A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence

Abstract. “The Notebook Corner,” edited by Enrico Pattaro, makes its first appearance here as a new section of Ratio Juris. This new section can be described in a sense as an offshoot of the project for A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence, a work still in progress composed of five theoretical volumes and six historical ones. The theoretical volumes receive a brief presentation in the paper immediately below, with a specific focus on Volume 1, entitled The Law and the Right: A Reappraisal of the Reality That Ought to Be. This volume is then discussed as well by Rosaria Conte and Cristiano Castelfronchi in the second paper of this “Notebook Corner”.     

法理学与法哲学的关系

对于法理学与法哲学的关系,我国学术界大致上可以分为“法哲学独立论”和“法哲学即法理学”两大系列观点。法理学与法哲学都是研究法律一般理论的学科,但由于支配它们的哲学思维有差异,因而使得它们的研究模式有了差别。正是这种研究模式的差别导致了法理学与法哲学之间存在着区别。但不能因为这些区别便可以否定“法哲学即法理学”这种观点,而且这些区别的存在只应被看成是划分法理学或法哲学中不同流派或分支的一个根据。     

一般法理学的“乌托邦”——述评《全球化与法律理论》

全球化对传统法理学体系结构的封闭、研究对象的狭隘和理论视角的片面提出了挑战。特瓦宁教授提出要复兴一般法理学,为描绘世界的总体法律图景提供适当的概念工具,为在更广阔的背景中审视法律现象选取有效的观察视角,为提炼和概括超越特殊法律文化的元语言(meta-language)探求实际可行的道路。尽管他的理论设计是完美的,却难以付诸法理学研究的实践。     

中国近代“法理学”、“法律哲学”名词考述

在中国,"法理"古已有之。但"法理学"、"法律哲学"名词则自域外传入,并为中国法学家所广泛认知与界定。总体而言,不仅存在着"法理学"与"法律哲学"概念的错混,而且在实质上,"法理学"理论的发展,比"法律哲学"更见成效。     

Women Legal Academics – A New Research Agenda?

Women academics have been the subject of suprisingly little academic research; this is particularly true of women legal academics. This article argues that it is important that research into women legal academics is carried out, not just to gain empirical evidence about the working lives of these women, but because in exploring these members of the 'academic tribe' of lawyers, important insights may be gained into the university as an institution, the development of law as a discipline, and the nature of law itself.     

哲学与法学意义的符号互释

法学、法理的奥秘在哲学之中。哲学实质上是以非法学的抽象思辨语言在探寻着法的根本精神和理念。哲学和法学之间存在着深刻而广泛的符号及其意义互释关系。哲学的对象是作为"宇宙万物最高统治力量"的"最高的法"或自然法;哲学的产生和发展是借着"命运"、"始基"、"逻格斯"、"善本身"等范畴符号在探求"最高的法";法律的发展演进则是对哲学所揭橥的虚灵超越的价值系统或"最高的法"的不断定在化。     

Legal Disciplinary Practices – Who Needs Them?

The recent publication of the government's Review of the Regulatory Framework for Legal Services in England and Walesin March 2004 heralds a new era regarding the way in which legal services are to be delivered to the public. In the wake of the Enron-Arthur Andersen debacle, and growing disenchantment amongst policy-makers and market players with the involvement of 'elite' accountancy firms in the provision of legal services, interest and attention has now shifted away from the formation of Multi-Disciplinary Practices towards a new model of legal services provider– Legal Disciplinary Practices (LDPs), where the focus is at all times on the provision of legal services, albeit widely defined. The purpose of this article is to explore, and subsequently critique, the rationales behind the formation of LDPs and to outline the dangers which the provision of legal services through such business structures is likely to pose not only for the legal profession, but also for society more generally.     

法理天空 用精取宏——评《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》

《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》一书运用整体论的方法,描述了西方从古希腊到二十世纪七十年代的各种法哲学流派的思想、理论和主义,论证了法律是秩序与正义的综合体,探讨了解决法律问题的方法论,从而完整地构建了综合法理学体系。     

Asking the Sovereignty Question in Global Legal Pluralism: From “Weak” Jurisprudence to “Strong” Socio‐Legal Theories of Constitutional Power Operations

The article examines recent theories of legal and constitutional pluralism, especially their adoption of sociological perspectives and criticisms of the concept of sovereignty. The author argues that John Griffiths's original dichotomy of “weak” and “strong” pluralism has to be reassessed because “weak” jurisprudential theories contain useful sociological analyses of the internal differentiation and operations of specific legal orders, their overlapping, parallel validity and collisions in global society. Using the sociological methodology of legal pluralism theories and critically elaborating on Teubner's societal constitutionalism, the author subsequently reformulates the question of sovereignty as a sociological problem of complex power operations communicated through the constitutional state's organization and reconfigured within the global legal and political framework.