On Naturalizing Jurisprudence: Some Comments on Brian Leiter’s View of What Jurisprudence Should Become

In a series of powerful and challenging articles emerging since the mid-1990s, Brian Leiter has argued that certain theoretical strains in contemporary legal philosophy are ‘epistemologically bankrupt’, in virtue of their reliance on misguided argumentative devices: analysing concepts, such as the concepts of law and of authority; and doing so by appealing to intuitions regarding the correct way to understand the concepts in question. In response to this state of affairs, Leiter advocates that jurisprudence ought to attempt to catch-up with ‘naturalistic’ developments which have influenced the direction of other branches of philosophy – such as epistemology, philosophy of mind, and moral philosophy – in the last few decades. This article offers a critical analysis of some of Leiter’s proposals for what Jurisprudence should become, in light of his views on the relevance of naturalism for this discipline.     

Getting Real or Staying Positive: Legal Realism(s), Legal Positivism and the Prospects of Naturalism in Jurisprudence

The relationship between Legal Realism and Legal Positivism has been a recurrent source of debate. The question has been further complicated by the related difficulty of assessing the internal relationship between the two main original strands of Legal Realism: American and Scandinavian. This paper suggests considering American and Scandinavian Realism as instantiations of forward‐looking and backward‐looking rule skepticism respectively. This distinction brings into sharp relief not only the fundamentally different relationship between each of these two Realist schools and Legal Positivism but also their equally different potentials as starting points for naturalizing jurisprudence.     

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。     

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”.     

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。     

20世纪英美法理学论战中的概念分歧

20世纪50年代以来的英美法理学异常繁荣,各种理论进路纷至沓来。哈特与凯尔森、哈特与富勒、哈特与德沃金、德沃金与菲尼斯、拉兹与菲尼斯、拉兹与科尔曼的争论此起彼伏。他们的法律理论回应了不同的问题并提出了不同类型的概念主张,他们的概念主张具有不同的理论目标。从概念分析的角度看,20世纪英美法理学中的许多论战都是概念分歧,法学家的争论无非是他们的各说各话,许多貌似冲突的主张实际上是相容的。     

美国法律现实主义视野下的法学教育

美国法律现实主义在法学教育领域通过批判当时主流的案例教学法而兴起,并且在法学教育实践中展开了课程设置、教材内容和师资构成方面的改革。法律现实主义者的教学改革顺应了当时剧烈变动的美国社会对于法学所提出的要求,吸收了欧陆自由法学运动、美国实用主义哲学和法律功能主义的理论精髓。它对美国乃至世界上其他国家法学教育方法的发展产生了深远的影响,促成了诊所式法学教育模式的出现。     

Naturalism in Epistemology and the Philosophy of Law

In this paper, I challenge an influential understanding of naturalization according to which work on traditional problems in the philosophy of law should be replaced with sociological or psychological explanations of how judges decide cases. W.V. Quine famously proposed the ‘naturalization of epistemology’. In a prominent series of papers and a book, Brian Leiter has raised the intriguing idea that Quine’s naturalization of epistemology is a useful model for philosophy of law. I examine Quine’s naturalization of epistemology and Leiter’s suggested parallel and argue that the parallel does not hold up. Even granting Leiter’s substantive assumption that the law is indeterminate, there is no philosophical confusion or overreaching in the legal case that is parallel to the philosophical overreaching of Cartesian foundationalism in epistemology. Moreover, if we take seriously Leiter’s analogy, the upshot is almost the opposite of what Leiter suggests. The closest parallel in the legal case to Quine’s position would be the rejection of the philosophical positions that lead to the indeterminacy thesis.     

萨维尼的法哲学思想与法学实践评析

萨维尼(1779-1861),关于“法律是民族精神的产物”的法哲学思想是他经过30多年的法学实践后,其法学思想所发生变化的产物。萨维尼强调法律的民族性具有合理性因素。萨维尼的法学实践和他对国际私法学的发展所做出的贡献是卓越的。呼吁国际私学学界的广大同仁们通过不懈的探索与实践,不断完善国际私学这一重要法律部门,为人类和平与发展事业做出应有的贡献。