关于法学方法论的几个基本问题

本文是对法学方法论的基本问题的诠释。作者认为 ,法学方法论是一种具有实践功能性的、体现学术立场、哲学假定的有关法学方法的研究程序与科学叙述。从内容体系上说 ,法学方法论包括基本理念、具体内容、法律解释方法等主要方面。对于法理学研究来说 ,法学方法论构成法学理论的硬核 ,有助于法理学研究的深化 ,并且作为法理学的必备内容之一。     

私法程序理论的法理学意义

传统法理学理论仅将静态的法律关系内容(仅利、义务或者权力)作为它们的基石范畴,忽视了法律行为在法理学中的应有地位。私法程序理论揭示了程序在私法中的普遍存在及其重要功能,证明了程序不仅仅是公法的“专利”。“程序”应当与“权利”一起作为法理学的基石范畴,构建以权利一程序关系为基本架构的法理学范畴逻辑体系,以便从法理学的层面消除重实体轻程序等流弊。     

论良法的标准

良法理论既是法理学的重要问题 ,也在我国社会主义法治建设中具有重要的现实意义。传统的良法理论一直以道德价值作为评判法律良恶的标准 ,本文认为这种观点是片面的 ,我们应全面地理解良法的含义。本文认为 ,“良法”概念与道德评价紧密相关 ,但二者又不是等同的。任何制定法都具有内容、价值和形式三个方面的要素或成分 ,良法是符合法律的内容、形式和价值的内在性质、特点和规律性的法律 ,是符合法的“应然”的法律。良法的标准应全面地体现对这三个方面的要求 (标准 ) ,即合规律性原则、符合正义和公众利益原则、形式科学性原则 ,并分别作了较详细的论述。     

浅论法哲学与法理学的区别

当前,法学界大都把法理学与法哲学（法律哲学）看成是同一学科,有的则把法哲学看成是法理学的一个分支学科。实际上,法哲学既不是法理学,也不是法理学的分支学科,它应和法理学同为理论法学的分支,而且是在层次上高于法理学的理论法学。     

马克思、恩格斯论法文化

法文化研究是近年来国内兴起的一个新的法学综合研究领域,这个研究领域的开拓,完全仰仗了法律史学、法理学、比较法学等现有学科的鼎力合作。为了早日促成一门崭新的法学综合学科——法文化学的诞生,许多学者和法学工作者为此做了大量工作,法文化研究的论文可谓成果丰硕、令人瞩目,译著、专著、教材(章节)也陆续出现。就研究深度和广度而言,国内的文著与国外的这门新兴学科相比毫不逊色。目前,法文化研究已经为法文化学界定了初步系统化的研究范围和研究专题,它包括从法律史学角度提出的法文化传统问题、从法理学角度提出的法观念与法价值问题、从比较法学角度提出的法律(法系)形式特征问题,以及法律史学和法理学综合提出的传统遗存与法文化现代化问题、法理学和比较法学综     

部门法理学之提倡

法学虽然是以法为研究对象的 ,但法学与法在以下这一点上是有区别的 :法是由部门法构成的 ,法本身只是部门法的总和 ,部门法才是法的实体存在。离开了部门法 ,法只是一种观念而己。而法学则与之不同 ,除部门法学以外 ,还有以法的观念为研究对象的法学形态 ,这就是一般法理学或者简称为法理学。长期以来 ,我国法学研究中存在着法理学与部门法学之间严重脱节的现象。就法理学而言 ,在我国是从上世纪 90年代初的法学基础理论演变而来的 ,大体上还停留在教科书的水平上 ,不能满足部门法学对法理学的学理需求 ,未能形成法理学与部门法之间的良性…     

论法理学的学科性与科学性

法理学是理论法学的一个分支学科。在欧、日,大致形成于１９世纪。欧洲法学家们把法哲学视为法理学的同义语。在中国,无论法学还是法理学,都是十分年幼的学科,直到９０年代,在高等学校法律专业中才正式设置法理学课程。为了教学的急需,尽管已出版了若干版本的法理学教材,但法理学是一门什么样的科学学科,从各种教材版本的雷同和差异来看,对法理学的科学性、学科性还有必要进行深入研究。一、法理学的研究对象及主要内容一门学科之所以能成为一门学科,首先是因为它有明确的研究对象、研究范围。其学科性就是根据研究对象作出分工、…     

法哲学的对象和性质论辩

法哲学的概念、对象和性质，无论是在国外或国内都颇多歧义，争论一直存在。但基本上可概分为“法哲学独立论”与“法哲学即法理学论”这两大系列观点之间的分歧和争论。作者赞同前论，认为法哲学是从哲学的角度和用哲学的方法来研究法律理论和实践问题的一门学科，它以法学世界观和方法论为研究对象；它既是应用哲学的一个门类，又是理论法学的一个分科，是介于哲学与法学之间并兼具二者属性的一门综合性、交叉性和边缘性学科。因此，同一般性（或专门）法的理论有所不同，自有其独立存在的意义和价值。而认为“法哲学即法理学论”是由于１９世纪下半期以来，西方法哲学的对象发生了泛化、不同程度地把法哲学混同用于一般性法的理论，从而形成了法哲学与法理学趋同与合流的结果；它造成了对法哲学对象和内容的简单化、庸俗化，使其内涵和外延含混不清，对象和范围极不明确，具有极大的伸缩性和收纳度，内容十分庞杂甚至是包罗万象的。因此有必要对法哲学进行正名，廓清其概念、对象和性质，把泛化了的法哲学正本清源、还原归位。为此，作者引用了大量资料，从法学和哲学及其相结合上进行了论证，对一些置疑的观点进行了答辩，并阐述了法哲学在社会主义法学体系中的地位和作用，同时还就应该怎样正确认?     

法理学的定位——关于法理学学科性质、特点、功能、名称等的思考

法理学是一门独立的法学学科,它有其自身的知识体系和其独立存在的价值.但多少年来,法理学被赋予了同它的学科性质不太相符的学科定位,使它遭到很多误解与责难.本文试从法理学与部门法学、部门法理学、法律实践、法官判案等几层关系来探讨一下法理学的学科性质、特点、功能以及法理学名称等问题,以给法理学这门学科准确定位.     

法哲学名词的产生及传播考略

法哲学一词在本世纪初首度被引入中国法学,后遭受近半个世纪的冷遇及至误解,自八十年代末九十年代初在中国法学界再次流行使用。然而,今人在什么意义上使用法哲学一词,却是见仁见智,归纳起来,大抵有三:其一,将之作为研究法的一般理论的学科,这是最普通的理解,只是在具有不同哲学传统的国度里和在继承了不同法学传统的继受国中,用语不同,如在英美,人们更喜欢用法理学,而欧洲、拉丁美洲、日本则偏爱法哲学一语。其二,将法哲学狭义化,与同样狭义化的法理学并列,让其专注正义等法的实质问题,而将法的形式内容留待法理学去处理;其三,用来表达部门法基本理论,如刑法哲学、民法哲学。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms

In the study of Buddhism it is commonly accepted that a monk or nun who commits a pārājika offence is permanently and irrevocably expelled from the Buddhist monastic order. This view is based primarily on readings of the Pāli Vinaya. With the exception of the Pāli Vinaya, however, all other extant Buddhist monastic law codes (Dharmaguptaka, Mahāsāṅghika, Mahīśāsaka, Sarvāstivāda and Mūlasarvāstivāda) contain detailed provisions for monks and nuns who commit pārājikas but nevertheless wish to remain within the saṅgha. These monastics are not expelled. Rather, they are granted a special status known as the śikṣādattaka. In this paper I explore the rules. concerning pārājika penance and the śikṣādattaka with specific regard to monastic celibacy. Given that five out of six extant law codes recognise this remarkable accommodation to the rule of celibacy, I argue that we must look to Vinayas other than the Pāli Vinaya if we are to arrive at a nuanced and representative view of Indian Buddhist monasticism.

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.)

     

Family breakdown and the ‘Welfare Child’ in 19th and 20th century Britain

This article traces new cycles of interest in past children as distinct from past childhood. Recent work highlighting that a conceptualisation of childhood existed even in periods with few written records closes the chapter begun by Philippe Ariès in 1960. Instead, there has been a new surge of interest in children on the edges of family life, as well as children in similarly liminal positions between the worlds of adults and children: runaways, delinquents and orphans. Several themes in the literature are identified, based on the conflicting ideas of ‘body/mind’, ‘victim/threat’, ‘needs/rights’. It is noted that researchers are using more imaginative ways of reaching the lived experience of children than the family or institutional framework, and that an increasing link is drawn between historical and modern concerns such as child abuse and the care of ‘at risk’ children.     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Student mentoring to enhance graduates’ employability potential

This paper considers whether the adoption of a subject-specific, classroom-based, voluntary extra-curricular student mentoring scheme could provide an effective mechanism and andragogic approach to enhance higher education students’ employability potential pre-graduation.Over the three-year pilot, 26 more advanced (second to fourth year) undergraduate students actively mentored nearly 400 first year undergraduate students during workshops delivered annually within forensic and policing focused courses. In total, 17 mentors anonymously completed online, post-scheme surveys. Survey data was quantitatively analysed to evaluate the scheme, establish which skills and attributes mentors had developed and investigate whether mentors could appropriately identify example skills within professional terminology used during employer recruitment. In addition, this paper reflects on the implementation of remote student mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic and its adoption within a blended learning framework.The results from this research strongly support mentoring as an effective mechanism to develop undergraduate employability skills, significantly developing mentors’ self-confidence and self-efficacy in their interpersonal and communication skills. Although mentors were aware of university graduate attributes and thought they could evidence these with appropriate examples, in practice this was not necessarily the case. As a result, a framework is proposed to enable mentors to identify their skills and how they may align with competencies sought by relevant forensic and policing employers. However, other andragogic practices may need to be implemented to maximise the potential for successful graduate employment.     

Vedic Language and Vaiṣṇava Theology:Madhva’s Use of Nirukta in his Ṛgbhāṣya

This article explores the way in which Madhva (1238–1317), the founder of the Dvaita Vedānta system of Hindu thought, reformulates the traditional exegetic practice of nirukta or “word derivation” to validate his pluralistic, hierarchical, and Vaiṣṇava reading of the Ṛgvedic hymns. Madhva’s Ṛgbhāṣya (RB) is conspicuous for its heavy reliance on and unique deployment of this exegetical tactic to validate several key features of his distinctive theology. These features include his belief in Viṣṇu’s unique possession of all perfect attributes (guṇaparipūrṇatva) and His related conveyability by all Vedic words (sarvaśabdavācyatva). Such an understanding of Vedic language invokes the basic nirukta presupposition that words are eternally affiliated with the meanings they convey. But it is also based onMadhva’s access to a lexicon entitled Vyāsa’s Nirukti with which his critics and perhaps even his commentators seem to be unfamiliar.While the precise status of this text is the subject of ongoing debate, Madhva’s possession of special insight into the sacred canon is established in part by his unique claim to be an avatāra of the wind god Vāyu and a direct disciple of Viṣṇu Himself in the form of Vyāsa₁. Thus, Madhva’s use of nirukta invokes his personal charisma to challenge not only conventional understandings of the hymns but traditional exegetic norms. Madhva’s provision of an alternative tradition of nirukta provoked sectarian debate throughout the Vijayanagara period over the extent to which one could innovate in established practices of reading the Veda. Articulating the Veda’s precise authority was a key feature of Brahmin debates during this period and reflects both the empire’s concern with promoting a shared religious ideology and the competition among rival Brahman sects for imperial patronage that this concern elicited. By looking at how two of Madhva’s most important commentators (the 14^th-century Jayatīrtha and the 17^th-century Rāghavendra) sought to defend his niruktis, this article will explore how notions of normative nirukta were articulated in response to Madhva’s deviations. At the same time, however, examining Madhva’s commentators’ defense of his niruktis also demonstrates the extent to which Madhva actually adhered to selected exegetic norms. This reveals that discomfort with Madhva’s particular methods for deriving words stemmed, in part, from a more general ambivalence towards this exegetical tactic whose inherent open-endedness threatened to undermine the fixity of the canon’s very substance: its language. Vyāsa’s Nirukti is one of several ”unknown sources” cited in Madhva’s commentaries whose exact status continues to be debated. Some scholars (e.g. Rao, Sharma, Siauve) maintain that these texts are part of a now lost Pāṅcarātra tradition that Madhva is attempting to preserve. This may be true for many of these citations. However, in addition to claiming to be both an avatāra of Vāyu and Viṣṇu-as-Vyāsa’s student, Madhva states in several places (e.g., VTN 42, RB 162) that the canon has suffered loss during transmission and that only Viṣṇu can reveal it in its entirety. Thus, it is possible that Madhva intends texts like Vyāsa’s Nirukti to be viewed as part of an ongoing and corrective revelation, a notion that is compatible with many Vaiṣṇava traditions (Halbfass, 1991: 4).