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。     

论哲学化的法理学

法理学名称经历了从部门哲学、法哲学、法律哲学、法理学到哲学的法理学的演变过程;法理学学术问题有描述性问题、规范性问题和哲学问题三种基本类型;研究法的哲学问题的法理学实际上就是法的世界观的学问,具有人的实践基础上的科学性和价值性的特征;在当今时代研究法理学哲学问题的最好途径和最好方法是对历史中的法理学进行理解和解释。     

Promising Justice: Derrida with Jewish Jurisprudence

Law and Critique - “Deconstruction is justice”. How are we to understand this striking and extraordinary sentence Jacques Derrida has written? Whose justice? Which deconstruction? The...     

Punishment and Justice in Adam Smith*

Abstract. The modern interpretation of Smith as a retributive theorist of punishment is challenged in favour of a view of his work as containing a curious amalgam of retributive and utilitarian elements. This unsynthesised theoretical compound accounts for many of the contradictory positions assumed by him, examples of which are given in the article. At the level of “punishment” (i.e., punishment considered without a political dimension), the retributivehtilitarian dichotomy is observed in his discussions of merit and demerit (which are utilitarian in their logic) and propriety and impropriety (which are retributive). At the level of state punishment, the same dichotomy is seen in his juxtaposition of considerations of individual justice and the political ends of punishment. A final section locates Smith's “double cleft stick” theoretically in his position on the one hand in the Hobbesian materialist tradition and on the other in his historical stance half-way between the individualism of the contractarians and the full blown utilitarianism of Bentham.     

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。     

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。     

马克思主义法学正义观的多元视角

从马克思主义经济学、政治学、哲学的不同角度和立场分析马克思主义法学的正义价值观，可知其根源于生产、交换、分配、消费四个经济环节，并通过政治解放的路径，最终在“人的解放”这一哲学问题上得以解决。文章同时尝试对上述问题进行了反恩。     

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。     

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”.     

司法的政治力学——民众、媒体、为政者、当事人与司法官的关系分析

本文着重考察"公案"这类特定案件的司法过程,从中观察和分析中国司法的政治力学现象。文章分析了民众、媒体、为政者和司法官四个主体及其相互间的角力关系,分析了民意对司法的影响,分析了司法与媒体的关系。认为司法与民意、媒体的角力,不能仅仅基于司法独立原则,而应当强调被告公平受审权。总之,司法的政治力学现象是不可避免的,但是司法的政治角力应当加以规制;通过制度设计,有的关系可以回归到权利与义务的关系,不仅会有更好的法律效果,还会有更好的社会效果。     

The Caribbean Court of Justice and the Legal Profession: Promoting a Caribbean Jurisprudence*

The author submits that the main purpose in the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is to promote the development of a Caribbean jurisprudence, based on the Commonwealth Caribbean's common historic, political, economic and cultural experiences and mutual history.

The article examines the role of final appellate courts, noting that judges of such courts must often choose between alternatives which are perfectly capable of being defended as rational, reasonable and consistent with ‘the law’. Factors such as life experiences, socialisation, and backgrounds all play a role in determining the choices that are ultimately made. This is why, the author underscores that ‘it is so important to have a diverse Bench, to have Judges from different backgrounds’.

For judges to come close to steering the right course they must have an understanding of the society that gives rise to the legal disputes. They must be grounded in that society. In this respect, the author argues, it is remarkable that the evolution of certain landmark judgments relating to human rights, particularly capital punishment, have been rendered by British judges, sitting and residing in England.

The article, which draws on a wealth of jurisprudence, proceeds to examine the original jurisdiction of the CCJ and the role of the Bar in defending the integrity of the Court and the justice system as well as in enhancing the quality of judgments.

Finally, it emphasises the need to promote Caribbean jurisprudence and access to local judgments. In this regard, it is lamented that many truly outstanding judgments of Caribbean judges do not receive the recognition they should because, if there is an appeal, they become almost automatically buried beneath the judgments of the higher court.     

后现代法学的批判价值与局限

后现代主义从艺术、哲学、社会理论等领域扩散到法学领域,形成了所谓的后现代法学。它们反对主客体二分法,否认理性个人作为法律主体之存在;反对法律本质主义,否定法律的确定性和普适性;反对法律基础主义,否定法律的客观性和自主性;反对历史进步观,认为现代社会的进步是虚幻的。后现代法学的这些批判性观点在其终极指向、发现的问题、思维方式以及学术精神方面具有意义和价值。同时后现代法学也具有不可忽视的局限性,如它极易导致混乱、言过其实、理论薄弱、缺乏实践性等。     

中国传统的司法和法学

近来祖国大陆的法学界流行着两种对于中国传统的批评:其一指责中国传统司法者不遵循法律和先例,仅仅就事论事,凭天理人情作成判决;其二声称中国传统文化里几乎没有法学可言。二者都与事实不符。第一,中国自秦汉时起,法律已极繁多,在有明文可以适用或有成案可以比照的情形下,司法者都乐于遵循,不会自找麻烦另寻判决的依据。如果没有法律或成案可用,任何法制里的司法者都该先仔细分析案情(“就事论事”),然后探索法的精义(“天理人情”)而作成一个合乎公平正义的判决;中国传统司法者的做法并非例外。第二,中国历代都有许多学者不仅以纯理性的观点和方法对于当代的法律加以注释、批详,并且从历史背景和社会经验中去深究其渊源、目的和效能,以及法与其它社会规范的关系、法的正当性,法律条文不足时应该如何补救等法学上的重要问题,留下许多著作,对于这些问题提出了精辟的见解。只因他们的观点、方法和所用的语言及陈述方式与近人习见的不同,所以被忽略了。中国传统法制自成一系,与世界另几个重要法系并立,各有短长。如要加以检讨,应该先对它作一番整体的、深入的研究;如果想用另一法系的某些规定作为他山之石以改善中国法制,则更须对那些规定甚至整个法系作一番同样的研究,看清了二者的优劣,慎为取舍,不可以轻易地将中国目前的问题一概归咎于传统,更不该盲目地仿效他人。