作为实践理性的法律

理性是法理学的永恒主题。现代法理学的理性话语经历了从“理性法”向“法律理性”的转向,这实际上是法理学从理论理性向实践理性的转向。法律与实践理性的关系体现为“法律是实践理性的体现”、“法律是行为的正当理由”、“法律是实践性信息”等命题。同时,作为实践理性的法律也具有客观性,其客观性基础在于实践商谈。     

实践法学要义

实践法学是对以往的法学理论的反对,但同时又承继了它们的合理性特质.它以实践理性为基础,坚持实践辩证法的基本理念和思维方式,主张在普通与特殊,抽象与具体之间寻求良好的结合点--实践智慧.实践法学包含了深刻的目的论理念,集中体现在它对人的存在与发展及其价值的关怀.同时实践法学是行动的法学,以此为基础的法治必然是实践中的法治,它主张通过一个又一个的事件,让人们行动起来,并运用自身的实践智慧完成对中国法治的重塑.实践法学是中国自己的法学.     

Practical reason and the ontology of statutes

Conclusion A common working assumption of theories of statutory interpretation is that the object of interpretation is uncontroversial. It is assumed that dispute only centers on the epistemics of interpretation. The assumption is unsound. Theories of statutory interpretation are importantly different from other sorts of theories. The subject matter of other sorts of theories can be identified uncontroversially. In the case of statutory interpretation, the object of interpretation is controversial. What counts as the object of interpretation therefore needs specification. Without the required specification, criteria of evidence and warrant justifying an interpretation are not well-defined.An adequate theory of statutory interpreation must contain both epistemic and ontological components. It must provide criteria for treating information as evidence relevant to, and standards for, interpreting a statute. Providing such criteria in turn requires also giving an account of the object of interpretation — what a statute consists in. Practical reason theories fail to provide acceptable criteria and standards for interpreting a statute. These accounts therefore fail to supply an adequate epistemic components for a theory of statutory interpretation. As to the ontological component, things are less clear. I have argued in sections II and III that this component is partly a matter of substantive political theory. Although practical reason theorists fail to offer a substantive political theory for defining the proper object of interpretation, their accounts are in principle ontologically unobjectionable. At most, practical reason accounts are incomplete. Of course, practical reason accounts might still be defective for other reasons. They may invoke a defective substantive political theory. Or the constraints imposed on properties of a statute or relations between them may not in fact affectuate the goals set by the theory. Such failings would be normative, not metaphysical. Since practical reason accounts are epistemically inadequate and ontologically incomplete, legal theorists should find the accounts less attractive than they do, even putting aside the normative soundness of the accounts.I thank Barry Adler, John Harrison, George Rutherglen, William Stuntz and an anonymous referee for helpful comments. I am particularly grateful to Larry Alexander for discussions and comments on previous drafts of this article. The usual disclaimer applies.     

Practical Reason and Legislation

Abstract
The author's starting point is Bobbio's theoretical approach to the problems of the relations between law and reason. He then appraises the meanings of reason and the concept of theoretical and practical rationality in the application of law. He examines the complex problem of the rationality of legislation and distinguishes five levels of rationality.     

法律权威与行动理由——基于拉兹实践哲学进路的考察

权威可以分为理论权威与实践权威、事实权威与合法权威,拉兹讨论的是合法的实践权威。权力与承认这两个概念都无法有效地界定合法的实践权威,在一定意义上可以说,拉兹的实践权威理论批判性地借鉴了权力论的分析模式并用行动理由作为基本分析概念。法律主张合法权威是法律的一个本质特征,法律规范也是一种强制性的行动理由,即一种内容独立的排他性理由。     

A Discourse-Theoretical Conception of Practical Reason*

Abstract
Contemporary discussions about practical reason or practical rationality invoke four competing views which can be named as follows by reference to their historical models: Aristotelian, Hobbesian, Kantian and Nietzschean. The subject-matter of this article is a defence of the Kantian conception of practical rationality in the interpretation of discourse theory. At the heart, lies the justification and the application of the rules of discourse. An argument consisting of three parts is pre sented to justify the rules of discourse. The three parts are as follows: a transcen dental-pragmatic argument; an argument which takes account of the maximisation of individual utility and an empirical premise about an interest in correctness. Within the framework of the problem of application, the article outlines a justification of human rights and of the basic institutions of the democratic constitutional state on the basis of discourse theory.     

Hobbes on Political Authority,Practical Reason and Truth

The role of sovereign authority in Hobbes' political philosophy is to establish peace and stability by serving as a definitive and unambiguous source of law. Although these broad outlines of Hobbes' account of political authority are uncontentious, matters quickly become more complicated once one seeks its normative basis. This much is evident from recent debates on the normative status of the laws of nature and the related issue as to whether Hobbes is better categorised as an incipient legal positivist or as a heterodox natural law thinker. In this paper I argue that although the positivist and natural law commitments in Hobbes' theory of political authority can be partially reconciled, such a reconciliation points to the need for more substantive theories of practical reason and truth than are to be found in Hobbes' official statements on these topics. Section II examines the positivist and natural law dimensions in Hobbes' thought and suggests that the role of sovereign authority in providing the definitive interpretation of the laws of nature allows a partial reconciliation to be effected. In section III, I consider the tension between this reconciliation and Hobbes' instrumentalism about practical reason and equivocal separation of authority and truth.     

Reconciling MacCormick: Constitutional Pluralism and the Unity of Practical Reason

This article begins by assessing the ways in which the life and work of Neil MacCormick exemplified a dual commitment to the local and particular—especially through his advocacy of nationalism—and to the international and the universal. It then concentrates on one of the key tensions in his work which reflected that duality, namely the tension between his longstanding endorsement of constitutional pluralism—and so of the separate integrity of different “local” constitutional orders—and his belief in some kind of unity, and so community, residing in the moral and rational properties of all law. The article continues by considering a number of ways in which this tension may be resolved. It concludes, with particular reference to MacCormick's late work on ethics, that the answer may be found through the idea of a general unity of practical reason which undergirds the various special orders of practical reason by which particular legal systems are distinguished.     

司法改革方法论的反思性整合——一个实践理性的视角

在全面依法治国的时代背景下,司法改革的推进需要在实践理性的指导下,通过新的方法论体系来予以重新解读和把握。当下司法改革的方法论面临价值理性缺失、工具理性误区和理论范式失衡的现实困境,需要在问题导向的基础上,借鉴和利用多种社会科学方法,透过多种视角探讨如何认识改革、如何推进改革、如何评价改革,在实践建构中实现方法体系的反思性整合。以"制度化的社会回应型司法"为基本目标,协调价值理性与工具理性的冲突,统合国家治理的实践逻辑与法治的价值逻辑,统筹推进司法制度的改革和构建。     

实践理性与疑难案件的法律适用——基于“实践法律观”的一种补充

当前在疑难案件中,法律的正确适用是司法的核心问题及公众关注的焦点。但由于＂法律观＂的差别,使得疑难案件的法律适用存在诸多问题。从学术史及方法论角度看,学者们处理疑难案件有各种方法,但最终都依赖对＂法＂的正确认识及案件事实与法律规范之间的关系的澄清。只有在个案事实与规范的融贯中,在实践理性理论框架内,通过类推等方法,发现、鉴别法律规范才能使疑难案件得以恰当处理。     

The Language of Practical Philosophy

Kant's criticism is based on the idea that all possible knowledge of facts is determined by the immanent structure of our apparatus of cognition, and that therefore we have no access to reality as it is per se (" Ding an sich "). In modern analytical philosophy some elements of this view survived, namely, the distinction between framework construction and actual data of experience, supposition or voluntary setting. The conditio humana is characterised by our capacity of acting. Acting is defined as behaviour determined and controlled by information processes. The structure of these processes defines the semantics and logical principles of practical philosophy. From this view follows the conception of value judgments, the logic of preferences, formal teleology, the analysis of utility and norm logic. The framework theories should be open in order to be able to express all possible theoretical views, namely, subjectivism as well as objectivism. The paper gives a concise account of the systems of practical thought (formal axiology, formal teleology, preference logic and norm logic) and their gnoseological problems.     

Institutions,Arrangements and Practical Information*

Abstract. A restatement of an institutionalist theory of law is attempted with particular reference to legal reasoning and legal rights. Use is made of Ota Weinberger's concept of “practical information”, focusing on both its momentary and diachronic aspects. Momentary practical information corresponds to the need to know which conduct is required of us at a given moment. The diachronic practical information becomes relevant whenever we wish to stabilize the practical information and to reduce the likelihood of change regarding our ways of acting. Furthermore, the momentary information is given sense only against the background of the diachronic one. Among the different types of diachronic practical information particular importance is ascribed to legal “institutions” such as contracts and rights. Legal “institutions” are conceived as founded on various sets of rules. Rules may then increase the number of facts in the world: those special kinds of facts which are represented by social phenomena.     

The Relational Conception of Practical Authority

I argue for a new conception of practical authority based on an analysis of the relationship between authority and subject. Commands entail a demand for practical deference, which establishes a relationship of hierarchy, vulnerability, and responsibility that involves a variety of signals and commitments. In order for this relationship to be justified, the subject must be under a preexisting duty, the authority’s commands must take precedence over the subject’s judgment regarding fulfillment of that duty, the authority must accept the position and responsibilities of command, and the authority must be sufficiently trustworthy relative to how vulnerable the subject makes herself by deferring. This results in an instrumentalist conception of practical authority that can be favorably compared to Joseph Raz’s influential service conception. The relational conception’s main advantage is that it focuses on the authority as much as the subject, requiring that the authority accept responsibility for the relationship and be sufficiently trustworthy. This allows the relational conception to avoid problems that the service conception faces and illuminates institutional authority.     

基于人工智能硅藻自动化识别系统的实际案例应用

目的探讨人工智能硅藻自动化识别系统在实际案例中的应用,为应用该系统进行硅藻定量分析提供参考,并对该系统所搭载的深度学习模型进行验证。方法收集10例水中尸体的器官进行硅藻硝酸消解,利用数字化切片扫描仪将涂片数字化扫描后,使用人工智能硅藻自动化识别系统进行硅藻的定性定量检测。结果该人工智能硅藻自动化识别系统所搭载的深度学习模型的受试者操作特征(receiver opera⁃tor characteristic,ROC)曲线的曲线下面积(area under the curve,AUC)达到98.22%,硅藻识别的查准率达到92.45%。结论该人工智能硅藻自动化识别系统实现了硅藻的自动化识别,可用于实际案例中硅藻的辅助检验,并为水中尸体的死因鉴定提供参考依据。     

About the Meaning of the Legal Aspect of Practical Semantics in Estonian Legal Order

This article is aimed at regarding, from the author’s viewpoint, one possible jurisprudential theory for rational understanding of legal order – the structuring theory of law. It is very important that cognition of a legal order should be based on the rules which could be designated as “laws of jurisprudence”. Naturally, this does not mean legislation within the concept of objective law. Rather, these laws can be referred to as certain regularities, ignorance of which would, however, either impossibly or substantially complicate the legal process of decision-making, both in law-making (as the so-called decisional function is contained in law itself¹) or the practical legal process of making decisions (the application of law). In recent years, a conception involving cooperation between linguists and jurists has emerged in the discussion of jurisprudential methodology. This constitutes an interdisciplinary approach to motivation of legal decision-making and involves, on the one hand, “practical semantics” and researchers thereof,² and on the other hand, representatives of the so-called structuring theory of law.³ In specialist literature, the structuring theory of law has also been referred to as the Müller Schoo1.⁴ The role of language and linguistic arguments in the discussion and practice of legal working methods serves as a connective principle in such interdisciplinary approach (co-operation).     

犯罪构成的实践运用

犯罪构成的实践运用首先是基于对犯罪构成这一规格模型的认识和理解。犯罪构成一旦成型即获得客观存在的属性 ,成为一种中性的规格模型 ,不得随意改变。犯罪构成只有与犯罪事实相结合才具有实践价值。犯罪事实只有经过人的评价和判断 ,才能与犯罪构成进行连接与匹配。通过对犯罪构成的认识和理解、通过对犯罪事实的认识和理解 ,将两者紧密的结合起来 ,完成对犯罪构成的实践运用 ,就是一个犯罪构成的规范评价过程     

Models of Reason, Types of Principles and Reasoning. Historical Comments and Theoretical Outlines

Abstract. The author distinguishes between scientific and prudential reason (practical wisdom) in Aristotle with reference to the nature of the principles assumed as premises, and to the method of inference. In the history of thought these two models of reason are elieved not only to be proper to science and, respectively, ethics, but also, at times, to be the scientific model proper to ethics (for example, in natural law doctrines) and the prudential model proper to science. Mixed models are also given in the history of thought: scientific-prudential (for example, in Thomas Aquinas) and prudential-scientific. Furthermore, some aspects of the relationship between authority and reason are examined.     

司法行政人员必须掌握应用写作知识

本文论述了知识经济时代司法行政人员掌握应用写作的重要性和必要性,概括了应用写作内容的务实性、体制的程式性、表达的简明性、对象的明确性和行文的时效性等特征,阐述了应用文在现实生活中的信息传递、事务处理和凭证依据三大基本作用,并从五个方面详细说明了应用写作的基本要求。这对司法行政人员提高应用写作能力具有一定的理论指导意义。     

去道德化视角下的法正当性问题

德国学者哈贝马斯曾将实践理性的运用途径划分为道德、伦理和实用三种途径。法的正当性与道德的独特联系正源于,与伦理和实用角度的运用相比,实践理性道德角度的运用所产生的规范性资源具有某种特殊的说理性优势。在西方法律思想史中,历史主义与功利主义法哲学分别代表着从伦理与实用的角度看待法正当性问题的最典型学派,而其所面临的问题则从反面说明了,从实践理性的深层结构来看,法与道德的关系问题仍是现代社会法正当性问题的要害,道德话语是建构法正当性无法置换的规范性资源。     

权力监督视阈下国家监察体制改革的实践指向

国家监察体制改革作为我国政治体制改革的一项重大举措,自实施以来就一直倍受学术界的关注。从历史层面上看,监察体制改革继承了我国古代监察思想的精髓;从现实层面上看,国家监察体制改革是适应新时代国家治理现代化的要求,进一步改善我国反腐败力量分散现状的实践探索。因改革刚刚起步,所以存在相关法律制度尚未健全、工作职能尚未细化、与其他部门配合不够等问题。未来国家监察体制改革应立足实践,突出问题导向,不断完善法律制度,规范运行机制,形成强而有效的监督合力,进一步推进党风廉政建设。