我国法理学研究的路径

法理学是以整个法律现象的共同规律和共同性问题作为研究对象的法学理论学科。我国法理学研究的路径应该是沿着价值理念和法律实证两个方向进行,既着手于形而上的法哲学思考,为法理学的演进构建理想蓝图;又对法的实际运作形态加以研究,为现行法律制度提供理论指导。     

实证哲学影响下的实证派犯罪学——菲利犯罪社会学思想评述

以实证主义哲学作为自己的理论基础，菲利将实证方法引入犯罪学研究，创立了自己的犯罪社会学理论体系。在对犯罪原因的分析上，他在否定古典学派的自由意志选择的基础上，提出了犯罪因素三元论；在对犯罪现象的分析上，提出了犯罪饱和理论；并在把社会防卫作为刑罚目的的基础上，提出了一系列的社会防卫措施。菲利的犯罪社会学思想实现了犯罪学研究领域的一次意义深远的变革。     

DIFFERENTIATION AMONG TYPES OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE: RESEARCH UPDATE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTIONS

A growing body of empirical research has demonstrated that intimate partner violence is not a unitary phenomenon and that types of domestic violence can be differentiated with respect to partner dynamics, context, and consequences. Four patterns of violence are described: Coercive Controlling Violence, Violent Resistance, Situational Couple Violence, and Separation‐Instigated Violence. The controversial matter of gender symmetry and asymmetry in intimate partner violence is discussed in terms of sampling differences and methodological limitations. Implications of differentiation among types of domestic violence include the need for improved screening measures and procedures in civil, family, and criminal court and the possibility of better decision making, appropriate sanctions, and more effective treatment programs tailored to the characteristics of different types of partner violence. In family court, reliable differentiation should provide the basis for determining what safeguards are necessary and what types of parenting plans are appropriate to ensure healthy outcomes for children and parent–child relationships.     

价值永存的伦理思考

价值永存既是可能的又是必要的.价值永存的可能性以人类本身的永恒存在、人类对价值的永存追求、人类对创造过非凡价值的历史人物的永恒缅怀为根本前提、必要条件和主要途径.价值永存的必要性源自人类文明发展的需要.前人创造和积累的物质价值和精神价值是后人生存、发展和继续创造的必要基础.价值永存具有多种伦理意义:满足人们追求超越性的意愿;鼓舞人们积极创造价值;激励后代效法先贤.     

计算法学:展开维度、发展趋向与视域前瞻

在大数据时代的开放结构中,计算法学延伸了实证法学研究的知性体系和学科范畴,使法学研究迈向了更为纵深、更为宽广的畛域。计算法学在方法论上的基本立场深嵌于法学与社会科学的交叉研究范式中,如司法政治学、法社会学、犯罪学等。在计算法学方兴未艾之际,对这些学科研究主题及其理念分殊进行梳理和总结也就尤有意义。从既有的域外研究成果来看,计算法学研究的方法运用逐渐趋向科学成熟,研究视域不断拓宽,数据驱动与算法驱动多维推进,研究模式呈现出跨学科合作趋向。计算法学研究虽然在中国尚处于起步阶段,但是法律实务界和各大高校追摹大数据前沿的脚步从未停歇,计算法学在中国未来的发展也是可期可盼的。     

舆论与刑法的偏差式互动:刑事责任年龄个别下调的中国叙事

降低刑事责任年龄的舆论诉求与刑法回应已然发展成为一对既密切关联、又有所区别,甚至存在矛盾冲突的新力量,深度嵌入未成年人罪错行为治理的复杂格局之中。引入长短期记忆网络(LSTM)对14058条新浪微博相关评论文本进行情感分类,分别统计正向、中性、负向情感的高频词,可以数据化呈现社会舆论的具体诉求与刑法回应的实际效果。面对社会舆论对刑法功能的过度期许、对保护理念的极度排斥、对规范设置的明确否定,刑法采用了分散式功能叙说、不能“一放了之”的话语体系置换、年龄整体下调与多重限制并行的回应策略。然而,这一回应策略导致社会舆论对刑法的功能期许不降反升、保护与惩戒的理念认可度更加失衡、限制性规范存在异化风险。刑法应在理解、尊重社会舆论的演化逻辑与核心诉求的前提下,逐步缩小功能诉求与治理供给的偏差,以惩戒理念的强调带动保护理念的培植,寻找支持个别下调的正当性基础,探索“舆论诉求—刑法引导—社会互动”的“杜鹃—鸳鸯模式”。     

Doctoral Education in Clinical-Community Psychology

SUMMARY

This paper provides an overview of doctoral clinical-community psychology programs and highlights some possible future directions in training. Clinical-community doctoral programs were categorized as: (1) formally labeled clinical-community programs, (2) clinical programs with a formal community track, or (3) clinical programs with an informal community emphasis. Many graduates from these programs obtain a basic understanding and appreciation of community psychology through required or elective courses, and through contact with students and faculty involved in community research and action. Those students who focus their research and electives around community psychology obtain a thorough and in-depth training experience in community research and action. Changes precipitated by managed care will challenge current ways that psychological services are provided allowing for more community based, innovative, and preventive approaches for which community psychology training would be particularly useful. Greater flexibility in APA accreditation guidelines provide opportunities for greater flexibility within clinical-community programs. Doctoral programs in clinical-community psychology are positioned to lead the development of a public health and human service approach to doctoral training through the integration of community and clinical psychology.     

Evidence‐Based Policy‐Making: The Elusive Search for Rational Public Administration

Evidence‐based policy making has been criticised as a revival of the ‘rationality project’ in which democratic politics is regarded as rent‐seeking and a deadweight loss to society. In response, the evidence‐based policy movement has failed to articulate a defence in which the rationality animating the policy process is situational and contextual rather than unique and authoritative. This article traces the movement's motto –‘what works?’– to the American pragmatist movement, whose influence on Harold Lasswell and New Labour in the UK was substantial. This article argues that the ambition for evidence‐based policy‐making should be seen in terms of the transition from a single, unique and universal rationality toward multiple rationalities that vary according to different policy making contexts. Interpreted in such terms, evidence‐based policy making can avoid several of the main criticisms, and offer strong potential to contribute to solving policy problems.     

关于经济学方法论中实证规范二分法的批判——基于马克思主义理论视角

西方经济学方法论中广泛流行着实证分析和规范分析二分的做法,这种二分实际上是一种二元论。当前二分法已经发展到“实证分析和规范分析相结合”的阶段。但这种结合是机械的、形式上的,是以割裂为前提的。二分法的哲学实质是本体论和认识论的二元论。它一方面是经验主义的唯物主义,一方面是历史唯心主义。同时,二分法在实践应用中导致了两个困境和三个危险推论。不破除哲学二元论就不可能破除方法论的二分,也不可能从根本上破除实证和规范的对立,在经济研究中把二者真正结合起来。马克思主义作为辩证的、彻底的唯物主义,恰恰为弥合二元论造成的方法论的裂痕提供了解决方案。因此,经济学研究要以马克思辩证唯物主义的方法论为基础,摒弃实证规范二分法,建立科学的经济学。     

Child Protection Law as an Independent Variable

Child protection professionals work in a multidisciplinary system in which the law and the family court play central roles and which collects an increasing amount of data. Yet we know little about what impact the law has on whether a child is removed by child protective services, is deemed neglected by a family court, or reunifies with a parent. Do state‐to‐state variations in child protection laws, or changes by individual states to their laws, lead to different outcomes for children and families? The dramatic variations in child welfare practice from one state to another suggest that legal variations do matter. Yet empirical research on these questions is scarce both because we collect too little data to measure all such issues, and, because we have failed to study the data we do have. This article is a plea for researchers to rectify that problem and for policymakers to improve data collection. Doing so would facilitate a more clear understanding of the law's effect on child protection outcomes and aid policymakers and advocates in identifying both promising and problematic practices and legal reforms.