话语中的省略推理

本文主要探讨省略三段论的内容结构，提出常规关系在扩展和推导会话语义方面的作用；进一步提出省略三段论的驱动机制，影响省略推理的有关变量；并从包含、概括、综合、联想、删除等方面阐述恢复三段论的规则。     

试论逻辑推理在案件侦查中的作用

逻辑推理是分析案惰、案件侦查的重要工具。从某种意义上说，案件侦查过程也是一个思维过程，这种思维过程就是追溯、推论的过程，必须借助于一定的逻辑推理形式来完成，逻辑推理在案件侦查中具有不可替代的重要作用，正确的逻辑推理是对案情进行正确分析、有效推断的必备工具。     

法律与逻辑——对法律与逻辑关系的一种全面解读

本文主要对法律与逻辑关系进行了全面的探讨。对逻辑学和法学之间交叉性的一些问题进行了回顾和总结。首先,探讨了什么是“法律逻辑”,并重点介绍了我国学者较陌生的“规范逻辑”,将两者进行了比较;其次,对法理学和逻辑学都关心的“法律推理”问题进行了探讨,比较了“法律推理”和“司法推理”两者的异同,以及两大法系“法律推理”的特点和差异;最后,对饱受批判的“法律形式主义”进行了研究,指出应当辩证地看待“法律形式主义”的功与过。最后,作者结合我国的实际,认为:我们不能借口反对“法律形式主义”而忽视和否定逻辑在法律领域中的作用。     

说理执法在公安工作中的应用

说理执法是公安机关在执法过程中与行为相对人真诚交流与沟通，讲明事理，讲透法理，以保证执法活动有效进行的一种工作方式。说理执法对公安机关推行执法规范化建设、构建和谐警民关系具有积极的意义。开展说理执法，要坚持以理服人，注重说理效果，通过平等交流、坦诚沟通，清除隔阂，化解矛盾。     

事实认定的概率分析

根据概率分析所涉及证据数量的不同,事实认定概率分析可分为单一证据维度和证据组合维度。在单一证据维度中,司法鉴定领域会不断涌现像DNA证据那样兼具实证统计数据和高度科学确认度的统计概率证据。在证据组合维度中,事实认定不可能通过数学推理实现,其原因主要有：事实认定过程复杂,数学推理难以模拟;数学推理并非司法证明思维的＂母语＂,而是一门需要翻译的＂外语＂;数学推理会通过＂量＂上的运算模糊、混淆乃至掩盖了＂质＂上的差别。     

Reflective political reasoning: Political disagreement and empathy

As political polarization increases across many of the world's established democracies, many citizens are unwilling to appreciate and consider the viewpoints of those who disagree with them. Previous research shows that this lack of reflection can undermine democratic accountability. The purpose of this paper is to study whether empathy for the other can motivate people to reason reflectively about politics. Extant studies have largely studied trait-level differences in the ability and inclination of individuals to engage in reflection. Most of these studies focus on observational moderators, which makes it difficult to make strong claims about the effects of being in a reflective state on political decision making. We extend this research by using a survey experiment with a large and heterogeneous sample of UK citizens (N = 2014) to investigate whether a simple empathy intervention can induce people to consider opposing viewpoints and incorporate those views in their opinion about a pressing political issue. We find that actively imagining the feelings and thoughts of someone one disagrees with prompts more reflection in the way that people reason about political issues as well as elicits empathic feelings of concern towards those with opposing viewpoints. We further examine whether empathy facilitates openness to attitude change in the counter-attitudinal direction and find that exposure to an opposing perspective (without its empathy component) per se is enough to prompt attitude change. Our study paints a more nuanced picture of the relationship between empathy, reflection and policy attitudes.     

科学客观性的历史建构--科学哲学视域中的历史认识论

在尼采的视角主义和福柯的主体解释学等欧陆哲学的影响下,历史认识论结合观念史、思想史和文化史的历史语境,考察了科学客观性的概念的历史建构过程,加深了人们对科学实践的复杂性的认识,并为科学哲学在新世纪的发展提供了诸多有价值的启示。     

House or home? Constituent preferences over legislator effort allocation

In many political systems legislators face a fundamental trade‐off between allocating effort to constituency service and to national policy‐making activities, respectively. How do voters want their elected representatives to solve this trade‐off? This article provides new insights into this question by developing a conjoint analysis approach to estimating voters’ preferences over their legislator's effort allocation. This approach is applied in Britain, where it is found that effort allocation has a significant effect on voter evaluations of legislators, even in a political system where other legislator attributes – in particular, party affiliation – might be expected to predominate. This effect is nonlinear, with voters generally preferring a moderate balance of constituency and national policy work. Preferences over legislator effort allocation are not well‐explained by self‐interest or more broadly by instrumental considerations. They are, however, associated with voters’ local‐cosmopolitan orientation, suggesting that heuristic reasoning based on underlying social dispositions may be more important in determining preferences over representative activities.     

推导作为诉讼证明的逻辑

关于证据与证明的传统哲学与逻辑理论存在着实践缺陷,形式逻辑中的演绎和归纳推理不能合理解释依证据进行的事实认定。证据的作用不可能是回复案件真相,而只是为特定假设提供支持。推导作为一种可废止和情境化的第三种类型的推理是契合诉讼事实认定的逻辑形式,这种内容求真的推理与形式逻辑上的演绎及归纳推理有着本质的区别。推导理论的提出会对传统证据法理论形成冲击,从这一角度我们会对证明标准与证明责任、直接证据与间接证据、表见证明与摸索证明、事实推定与经验法则等概念与问题形成新的认识。理解案件事实认定过程的推导本质,并对其缺陷有足够的认识,才能在实践中谨慎论证与比较各种假设,以全面的信息检验假设以避免最终的误认。     

论类推思维在法律发现当中的地位——以孙斯坦有关类推思维思想为中心的考察

随着人们对传统法律三段论在法律适用过程中作用的反思,一种围绕着类推思维为中心的法律发现模式逐渐获得了人们的普遍认同。借助于未完全理论化协议理论,孙斯坦将类推思维在法律发现当中的地位和作用上升到推进民主司法的高度,从而更有力地彰显了类推思维在当代司法实践当中的重要性。类推思维是一个迈向民主政治的法治社会应该努力倡导的一种法律思维和法律适用模式,捍卫法治需要我们认真地对待类推思维方法在法律发现当中的地位。