法律论证:一个关于司法过程的理论神话——以王斌余案检验阿列克西法律论证理论

阿列克西的法律论证理论无力为司法程序和司法判决提供有用的启示和指导,这种理论的前提缺乏经验基础,论证也出现了自相矛盾,并且由于忽略了司法过程中的交易成本和权力运作而从总体上误解了司法过程所追求的现实目标。当法官从实在法范围内无法获得令人满意的判决结果时,应当求助于社会科学的论证,而不是道德哲学的论证,后者无力为法律疑难问题提供决策方案,充其量也只能够大致满足公众寻找正当性依据的心理需求。

Legal Argumentation: a Theoretic Myth of Judicial Process

Alexy’s theory of legal argumentation incapably provides the useful enlightenment and the instruction for the judicial procedure and the judicial decision. With the premise lacked the empirical base and the self-contradictory logic, the theory neglected the transaction cost and the authority operation in the judicial process, so it has misunderstood the realistic goal totally which the judicial process pursued. When the judges can’t obtain the satisfactory result of the judgement from the law, they should seek help from the social science, not the moral philosophy, which can’t capably provide the policy-making plan for the hard cases, but it can approximately meet the psychological demand of the public at least to seek the rationality of the proof.