摘要
司法三段论这一近代以来占主导地位的法律推理模式,当今的法学家对其提出了诸多批判,法律方法论亦由此从总体上实现了向法律论证理论的转换。但是,三段论推理本身的合理价值依然应当予以承认。在法律论证中,形式方法仍然具有无可替代的作用。法律论证的逻辑有效性对于实际的论证活动依然是个比较重要的评价标准。足见三段论推理在法律论证理论中具有重要意义。可以说,演绎模式的说理规则表达了对于法律论证最低限度的理性要求。在事实与规范相互对应的法律适用观念下,三段论推理继续在法律论证,尤其是在内部证立当中发挥作用。
Judicial syllogism, as the most important model of legal reasoning since the modem times, has been criticized by a lot of contemporary jurists, and thus it has been replaced by theory of legal argumentation in legal methodology. But the positive aspects of syllogism reasoning still should be accepted, because the role of formal method is irreplacable in legal argumentation. Thus formal validity is still an important standard for evaluation of the practices of legal argumentation, which make people recognize the importance of syllogism reasoning in theory of legal argumentation. The deductive rules of argument express the lowest requirement for rationality of legal argumentation. Syllogism reasoning still practise in legal argumentation, especially in internal justification, inspired by the new view of application of law, i.e. interaction between facts and norms.
出处
《法制与社会发展》
CSSCI
北大核心
2007年第1期63-72,共10页
Law and Social Development
基金
山东省社会科学规划研究青年项目:"法律论证理论研究"(05CFJ01)。
关键词
法律论证
三段论
涵摄
逻辑有效性
legal argumentation
syllogism
subsumtion
logical validity
