建设性怀疑主义——弗兰克事实怀疑论

Constructive Skepticism——Frank’s Fact-skepticism

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

行政法学院

作者:

刘文哲

导师:

郭忠

导师单位:

行政法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

其他

关键词:

事实怀疑论;建设性怀疑主义;法律形式主义;普通法传统

摘要:

弗兰克事实怀疑论思想当中始终贯彻着怀疑主义这样一个主题。为了批判法律形式主义的保守与僵化,弗兰克所依凭的怀疑主义这样一种进路,并没有最终走向‘规则虚无’和‘事实虚无’的极端地步,相反,弗兰克事实怀疑论中的怀疑主义是一种建设性怀疑主义。这种怀疑主义是一种温和的、带有建设性的怀疑,是对人的认知能力及知识的可信性的理性怀疑,而并非是极端的、绝对的、否定一切的怀疑。这体现为其怀疑主义不单单对受到大陆法系影响的法律形式主义起到批判和“破坏”的作用,而且还试图使司法回归到以个案优先为特点的普通法传统中去。简言之,弗兰克的怀疑主义既注重“破”的彻底性,又强调“立”的深刻性,“破”的是法律形式主义的种种神话思维,“立”的是普通法传统中对个案正义的优先诉求。弗兰克在事实怀疑论中,以探究人类弱点对制度操作方面所产生的影响为主线,来阐述法官、陪审团、律师、当事人、证人等主体的主观性和情感化特征对司法审判的影响,尤其是法官个性特征对事实认定方面的影响。对事实认定的怀疑可谓是建设性怀疑主义的最为重要的基点,一方面相较于规则怀疑其对抽象规则重要性的解构更为彻底,另一方面事实认定的不确定性以及案件事实的个殊性也决定了个案中具体正义要优先于规则所代表的抽象正义。第一部分主要介绍弗兰克怀疑主义理论进路的确定。分别从思想继承、理论支撑和时代必要性三个方面入手。其中思想继承方面重点介绍霍姆斯和勒尼德·汉德对于弗兰克怀疑主义理论进路形成和确定的影响。弗兰克对司法现实的怀疑主义始自于霍姆斯,而在勒尼德·汉德的影响下将怀疑主义从规则领域进一步贯穿到事实领域。理论支撑则重点阐述实用主义哲学和心理学渊源,其作为怀疑主义理论进路推演的工具和基础而存在。实用主义哲学自身蕴含着怀疑主义精神,为事实怀疑论提供了批判的方法。弗兰克的怀疑主义并非是哲学意义上的怀疑主义,在很大程度上往往被视为一种怀疑主义态度,因此称其为“实用主义”更恰当。心理学渊源既包括弗洛伊德的精神分析理论,也包括皮亚杰的儿童心理学理论。虽然弗兰克有时极力划清其与弗洛伊德精神分析理论的界限,但是这恰恰也表明其深受精神分析理论的影响。在具体理论阐述的行文中,弗兰克引用最多的当属皮亚杰的儿童心理学理论。时代必要性主要强调在政治、经济、社会等方面已发生巨大形势变化的情况下,法律形式主义司法风格深受挑战和质疑。对其展开批判固然要从规则或事实方面入手,弗兰克事实怀疑论就包含了规则怀疑和事实怀疑两方面的内容。其并不是从对规则的怀疑转变为对事实的怀疑,两者本身是一体双翼。第二部分主要介绍怀疑主义在事实怀疑论中的展开。其内容包括怀疑规则认知和怀疑事实认定两个层面,怀疑规则认知层面从规则的不确定性、法官造法以及初审法院中心论三个方面,来论述规则不确定性的价值、法官造法的意义以及事实问题的重要性;怀疑事实认定层面从事实建构论、斗争理论和结论先行论三个方面,来论述事实认定乃至司法判决在现实司法审判过程中的不确定性,并且利用心理学成果来研究主观性因素对事实认定的影响。不论是怀疑规则认知层面还是怀疑事实认定层面,我们都能够看到人的主观性因素对审判的影响,这是事实怀疑论得以阐述的外在主线,内在则蕴含着对以规则确定性和事实确定性为表征的法律形式主义思维的批判和消解。第三部分主要论述事实怀疑论中的“破”与“立”,来论证其怀疑主义乃是一种建设性的怀疑主义。事实怀疑论的“破”主要通过规则怀疑和事实怀疑解构了规则的重要性,批判了法律形式主义,形成了对大陆法理性主义传统的某种抵制。事实怀疑论的“立”则是通过把研究重心从规则领域转移到事实领域,试图恢复普通法个案优先的传统,讲求的是个案正义优先于规则的统一适用,为了特定案件事实的公正判决要对规则予以灵活处理。

学科:

法学理论

提交日期

2019-04-11

引用参考

刘文哲. 建设性怀疑主义——弗兰克事实怀疑论[D]. ,2017.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 建设性怀疑主义——弗兰克事实怀疑论
  • dc.title
  • Constructive Skepticism——Frank’s Fact-skepticism
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20140301010072
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 刘文哲
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 行政法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学硕士
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2017
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 郭忠
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 行政法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 其他
  • dc.subject
  • 事实怀疑论;建设性怀疑主义;法律形式主义;普通法传统
  • dc.subject
  • Fact-Skepticism; constructive skepticism; legal formalism; tradition of common law
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 弗兰克事实怀疑论思想当中始终贯彻着怀疑主义这样一个主题。为了批判法律形式主义的保守与僵化,弗兰克所依凭的怀疑主义这样一种进路,并没有最终走向‘规则虚无’和‘事实虚无’的极端地步,相反,弗兰克事实怀疑论中的怀疑主义是一种建设性怀疑主义。这种怀疑主义是一种温和的、带有建设性的怀疑,是对人的认知能力及知识的可信性的理性怀疑,而并非是极端的、绝对的、否定一切的怀疑。这体现为其怀疑主义不单单对受到大陆法系影响的法律形式主义起到批判和“破坏”的作用,而且还试图使司法回归到以个案优先为特点的普通法传统中去。简言之,弗兰克的怀疑主义既注重“破”的彻底性,又强调“立”的深刻性,“破”的是法律形式主义的种种神话思维,“立”的是普通法传统中对个案正义的优先诉求。弗兰克在事实怀疑论中,以探究人类弱点对制度操作方面所产生的影响为主线,来阐述法官、陪审团、律师、当事人、证人等主体的主观性和情感化特征对司法审判的影响,尤其是法官个性特征对事实认定方面的影响。对事实认定的怀疑可谓是建设性怀疑主义的最为重要的基点,一方面相较于规则怀疑其对抽象规则重要性的解构更为彻底,另一方面事实认定的不确定性以及案件事实的个殊性也决定了个案中具体正义要优先于规则所代表的抽象正义。第一部分主要介绍弗兰克怀疑主义理论进路的确定。分别从思想继承、理论支撑和时代必要性三个方面入手。其中思想继承方面重点介绍霍姆斯和勒尼德·汉德对于弗兰克怀疑主义理论进路形成和确定的影响。弗兰克对司法现实的怀疑主义始自于霍姆斯,而在勒尼德·汉德的影响下将怀疑主义从规则领域进一步贯穿到事实领域。理论支撑则重点阐述实用主义哲学和心理学渊源,其作为怀疑主义理论进路推演的工具和基础而存在。实用主义哲学自身蕴含着怀疑主义精神,为事实怀疑论提供了批判的方法。弗兰克的怀疑主义并非是哲学意义上的怀疑主义,在很大程度上往往被视为一种怀疑主义态度,因此称其为“实用主义”更恰当。心理学渊源既包括弗洛伊德的精神分析理论,也包括皮亚杰的儿童心理学理论。虽然弗兰克有时极力划清其与弗洛伊德精神分析理论的界限,但是这恰恰也表明其深受精神分析理论的影响。在具体理论阐述的行文中,弗兰克引用最多的当属皮亚杰的儿童心理学理论。时代必要性主要强调在政治、经济、社会等方面已发生巨大形势变化的情况下,法律形式主义司法风格深受挑战和质疑。对其展开批判固然要从规则或事实方面入手,弗兰克事实怀疑论就包含了规则怀疑和事实怀疑两方面的内容。其并不是从对规则的怀疑转变为对事实的怀疑,两者本身是一体双翼。第二部分主要介绍怀疑主义在事实怀疑论中的展开。其内容包括怀疑规则认知和怀疑事实认定两个层面,怀疑规则认知层面从规则的不确定性、法官造法以及初审法院中心论三个方面,来论述规则不确定性的价值、法官造法的意义以及事实问题的重要性;怀疑事实认定层面从事实建构论、斗争理论和结论先行论三个方面,来论述事实认定乃至司法判决在现实司法审判过程中的不确定性,并且利用心理学成果来研究主观性因素对事实认定的影响。不论是怀疑规则认知层面还是怀疑事实认定层面,我们都能够看到人的主观性因素对审判的影响,这是事实怀疑论得以阐述的外在主线,内在则蕴含着对以规则确定性和事实确定性为表征的法律形式主义思维的批判和消解。第三部分主要论述事实怀疑论中的“破”与“立”,来论证其怀疑主义乃是一种建设性的怀疑主义。事实怀疑论的“破”主要通过规则怀疑和事实怀疑解构了规则的重要性,批判了法律形式主义,形成了对大陆法理性主义传统的某种抵制。事实怀疑论的“立”则是通过把研究重心从规则领域转移到事实领域,试图恢复普通法个案优先的传统,讲求的是个案正义优先于规则的统一适用,为了特定案件事实的公正判决要对规则予以灵活处理。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Frank's fact-skepticism always carry out a subject such as skepticism. In order to criticize the conservatism and rigidity of legal formalism, the way in which Frank relied on skepticism did not ultimately go to the extremes of 'rule nihilism' and 'factual nihilism'. Instead, the skepticism in Frank's fact-skepticism was a constructive skepticism. This skepticism is a gentle, constructive skepticism that is a rational suspicion of human's cognitive power and the credibility of knowledge, not an extreme, an absolute, denial of all doubt. This is reflected in the fact that its skepticism is not only a matter of criticism and "destruction" of legal formalism influenced by civil law, but also attempts to return justice to the common law tradition characterized by case priority. In short, Frank's skepticism not only emphasizes the "broken" thoroughness, but also emphasizes the "legislation" of the profound, "broken" is the legal formalism of all myth thinking, "legislation" is common law in the case the priority of justice. In the skepticism of history, Frank explores the influence of the subjective and emotional characteristics of judges, juries, lawyers, parties, witnesses on the judicial trial in order to explore the influence of human weaknesses on the operation of the system as the main line. Is the judge of the personality characteristics of the fact that the impact of identification. The suspicion of factualization can be described as the most important basis point for constructive skepticism, on the one hand, it is more thorough than the rule that its deconstruction of the importance of abstract rules is more thorough, on the other hand, the uncertainty of the facts and the facts of the case Discrimination also determines that the specific justice in the case takes precedence over the abstract justice represented by the rule.The first part mainly introduces the determination of Frank's theory of skepticism. Respectively, from the ideological succession, theoretical support and the necessity of the times three aspects. The idea of ??inheritance focuses on the influence of Holmes and Learned Handon the formation and determination of Frank's theory of skepticism. Frank's skepticism about judicial reality began with Holmes, and under the influence of Learned Hand, the skepticism was further penetrated from the field of rules into the realm. Theoretical support focuses on the origin of pragmatism and psychology, which exists as a tool and basis for the deduction of skepticism theory. Pragmatism itself contains the spirit of skepticism and provides a critical way for factual skepticism. Frank's skepticism is not a philosophical sense of skepticism, to a large extent often regarded as a skeptical attitude, so called "pragmatism" more appropriate. The origin of psychology includes both Freud's psychoanalytic theory and Piaget's theory of children's psychology. Although Frank sometimes tried to delineate the boundaries of Freud's psychoanalytic theory, it also showed that it was deeply influenced by psychoanalytic theory. In the specific theory of the text, Frank cited most of the Piaget's children's psychological theory. The necessity of the times mainly emphasizes that the legal formalism judicial style is challenged and questioned in the case of great changes in politics, economy and society. Criticism of the rule of course, from the rules or facts to start, Frank facts skeptics to contain the rules of doubt and the fact that the two aspects of doubt. It is not from the suspicion of the rules into the suspicion of the facts, the two themselves are one of the wings.The second part mainly introduces the development of skepticism in fact-skepticism. The content includes the two levels of skepticism and suspicion of factual cognition, and it is suspected that the rule cognition level discusses the value of rule uncertainty from three aspects: the uncertainty of rules, the law of judges and the three aspects of the court of first instance. The significance of law and the importance of factual problems; suspicion of the fact that the level of fact in the construction theory, the theory of the struggle and the first three aspects of the conclusion to discuss the fact that the judicial decision and judicial judgments in the process of judging the uncertainty of the trial, and the use of psychological To study the impact of subjective factors on factual recognition. Whether it is skeptical rules of cognitive level or doubt the fact that the level of recognition, we can see the subjective factors of the impact of the trial, which is the fact that skeptics can be described in the external main line, inherently contains the rules of certainty and Criticism and Deconstruction of Legal Formalism in Characterization.The third part mainly discusses the "broken" and "established" in the skepticism of facts, to prove that skepticism is a constructive skepticism. The "breaking" of fact skepticism mainly deconstructs the importance of rules through the rule-suspicion and fact-doubt, criticizes the legal formalism and forms a kind of resistance to the tradition of rationality of the continental law. The factual skepticismof "legislation" aims to restore the tradition of priority of common law cases by shifting the focus of research from the domain of rules to the field of facts. It emphasizes the priority of case justice over rules and the fairness of facts in specific cases. The rules are flexible.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2017-05-21
  • dc.relation.relatedpublications
  • 目录引言 1一、弗兰克怀疑主义理论进路的确定 3(一)怀疑主义理论进路之思想继承 51.霍姆斯 52.勒尼德·汉德 8(二)怀疑主义理论进路之理论支撑 91.实用主义哲学 92.心理学渊源 11(三)怀疑主义理论进路之时代必要性 13二、弗兰克怀疑主义在事实怀疑论中的展开 15(一)怀疑规则认知 161.法律规则的不确定性 162.法官造法 173.初审法院中心论 19(二)怀疑事实认定 211.事实建构论 212.斗争理论 233.结论先行理论 28三、事实怀疑论中的建设性怀疑主义 31(一)事实怀疑论的“破” 31(二)事实怀疑论的“立” 39结语 45参考文献 46
回到顶部