- dc.title
- 法律规则逻辑结构理论的变迁及反思
- dc.contributor.author
- dc.contributor.author
- dc.contributor.affiliation
- 西南政法大学
- dc.publisher
- 法制与社会发展
- dc.publisher
- Law and Social Development
- dc.identifier.year
- 2020
- dc.identifier.issue
- 01
- dc.identifier.volume
- v.26;No.151
- dc.identifier.page
- 62-80
- dc.date.issued
- 2020-01-10
- dc.subject
- 法律规则;结构;道义;实践;逻辑
- dc.subject
- Legal Rule;Structure;Morality;Practice;Logic
- dc.description.abstract
- 自新中国成立以来,关于法律规则的逻辑结构理论,我国法理学界大致存在四种主张:三要素说、二要素说、新三要素说和新二要素说。这四种学说或是在实践上无法被准确适用,或是在逻辑上无法自洽,抑或在理论上尚未回答根本性问题。事实上,对法律规则逻辑结构理论的证成必须从"道义"合法性、逻辑自洽与指导实践三个维度出发。从这三个维度出发检讨这四种学说,可以发现,由二要素说所做的从"阶级斗争论"到"权利本位论"的工作尚未完成;由新三要素说所呈现的从"本体论"到"方法论"的努力仍需持续;而新二要素说所揭示的从"中国式回答"到"多元化视角"的进路亦无法回避中国自身的"元问题"。
- dc.description.abstract
- Since the founding of the People's Republic of China, there are roughly four doctrines on the logical structure theory of a legal rule in Chinese jurisprudence: the three-elements doctrine, the two-elements doctrine, the new three-elements doctrine, and the new two-elements doctrine, which are accompanied by constant debate and criticism. The four doctrines are either not accurately applicable in practice, logically unable to be self-consistent, or have not yet answered fundamental questions in theory. In fact, the justification of the logical structure of a legal rule must start from the three dimensions of"moral"legitimacy, logical self-consistency, and guiding practice. In this way, the work from"Class Struggle"to"Theory of Right-oriented"done by the two-elements doctrine has not been completed; the effort from"Ontology"to"Methodology"presented by the new three-elements doctrine still needs to be continued; the approach from the"Chinese-style Answer"to the"Multiple Perspective"revealed by the two-elements doctrine also cannot evade China's own"meta-question".
- dc.identifier.CN
- 22-1243/D
- dc.identifier.issn
- 1006-6128
- dc.identifier.if
- 2.447
- dc.subject.discipline
- D920.0