本文關(guān)鍵詞： 法律體系 自治性 構(gòu)成性規(guī)范 排他性理由　出處：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2011年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：法律體系問題是一個(gè)復(fù)雜而且重要的問題,不少法學(xué)家對(duì)此問題有過研究。從一些比較具有代表性的法學(xué)家的著作來看,這些研究在某些方面雖然已經(jīng)取得了比較深入的研究結(jié)果,但是,還是在不同程度上存在著許多問題。具體體現(xiàn)在兩個(gè)方面:一是將法律體系的研究技術(shù)化、瑣碎化,將原本應(yīng)該是前瞻性、基礎(chǔ)理論性以及總體反思的法律體系研究變成了一個(gè)在現(xiàn)有立法體制之下的對(duì)于實(shí)證性法律體系的修修補(bǔ)補(bǔ)。另一方面的表現(xiàn)就是與此相反對(duì),將法律體系的研究在相當(dāng)大程度上擴(kuò)展到更大的范圍中,從經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會(huì)、政治、文化等角度來觀察和分析法律體系。這兩種研究路徑都有其合理性和科學(xué)性的一面,但是,缺陷也是明顯存在的。第一種方法只見樹木不見森林,抓不住法律體系問題核心。第二種方法沒能注意到法律體系的規(guī)范性特征�；诖�,法律體系的研究核心問題應(yīng)該是其自治性問題。 對(duì)于法律體系自治性問題的研究比較深入和具有代表性的有奧斯丁、哈特、凱爾森、拉茲等人,所以,本文的第一章首先分析和解釋哲學(xué)和邏輯學(xué)中的自治性何以可能,以及由此反觀法律體系自治性何以可能。第二章分析了奧斯丁的法律體系自治性理論,指出其將體系的自治性建立在主權(quán)者理論上的缺陷和不足,由于這些不足之處的存在,體系的自治性是完不成的。第三章分析了哈特的法律體系的理論。哈特分析并提出初級(jí)規(guī)則和次級(jí)規(guī)則,以這兩類規(guī)則的有機(jī)結(jié)合來解釋和描述法律的本質(zhì)并實(shí)現(xiàn)法律體系的自治性。不過,由于承認(rèn)規(guī)則性質(zhì)的曖昧不明,從而體系的自治性也實(shí)現(xiàn)不了。第四章分析了凱爾森的體系理論。如果要保持法律的純粹性特征的話,法律體系不可避免地要實(shí)現(xiàn)自治,否則倫理的、道德的因素總會(huì)自覺不自覺地進(jìn)入到法律體系中來。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)法律體系的自治性,凱爾森在運(yùn)用了康德批判哲學(xué)中的論證方法,以基本規(guī)范的預(yù)設(shè)和論證方式來構(gòu)建體系的自治性。但是,由于基本規(guī)范沒有處理好事實(shí)層面問題,從而將復(fù)雜的法律體系建構(gòu)問題簡(jiǎn)單化處理了,因此,也不能夠成功實(shí)現(xiàn)體系自治性的要求。 在分析了前面幾個(gè)具有代表性理論,并結(jié)合第一章所揭示的自治性的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和要求基礎(chǔ)上,在第五章本文提出了法律體系自治性所必然具備的特征同時(shí)也是必須具備的要求。首先,從行為理由的角度來看,體系中的規(guī)則必須作為排他性的理由。由此又可以推出另一個(gè)要求,即社會(huì)中權(quán)威性機(jī)構(gòu)的存在。其次,體系中處于最高效力層次上的規(guī)范,如憲法性規(guī)范必須是構(gòu)成性的。同樣,由此也可以推出法律規(guī)范及其體系應(yīng)該是實(shí)踐性生成的。
[Abstract]:The question of the legal system is a complex and important issue, which many jurists have studied. From the works of some more representative jurists, Although these studies have made some in-depth research results in some aspects, there are still many problems in varying degrees. They are embodied in two aspects: one is to make the research of the legal system technical and trivial, The study of the legal system, which should have been forward-looking, theoretical and overall reflection, has been transformed into a patchwork of the positivist legal system under the existing legislative system. On the other hand, the opposite is true. To a large extent, the study of legal system is expanded to a larger scope, and the legal system is observed and analyzed from the angle of economy, society, politics, culture and so on. These two research paths have their rationality and scientific side, but, The defects are also evident. The first approach is to see only the trees and the forest, and the core of the legal system problem. The second method fails to notice the normative characteristics of the legal system. Based on this, The core of the study of the legal system should be its autonomy. The research on the autonomy of legal system is more in-depth and representative, such as Austen, Hart, Kelsen, Raz and so on. Therefore, the first chapter of this paper first analyzes and explains how autonomy in philosophy and logic is possible. The second chapter analyzes Austen's theory of legal system autonomy, and points out that the autonomy of the system is based on the defects and deficiencies of the sovereign theory. The autonomy of the system is not complete. Chapter three analyzes Hart's theory of the legal system. Hart analyses and proposes the primary rules and secondary rules. The organic combination of these two types of rules is used to explain and describe the nature of the law and to achieve the autonomy of the legal system. So the autonomy of the system can not be realized. Chapter 4th analyzes Kelsen's theory of the system. If we want to maintain the pure character of the law, the legal system will inevitably achieve autonomy, otherwise the ethical, Moral factors always come into the legal system consciously or unconsciously. In order to realize the autonomy of the legal system, Kelsen used the argumentation method of Kant's critical philosophy. The autonomy of the system is constructed by the presupposition and argumentation of the basic norms. However, because the basic norms do not deal with the problem of fact well, it simplifies the construction of the complex legal system. Nor can the requirement of autonomy of the system be successfully achieved. Based on the analysis of the previous representative theories and the criteria and requirements of autonomy revealed in the first chapter, In Chapter 5th, the author puts forward the necessary characteristics of the autonomy of the legal system as well as the necessary requirements. First of all, from the point of view of the reasons for conduct, The rules in the system must be used as grounds for exclusivity. Another requirement can be derived from this: the existence of authoritative institutions in society. Secondly, the norms of the system at the highest level of effectiveness, If constitutional norms must be constitutive, it is also possible to infer that legal norms and their systems should be practically generated.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D90

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 J·H·馮·基爾希曼,趙陽;作為科學(xué)的法學(xué)的無價(jià)值性——在柏林法學(xué)會(huì)的演講[J];比較法研究;2004年01期

2 卡爾·拉倫茨 ,趙陽;論作為科學(xué)的法學(xué)的不可或缺性——1966年4月20日在柏林法學(xué)會(huì)的演講[J];比較法研究;2005年03期

3 徐國(guó)棟;“人身關(guān)系”流變考(上)[J];法學(xué);2002年06期

4 徐國(guó)棟;“人身關(guān)系”流變考(下)[J];法學(xué);2002年07期

5 錢大軍;馬新福;;法律體系的重釋——兼對(duì)我國(guó)既有法律體系理論的初步反思[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

6 鄭永流;出釋入造——法律詮釋學(xué)及其與法律解釋學(xué)的關(guān)系[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年03期

7 舒國(guó)瀅;尋訪法學(xué)的問題立場(chǎng)——兼談“論題學(xué)法學(xué)”的思考方式[J];法學(xué)研究;2005年03期

8 王斌;;淺析奧斯丁對(duì)法的概念之構(gòu)建——以《法理學(xué)的范圍》為中心的考察[J];南方論刊;2007年12期

9 劉金國(guó),周靜;試論法律領(lǐng)域內(nèi)規(guī)范層面和事實(shí)層面的邏輯—句法對(duì)應(yīng)性[J];政法論壇;2003年02期

10 徐國(guó)棟;再論人身關(guān)系——兼評(píng)民法典總則編條文建議稿第3條[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2002年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：1545063