本文選題：實(shí)用主義 + 實(shí)用主義司法哲學(xué)��； 參考：《武漢大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：美國實(shí)用主義的司法哲學(xué)觀緣起于古典實(shí)用主義向傳統(tǒng)形而上學(xué)背離,尋求新方法的時(shí)代,實(shí)用主義世界觀的理解方式、真理觀以及方法論上的面向?qū)嵺`經(jīng)驗(yàn)與效果,契合了美國有別于傳統(tǒng)西方而更為務(wù)實(shí)的民族精神。實(shí)用主義的法律觀和現(xiàn)實(shí)主義、批判法學(xué)、社會(huì)法學(xué)等更為經(jīng)驗(yàn)性的法哲學(xué)方法興盛,為霍姆斯、卡多佐及波斯納等人的美國實(shí)用主義司法哲學(xué)提供了思想方法與命題啟示。實(shí)用主義司法哲學(xué)以霍姆斯的論述為開端,卡多佐為繼承者與司法實(shí)用主義的實(shí)踐及闡釋者,波斯納以霍姆斯為智識(shí)的導(dǎo)航,帶來了司法實(shí)用主義理論上的系統(tǒng)論述與復(fù)興。正如卡多佐論述中所現(xiàn),"司法哲學(xué)最終乃是呈現(xiàn)為法官這一司法者的哲學(xué)"。實(shí)用主義的司法哲學(xué)亦要回答時(shí)代社會(huì)需求以及思想潮流中的問題命題,在觀念的繼承中發(fā)展與回應(yīng)其他法哲學(xué)批判。命題與方法的真知與持存,司法實(shí)用主義不會(huì)畫上句點(diǎn),而是會(huì)繼續(xù)譜寫上自己的流變史。實(shí)用主義的司法哲學(xué)如同實(shí)用主義一樣排斥抽象的概念體系,而是以面向經(jīng)驗(yàn)問題的命題形式及其司法實(shí)踐,建構(gòu)起了司法實(shí)用主義的法律世界觀與科學(xué)方法觀�；裟匪够�'壞人'視角下的法律預(yù)測論,將司法置于社會(huì)需求中的經(jīng)驗(yàn)與歷史,對(duì)道德與法律關(guān)系的特殊視角等構(gòu)筑了司法實(shí)用主義的基本圖景,在聯(lián)邦憲法訴訟的言論自由審查、洛克納案中,將司法實(shí)用主義運(yùn)用于對(duì)經(jīng)驗(yàn)及社會(huì)需求的關(guān)照中。卡多佐則力求在其論述中闡釋司法過程的性質(zhì)及方法,將先例、邏輯、習(xí)慣、社會(huì)福利、個(gè)人的或共同的正義和道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等方法運(yùn)用于法官的案例裁判中。波斯納式的司法實(shí)用主義,則系統(tǒng)論述了法律客觀性和自主性基礎(chǔ),揭示了實(shí)質(zhì)規(guī)則上道德問題的事實(shí)經(jīng)驗(yàn)本質(zhì),引入了經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)等科學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)內(nèi)容的法律塑造,體現(xiàn)于其實(shí)用主義風(fēng)格的法官審判。美國的實(shí)用主義司法哲學(xué)形成了對(duì)司法過程構(gòu)造上的法律世界觀及其方法論,對(duì)理解與揭示美國司法進(jìn)程具有重要意義。而霍姆斯、卡多佐及波斯納的著述流傳,在司法哲學(xué)觀念塑造上亦將內(nèi)化于世界各國自身語境的司法制度實(shí)踐中。對(duì)其恒在性的科學(xué)觀念揭示與局限性闡述,即是正確理解實(shí)用主義司法哲學(xué)的必要路徑,在我國當(dāng)下新一輪司法改革進(jìn)程中,重述這一司法哲學(xué)則有他山之石、可以攻玉之效。
[Abstract]:The judicial philosophy of American pragmatism originates from the departure from the classical pragmatism to the traditional metaphysics, the era of seeking new methods, the way of understanding the pragmatism worldview, the view of truth and the practical experience and effect of methodology.It fits in with the more pragmatic national spirit of the United States, which is different from the traditional West.The pragmatism of legal view and realism, critical law, social law and other more empirical philosophy of law flourished, for Holmes, Cardoso and Posner and other people's judicial philosophy of American pragmatism to provide ideological methods and propositions enlightenment.The judicial philosophy of pragmatism starts with Holmes' argumentation, Cardoso is the successor and the practice and explanation of judicial pragmatism, and Posner takes Holmes as the intellectual navigation, which brings about the systematic discussion and revival of judicial pragmatism in theory.As Cardoso argues, "the philosophy of justice is ultimately the philosophy of justice as a judge".The judicial philosophy of pragmatism should also answer the social needs of the times and the question proposition in the ideological trend, and develop and respond to the criticism of other philosophy of law in the inheritance of ideas.The truth and persistence of proposition and method, judicial pragmatism will not draw an end, but will continue to write its own history of evolution.The judicial philosophy of pragmatism, like pragmatism, rejects the abstract concept system. Instead, it constructs the legal world outlook and scientific method view of judicial pragmatism in the form of empirical propositional form and its judicial practice.Based on the theory of legal prediction from the perspective of 'bad man', Holmes constructs the basic prospect of judicial pragmatism by putting justice in the social demand and history, and from the special perspective of the relationship between morality and law.In the review of freedom of speech in federal constitutional litigation, Lockna, judicial pragmatism was applied to the consideration of experience and social needs.Cardoso tries to explain the nature and method of judicial process in his discourse, applying precedent, logic, custom, social welfare, personal or common justice and moral standard to judge's case judgment.Posner's judicial pragmatism systematically discusses the legal objectivity and the basis of autonomy, reveals the essence of factual experience of moral problems in substantive rules, and introduces the legal shaping of scientific experimental contents such as economics.It is embodied in its pragmatic style of judge trial.The pragmatic judicial philosophy of the United States has formed the legal world outlook and its methodology on the structure of the judicial process, which is of great significance to understanding and revealing the judicial process in the United States.The works of Holmes, Cardoso and Posner also internalize the judicial system practice in the context of various countries in the shaping of the concept of judicial philosophy.It is necessary to correctly understand the judicial philosophy of pragmatism. In the course of the new round of judicial reform in our country, the restatement of this judicial philosophy has the effect of attacking the jade.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D90

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張國清;;波斯納立場:法律根基的失落及其后果[J];公法研究;2002年00期

2 喬新生;;波斯納讓法律變得更實(shí)用[J];博覽群書;2003年10期

3 張芝梅;;法律如何解決政治性問題——波斯納的視角[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年05期

4 張芝梅;;法律是一門什么樣的科學(xué)?——波斯納的反思[J];中共浙江省委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2006年02期

5 劉勇;;市場、公權(quán)力與公平就業(yè)——解讀波斯納《法律的經(jīng)濟(jì)分析》之公平就業(yè)觀[J];西南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2006年03期

6 尹德洪;;波斯納對(duì)產(chǎn)權(quán)理論和法律制度的研究[J];蘭州商學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

7 高袁;;波斯納效率觀之法理學(xué)探析[J];南方論刊;2007年12期

8 逄曉藝;;看法官如何思考——波斯納的《法官如何思考》讀后點(diǎn)滴[J];知識(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì);2011年10期

9 鄭鵬程;聶長建;;波斯納的實(shí)用主義法學(xué)[J];太原師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年02期

10 羅納德·H.科斯;艾佳慧;;科斯論波斯納論科斯:評(píng)論[J];法律和社會(huì)科學(xué);2013年02期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前3條

1 |!屒修;;自治而非管制才是侵k 法的本岅——評(píng)，

本文編號(hào)：1761144