本文選題：法律論證 + 法律商談理論��； 參考：《西南政法大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律論證是法律邏輯學的一個重要分支。我國的法律論證理論研究現(xiàn)在多局限于傳統(tǒng)形式邏輯視角之下。毋庸置疑，傳統(tǒng)形式邏輯視角是法律論證理論研究的基礎(chǔ)。但是其也具有一定的局限性。它雖然很好地解決了法律論證的形式合法性問題，不僅強調(diào)前提—法律規(guī)則的權(quán)威性，還能為結(jié)論—司法裁決提供一種強有力的說服力。但是，它只是一種規(guī)則主導(dǎo)之下的法律論證，強調(diào)結(jié)論的合法性，而這種合法性卻犧牲了對法律體系之外的正當性的考慮。為了彌補傳統(tǒng)法律論證只重形式不重實質(zhì)的缺陷，，筆者引入了法律商談理論,并在總結(jié)法律商談理論的基礎(chǔ)上提出了一個法律商談?wù)撟C的基本構(gòu)架，并初步探索了其在司法審判中的應(yīng)用之道，以期對我國的司法審判實踐有所助益。本文主要從以下四個部分來展開論述： 第一部分：法律論證理論研究之傳統(tǒng)視角 本部分首先簡單介紹了傳統(tǒng)法律論證研究狀況，肯定傳統(tǒng)法律論證理論的作用，同時也指出其存在一定的局限性，在此基礎(chǔ)之上指出當下法律論證研究正在從傳統(tǒng)形式邏輯視角向非形式邏輯視角轉(zhuǎn)變。 第二部分：法律論證理論研究的新視角 本部分把法律論證理論研究的視角引入到法律商談理論視野下。把法律商談理論分為理想條件下的法律商談理論和限定條件下的法律商談理論，并分別對其進行了詳細的介紹。然后對法律商談理論進行綜合評價并指出其對法律論證理論研究的意義。 第三部分：法律商談?wù)撟C的構(gòu)架 本部分結(jié)合第二部分的法律商談理論，在總結(jié)借鑒法律商談理論的基礎(chǔ)上提出了一個法律商談?wù)撟C的基本構(gòu)架。并分別從內(nèi)涵、特征、評價標準、規(guī)則和程序這幾個方面來具體闡釋法律商談?wù)撟C的構(gòu)架。 第四部分：法律商談?wù)撟C在司法審判中的應(yīng)用之初探 本部分試圖將法律商談?wù)撟C之方法運用于司法審判之中，探尋法律商談?wù)撟C與司法審判的契合之道并試圖為司法審判實踐探索出一種與司法三段論不同的法律論證模式。
[Abstract]:Legal argumentation is an important branch of legal logic. The theoretical research of legal argumentation in our country is now confined to the traditional formal logic perspective. There is no doubt that the traditional formal logic perspective is the basis of the theoretical study of legal argumentation. But it also has some limitations. Although it solves the problem of formal legality of legal argumentation, it not only emphasizes the authority of premise-legal rules, but also provides a powerful persuasion for conclusion-judicial decision. However, it is only a legal argument under the rule of law, emphasizing the legitimacy of the conclusion, which sacrifices the consideration of legitimacy outside the legal system. In order to remedy the defects of traditional legal argumentation, the author introduces the theory of legal negotiation, and puts forward a basic framework of legal negotiation on the basis of summing up the theory of legal negotiation. It also explores its application in judicial trial so as to be helpful to the judicial practice in our country. This paper mainly discusses from the following four parts: The first part: the traditional angle of view of the theoretical research of legal argumentation This part firstly introduces the research situation of traditional legal argumentation, affirms the function of traditional legal argumentation theory, and points out its limitations. On this basis, it is pointed out that the current legal argumentation is changing from the traditional formal logic perspective to the non-formal logic perspective. The second part: a new angle of view for the study of the theory of legal argumentation This part introduces the theory of legal argumentation into the perspective of legal negotiation theory. The legal negotiation theory is divided into ideal legal negotiation theory and limited legal negotiation theory. Then it evaluates the theory of legal negotiation and points out its significance to the research of legal argumentation theory. The third part: the framework of legal negotiation argumentation Based on the theory of legal negotiation in the second part, this part puts forward a basic framework of legal negotiation argumentation on the basis of summing up and drawing lessons from the theory of legal negotiation. The framework of legal negotiation and argumentation is explained from the aspects of connotation, characteristics, evaluation criteria, rules and procedures. The fourth part: the Application of legal negotiation and argumentation in Judicial trial This part attempts to apply the method of legal negotiation argumentation to judicial trial, to explore the agreement between legal negotiation argumentation and judicial trial, and to explore a different legal argumentation model from judicial syllogism for judicial trial practice.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D90-051

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 焦寶乾;;修辭方法及其在法律論證中的作用探討[J];法律方法;2008年00期

2 孫桂林;;哈貝馬斯的法律商談理論及其中國化的意義[J];法學雜志;2010年03期

3 陳登;哈貝馬斯的普遍語用學[J];湖南大學學報(社會科學版);2000年04期

4 胡軍良;;論哈貝馬斯的交往理性觀[J];內(nèi)蒙古社會科學(漢文版);2010年02期

5 李安;;裁判形成的思維過程[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2007年04期

本文編號：1957944