發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-15 19:16

【摘要】： 近年來(lái),國(guó)內(nèi)外專家學(xué)者對(duì)于法律推理展開(kāi)了廣泛而深入的研究,根據(jù)法律推理內(nèi)容的差異性,學(xué)者對(duì)法律推理有不同的認(rèn)識(shí)。大多數(shù)學(xué)者認(rèn)為法律推理的過(guò)程是形式邏輯推理與辨證推理的結(jié)合,既有形式合法性的外在訴求,又有實(shí)質(zhì)合理性的內(nèi)在追尋。本文通過(guò)對(duì)司法審判活動(dòng)中法官運(yùn)用的法律推理進(jìn)行相關(guān)分析研究,以勾勒出法律推理的粗略面貌。 論文正文共分三部分。 第一部分是法律推理的概述,主要從法律推理的概念、分類、特征等方面進(jìn)行了簡(jiǎn)單的梳理,指出了目前有關(guān)法律推理的研究狀況。依據(jù)傳統(tǒng)的觀點(diǎn),法律推理主要分為形式法律推理和實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理。形式法律推理,是從法律推理的形式結(jié)構(gòu)上加以認(rèn)識(shí),著重對(duì)法律推理大小前提的邏輯關(guān)系進(jìn)行分析,暫時(shí)撇開(kāi)了法律推理中前提和結(jié)論判斷所反映的具體內(nèi)容,它主要包含了演繹推理和歸納推理。而實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理是在法律適用過(guò)程中,在對(duì)相關(guān)的法律的規(guī)定或案件的事實(shí)進(jìn)行分析的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合一定的價(jià)值判斷,對(duì)案件作出判決的推理過(guò)程,實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理和形式法律推理的聯(lián)系非常緊密,實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理是對(duì)形式法律推理的有益補(bǔ)充,而形式法律推理是實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理的前提,兩者共存于司法實(shí)踐當(dāng)中,缺一不可。此外,文中還分析了實(shí)踐中法律推理的主要方法,有助于更好地對(duì)其進(jìn)行運(yùn)用。法律推理作為一種思維模式和技術(shù)方法,有著與眾不同的特征,它表現(xiàn)的是一種邏輯與經(jīng)驗(yàn)相結(jié)合,以實(shí)現(xiàn)法治為目標(biāo),并且推理主體發(fā)揮主觀能動(dòng)性的過(guò)程。 第二部分主要對(duì)我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中的法律推理所存在的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行研究,指出了法律推理在審判中的應(yīng)用存在著哪些瓶頸。由于受長(zhǎng)期的歷史傳統(tǒng)和司法習(xí)慣的影響,實(shí)踐中的法律推理存在著許多不足之處,如重法律知識(shí)輕推理能力、重言詞證據(jù)輕邏輯推理、重法條援引輕理由闡述、重形式法律推理輕實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理等。 第三部分通過(guò)審視我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中運(yùn)用法律推理存在的諸多問(wèn)題,從理論與實(shí)踐的雙重視野來(lái)探尋問(wèn)題的解決路徑。在理論視角下,本文首先分析了形式法律推理的局限性,然后重點(diǎn)強(qiáng)調(diào)了實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理的價(jià)值,實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理關(guān)注推理的內(nèi)容,并把對(duì)推理前提的證成納入到了其關(guān)懷之中,承認(rèn)價(jià)值判斷的存在,是對(duì)形式法律推理缺陷的彌補(bǔ)。在實(shí)踐層面上,在對(duì)現(xiàn)今司法審判存在的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行分析的基礎(chǔ)上,提出一些解決措施如:必須提高法官邏輯推理素質(zhì)、加強(qiáng)最高法院判例對(duì)案件的參考性、明確裁判文書的推理過(guò)程、加強(qiáng)證據(jù)規(guī)則的改革、加強(qiáng)司法審判體制改革等。要解決我國(guó)法律推理的現(xiàn)實(shí)困境,必須從這些方面入手,循序漸進(jìn),不斷增強(qiáng)法官運(yùn)用法律推理的自覺(jué)性與技術(shù)性,為我國(guó)司法發(fā)展做出努力。
[Abstract]:In recent years, experts and scholars at home and abroad have carried out extensive and in-depth research on legal reasoning, according to the differences in the content of legal reasoning, scholars have different understanding of legal reasoning. Most scholars believe that the process of legal reasoning is the combination of formal logic reasoning and dialectical reasoning, which has the external demand of formal legitimacy and the internal pursuit of substantive rationality. In this paper, the author analyzes and studies the legal reasoning used by judges in judicial activities to outline the rough appearance of legal reasoning. The paper is divided into three parts. The first part is an overview of legal reasoning, mainly from the concept of legal reasoning, classification, characteristics and other aspects of a simple comb, pointing out the current situation of research on legal reasoning. According to the traditional view, legal reasoning is mainly divided into formal legal reasoning and substantive legal reasoning. Formal legal reasoning is based on the understanding of the formal structure of legal reasoning, focusing on the analysis of the logical relationship of the legal reasoning premises, and temporarily disregarding the concrete contents reflected by the premise and the conclusion judgment in the legal reasoning. It mainly includes deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Substantive legal reasoning is the reasoning process of judgment in the process of application of law, on the basis of analyzing the relevant legal provisions or the facts of the case, and combining with certain value judgment. Substantive legal reasoning is closely related to formal legal reasoning. Substantive legal reasoning is a useful supplement to formal legal reasoning, and formal legal reasoning is the premise of substantive legal reasoning. In addition, the paper also analyzes the main methods of legal reasoning in practice, which is helpful to its better application. Legal reasoning, as a mode of thinking and a technical method, has its distinctive characteristics. It shows a process of combining logic with experience, aiming at the realization of the rule of law, and the process of the reasoning subject exerting its subjective initiative. The second part mainly studies the problems of legal reasoning in judicial practice in our country, and points out the bottlenecks in the application of legal reasoning in trial. Because of the influence of long history tradition and judicial custom, there are many deficiencies in the legal reasoning in practice, such as the emphasis on legal knowledge and reasoning ability, the emphasis on verbal evidence and logical reasoning, and the emphasis on invoking laws and discounting reasons. Emphasis on formal legal reasoning over substantive legal reasoning and so on. In the third part, by examining the problems existing in the application of legal reasoning in judicial practice in our country, the author tries to explore the solution of the problem from the perspective of both theory and practice. From the perspective of theory, this paper first analyzes the limitations of formal legal reasoning, then emphasizes the value of substantive legal reasoning, pays attention to the content of substantive legal reasoning, and brings the proof of reasoning premise into its care. To recognize the existence of value judgment is to remedy the defects of formal legal reasoning. On the practical level, on the basis of analyzing the problems existing in the current judicial trial, some solutions are put forward, such as improving the judge's logical reasoning quality and strengthening the reference of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence to the case. Make clear the reasoning process of the judgment document, strengthen the reform of the evidence rule, strengthen the reform of the judicial system and so on. In order to solve the practical dilemma of legal reasoning in our country, we must proceed from these aspects, step by step, constantly enhance the consciousness and technology of judges' application of legal reasoning, and make great efforts for the development of our country's judicature.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D90-051

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

中國(guó)碩士學(xué)位論文全文數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù) 前1條

1 王孟斐;我國(guó)司法裁判方法研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2244228