【摘要】： 增強(qiáng)法律推理能力,是提高司法人員法律思維素質(zhì)的一種途徑,而且能夠增強(qiáng)司法判決的一致性和正當(dāng)性。當(dāng)前,我國的法律推理研究還不夠深入,特別是在司法實(shí)踐中與法官裁判活動的結(jié)合不夠緊密,未取得令人樂觀的實(shí)質(zhì)性進(jìn)展。本文結(jié)合審判實(shí)踐,探討了法官在裁判案件過程中對法律推理的運(yùn)用。 本文首先從法律推理的定義和分類入手,選擇西方的二分法,即形式法律推理和實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理進(jìn)行論述。第二部分,通過對法律推理主體之一法官的實(shí)地考察,分析了法官裁判中引入法律推理的必要性,并提出法官運(yùn)用法律推理進(jìn)行理性、科學(xué)裁判的緊迫性。第三部分,對形式法律推理的規(guī)范性、局限性進(jìn)行討論,并提出了長期以來人們對一種傳統(tǒng)邏輯推理形式的誤解。第四部分,在審判實(shí)踐中法官面對的案件是紛繁復(fù)雜的,這使法官常常不能直接對號入座地適用法律。文中分析了引入實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理的原因,并分析了兩種推理方式的關(guān)系。與形式法律推理不同的是,法官運(yùn)用實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理需要從法律的非正式淵源,如法律原則、法理、政策、習(xí)慣等尋找判決的根據(jù)和理由,作為法律推理的大前提。文中結(jié)合大量案例,分析法官在審判實(shí)踐中運(yùn)用實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理的幾種形式,但實(shí)質(zhì)法律推理的運(yùn)用依然離不開形式邏輯的推理形式和推理規(guī)則。 對法律推理的深入研究,特別是與審判實(shí)踐緊密結(jié)合,能夠增強(qiáng)法官的法律推理能力,從而進(jìn)行理性、科學(xué)的司法裁判。熟練地掌握和運(yùn)用法律推理,相信會對法官判案大有幫助。
[Abstract]:Enhancing the legal reasoning ability is a way to improve the legal thinking quality of judicial personnel, and it can also enhance the consistency and legitimacy of judicial decisions. At present, the research on legal reasoning in our country is not deep enough, especially in the judicial practice, the combination with judges' adjudication is not close enough, and no optimistic substantive progress has been made. Combined with trial practice, this paper discusses the application of legal reasoning in the process of judge adjudication. This paper begins with the definition and classification of legal reasoning and discusses the western dichotomy, namely formal legal reasoning and substantive legal reasoning. In the second part, the author analyzes the necessity of introducing legal reasoning into the judge's judgment, and points out the urgency for the judge to use the legal reasoning to carry out rational and scientific judgment through the on-the-spot investigation of one of the main subjects of legal reasoning. In the third part, the normative and limitation of formal legal reasoning is discussed, and the misunderstanding of a traditional form of logical reasoning is put forward for a long time. The fourth part, in the trial practice, the judge faces the case is numerous and complex, this causes the judge often cannot apply the law directly to the seat. This paper analyzes the reasons for the introduction of substantive legal reasoning and the relationship between the two kinds of reasoning methods. Different from formal legal reasoning, judges need to seek the basis and reason of judgment from the informal sources of law, such as legal principles, policies, habits, etc., as the major premise of legal reasoning. Combined with a large number of cases, this paper analyzes several forms of substantive legal reasoning used by judges in trial practice, but the use of substantive legal reasoning is still inseparable from the reasoning form and rules of formal logic. The deep research on legal reasoning, especially the close combination with the trial practice, can enhance the judge's legal reasoning ability and carry on the rational and scientific judicial decision. Mastering and applying legal reasoning is believed to be of great help to judges.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：燕山大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D90-051

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 向建華;法律邏輯應(yīng)注重對實(shí)質(zhì)推理的研究——由一個(gè)案例引起的思考[J];重慶工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年09期

2 張繼成;價(jià)值判斷是法律推理的靈魂[J];北京科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2001年01期

3 焦寶乾;;三段論推理在法律論證中的作用探討[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2007年01期

4 陳銳;;法律與邏輯——對法律與邏輯關(guān)系的一種全面解讀[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

5 黃偉力;論法律實(shí)質(zhì)推理[J];政治與法律;2000年05期

6 王利明;民法案例分析的基本方法探討[J];政法論壇;2004年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 蔡家琴;論司法推理[D];河南大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號：2253776