【摘要】： 法學(xué)按照其層次從淺到深可概括為制度、理念、方法論,任何一種制度都由理論引導(dǎo),而每種理論都有其方法論基礎(chǔ),換句話說,如果方法論失當(dāng),由此而形成的理念和制度就天然的具有缺陷。本文并非要全然推翻由失當(dāng)?shù)姆椒ㄕ撍傻睦砟詈椭贫?而是要指出其中的缺陷以使得對(duì)各種理論的思考更加全面。 當(dāng)今中國(guó)法學(xué)界相當(dāng)多的理論將西方自然法個(gè)人主義的天賦人權(quán)理念之上形成的契約論作為至上真理,不予論證而將其作為各種理論的前提,比如在張文顯系統(tǒng)闡述其“權(quán)利本位論”的《當(dāng)代中國(guó)法哲學(xué)研究范式的轉(zhuǎn)換——從階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)范式到權(quán)利本位范式》一文中,他直接借用契約論“國(guó)家權(quán)力來源于個(gè)人權(quán)利”“私法優(yōu)于公法”“社會(huì)與國(guó)家相分離”等觀點(diǎn)作為中國(guó)法的基本理念,但是他沒有看到這種西方法治理念的歷史發(fā)展,這種理念是與維護(hù)對(duì)資本主義有利的經(jīng)濟(jì)結(jié)構(gòu)和政治、文化理念相一致的,只是資本主義現(xiàn)實(shí)的片斷截取,它的邏輯與歷史并不相一致,于是,它對(duì)前資本主義社會(huì)的狀態(tài)只能用虛擬的自然狀態(tài)和由資本主義法的邏輯篡改過的自然法來描述。同樣的,按照歷史唯物主義的方法,社會(huì)主義社會(huì)同資本主義社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況相區(qū)別,資本主義社會(huì)以自由市場(chǎng)為基礎(chǔ),而社會(huì)主義社會(huì)中不僅僅存在的是自由市場(chǎng),更重要的是公有制經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,所以,直接套用西方的法治理念是不合適的。在法理學(xué)之外法學(xué)領(lǐng)域,尤其是民商法界,這種指導(dǎo)法學(xué)發(fā)展和法的建設(shè)的思維方式更是非常盛行。這種情況反映了兩方面問題:一方面,法學(xué)研究者較少關(guān)注本國(guó)現(xiàn)實(shí)問題,更少關(guān)注本國(guó)其他學(xué)科,尤其是哲學(xué)、社會(huì)學(xué)、經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的研究思路和成果;另一方面,法學(xué)研究者對(duì)作為法學(xué)指導(dǎo)思想的馬克思主義缺乏深入研究,在運(yùn)用歷史唯物主義方法論進(jìn)行研究的時(shí)候容易產(chǎn)生兩種錯(cuò)誤,一是教條主義,一是以簡(jiǎn)單的經(jīng)濟(jì)決定論和階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)為綱的理由予以全盤否定。而對(duì)歷史唯物主義作深入的理解將會(huì)有助于摒棄法學(xué)理論界簡(jiǎn)單的拿來主義和教條主義傾向。 馬克思主義是中國(guó)法學(xué)理論的指導(dǎo)思想,作為馬克思主義核心方法論的歷史唯物主義和作為馬克思主義終極價(jià)值觀的“一切人的自由”是馬克思主義精神中不可分割的兩個(gè)支點(diǎn),因此,它們也是中國(guó)法學(xué)理論的方法論和價(jià)值觀,其中,歷史唯物主義是最根本的,因?yàn)閮r(jià)值觀脫離了正確的方法論就無(wú)法得以真正實(shí)現(xiàn)。馬克思主義經(jīng)典作家去世以后,資本主義社會(huì)發(fā)生了重大變化,法制和法學(xué)發(fā)展日益成熟,西方馬克思主義者運(yùn)用馬克思主義思想方法對(duì)新環(huán)境、新問題展開了深入討論,特別集中于對(duì)西方主流法學(xué)理念的批判,這些理論對(duì)中國(guó)法學(xué)理論的發(fā)展有深刻的啟示意義。當(dāng)然,西方馬克思主義者身處西方發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家,其理論不可避免的有西方主流思想的烙印,但是,正是因?yàn)檫@些烙印,我們才能發(fā)現(xiàn)他們對(duì)馬克思主義的偏離,從而,從另一側(cè)面加深對(duì)馬克思主義的理解。 本文第1章將從方法論和價(jià)值觀的視角——近代西方哲學(xué)的缺陷——主客體二元對(duì)立、形而上學(xué)的方法論導(dǎo)致價(jià)值觀上的抽象的人兩方面闡述馬克思主義哲學(xué)對(duì)近代西方哲學(xué)的超越以及其與轉(zhuǎn)向后的現(xiàn)代西方哲學(xué)的聯(lián)系,繼而重點(diǎn)闡釋馬克思主義哲學(xué)與西方馬克思主義哲學(xué)的關(guān)系,尤其是西方馬克思主義對(duì)馬克思主義的繼承和偏離。其中,為了使得本文對(duì)西方馬克思主義方法論的闡述更具針對(duì)性,對(duì)西方現(xiàn)代法學(xué)影響力最大的代表哈耶克的理論進(jìn)行了剖析,揭示其方法論基礎(chǔ)。在全球化條件下,古典自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)再次盛行,作為其新發(fā)展的新自由主義思潮的影響力在當(dāng)今世界尤其是中國(guó)算是最大的,其涉及政治、法學(xué)等各個(gè)領(lǐng)域,當(dāng)然,也包括它的方法論。而這一思潮的代表理論無(wú)疑是哈耶克理論,一方面,他作為西方新自由主義最具現(xiàn)實(shí)影響的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家深諳西方經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的思路,以此來發(fā)展其法學(xué),因而,他的法哲學(xué)具有典型意義;其二,其理論所代表的思路正是西方馬克思主義的主要批判對(duì)象。哈耶克首先是一個(gè)現(xiàn)代西方法哲學(xué)的代表,他將之前西方法哲學(xué)的理論路徑分為兩支,一支是建構(gòu)理性主義,一支是進(jìn)化理性主義,他摒棄的是西方近代法哲學(xué)以盧梭、黑格爾為代表的形而上學(xué)的理性主義自然法理論,而他尊崇的是以亞當(dāng)斯密、休謨等為代表的經(jīng)驗(yàn)論的進(jìn)化理性主義。進(jìn)化理性主義,在哈耶克來說,建立在人的無(wú)知論和知識(shí)分散論之上,這無(wú)非是庸俗經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的自由市場(chǎng)理論在哲學(xué)上的變種,是為思想市場(chǎng)。每個(gè)人的知識(shí)都是有限的,只有在思想市場(chǎng)中根據(jù)市場(chǎng)規(guī)則自由交換才能獲得指導(dǎo)自己行為的信息,這個(gè)市場(chǎng)里,人是分散的,是原子式的個(gè)人,知識(shí)是分散的,依照個(gè)人之間形成的自發(fā)秩序才能組織起來推動(dòng)社會(huì)進(jìn)步,而政府的命令不能違背這個(gè)秩序和它的規(guī)則。哈耶克的理論里,人還是抽象的人,只不過是能夠簽訂自由契約的人,至于他的財(cái)產(chǎn)、地位等等真實(shí)內(nèi)容都已經(jīng)被抽出去了。無(wú)疑,這依舊是另一種脫離物質(zhì)生產(chǎn)條件的形而上學(xué)。 第2章通過西方馬克思主義理論最具代表性和統(tǒng)領(lǐng)性的理論對(duì)西方馬克思主義的思維方法進(jìn)行總體上的分析,這些理論包括有:體現(xiàn)“社會(huì)存在決定社會(huì)意識(shí)”的盧卡奇的總體論、體現(xiàn)經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)和上層建筑原理的葛蘭西:“國(guó)家=政治社會(huì)+市民社會(huì)”、體現(xiàn)馬克思主義價(jià)值觀的阿爾杜塞理論,最后是全面體現(xiàn)西方馬克思主義對(duì)馬克思主義方法論和價(jià)值觀的繼承性的馬爾庫(kù)塞理論。 第3章,通過西方馬克思主義者對(duì)西方法學(xué)理念的具體分析來詳細(xì)看其方法論,與此同時(shí),將這種視角與中國(guó)理論界的理論和中國(guó)社會(huì)的現(xiàn)實(shí)包括全球化、環(huán)保技術(shù)、政治民主中的法理念及現(xiàn)實(shí)制度等問題相聯(lián)結(jié),以更好的探求西方馬克思主義對(duì)法學(xué)方法論的意義。 結(jié)論在于,只有在方法論上深入理解西方主流法學(xué)理念的背景和內(nèi)涵,并且將法學(xué)和其他學(xué)科的方法和成果相聯(lián)系,才能真正學(xué)會(huì)用馬克思主義方法論指導(dǎo)法學(xué)理論的發(fā)展。從對(duì)西方馬克思主義的研究中,我們可以看到其與西方各種哲學(xué)和思潮的根本區(qū)別,就是,它著力恢復(fù)歷史唯物主義這個(gè)方法論基礎(chǔ)和“人的全面發(fā)展、一切人的自由”的馬克思主義價(jià)值理念。法學(xué)研究最需要的是,運(yùn)用歷史唯物主義對(duì)各種社會(huì)現(xiàn)實(shí)問題進(jìn)行分析,堅(jiān)持馬克思主義的價(jià)值觀,不應(yīng)該被西方的法治邏輯套牢,不要以法學(xué)世界觀狹隘地觀察世界。西方馬克思主義對(duì)現(xiàn)當(dāng)代資本主義社會(huì)和社會(huì)主義社會(huì)的社會(huì)政治實(shí)踐的社會(huì)歷史分析,為我們更加深入的理解資本主義運(yùn)行機(jī)制包括法哲學(xué)和法的內(nèi)在結(jié)構(gòu)提供了豐富的資源,同時(shí)為社會(huì)主義在新的歷史條件下的法的理念、法的本質(zhì)、結(jié)構(gòu)和法的職能提供了諸多參考。從法學(xué)研究和法的理念來看,重中之重就是方法論問題,方法論不僅僅是指歷史唯物主義這個(gè)宏觀方法論,注重在經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治和文化方向上全面地考察問題,在微觀上,更應(yīng)該注重社會(huì)學(xué)研究,不單是將社會(huì)學(xué)作為一種方法,也要將社會(huì)學(xué)研究本身作為資料和理論來源,以此來防止西方式法治的形而上學(xué)特性。
[Abstract]:Jurisprudence can be summarized as system from shallow to deep according to its level. Idea, methodology, any system is guided by theory, and each theory has its methodological basis. In other words, if methodology is improper, the resulting ideas and systems are naturally defective. We should point out shortcomings in order to make all kinds of theories more comprehensive.
A considerable number of theories in Chinese jurisprudence today regard the contract theory formed on the basis of the innate human rights concept of Western individualism of natural law as the Supreme truth, and regard it as the premise of various theories without argumentation. For example, in Zhang Wenxian's systematic exposition of the transformation of the paradigm of contemporary Chinese philosophy of law from the perspective of class In the article from the struggle paradigm to the right-based paradigm, he borrowed the contractual theory that "state power comes from individual rights", "private law is superior to public law", "society and state are separated" as the basic concepts of Chinese law, but he did not see the historical development of this western concept of rule of law, which is to safeguard the owner of capital. The economic structure, politics and cultural concepts of righteousness and advantage are consistent with the capitalist reality, but the logic of which is inconsistent with history. Therefore, it can only describe the state of the pre-capitalist society in terms of the fictitious natural state and the natural law falsified by the logic of the capitalist law. Similarly, according to historical materialism. The socialist method is different from the capitalist social and economic conditions. The capitalist society is based on the free market. In the socialist society, there is not only the free market, but also the development of the public economy. Therefore, it is not appropriate to apply the western concept of the rule of law directly. This situation reflects two problems: on the one hand, law researchers pay less attention to the practical problems of their own country, and less attention to the research ideas and achievements of other disciplines, especially philosophy, sociology and economics; Law researchers lack in-depth study of Marxism as the guiding ideology of law. They are prone to make two mistakes when using the methodology of historical materialism. One is dogmatism. The other is to negate it wholly on the grounds of simple economic determinism and class struggle. Understanding will help to discard the simple doctrinal and dogmatic tendencies of legal theory.
Marxism is the guiding ideology of Chinese jurisprudence theory. Historical materialism as the core methodology of Marxism and "freedom of all people" as the ultimate value of Marxism are two inseparable fulcrums of Marxist spirit. Therefore, they are also the methodology and values of Chinese jurisprudence theory. Historical materialism is the most fundamental, because values can not be truly realized without correct methodology. After the death of Marxist classical writers, great changes have taken place in capitalist society, the development of legal system and law has become increasingly mature, Western Marxists use Marxist ideological methods to new environment, new problems. Deeply discussed, especially focusing on the criticism of the western mainstream jurisprudence, these theories have profound implications for the development of Chinese jurisprudence. Of course, western Marxists in the western developed countries, their theories inevitably have the brand of the western mainstream ideas, but it is precisely because of these brand, we can issue them. Now they deviate from Marx doctrine, thus deepening the understanding of Marx's theory from another aspect.
Chapter 1 of this article will elaborate the transcendence of Marxist philosophy to modern western philosophy and its relationship with modern western philosophy after turning from the perspective of methodology and values-the defect of modern western philosophy-the binary opposition between subject and object, and the abstract human being caused by metaphysical methodology. This paper expounds the relationship between Marxist philosophy and Western Marxist philosophy, especially the inheritance and deviation of Marxism from Western Marxism. In order to make this paper more pertinent to the interpretation of Western Marxist methodology, Hayek's theory, the most influential representative of Western modern jurisprudence, is analyzed and exposed. Under the condition of globalization, classical liberal economics prevails again, and the influence of neo-liberalism as its new development is the greatest in the world, especially in China. It involves politics, law and other fields, including its methodology, of course. The representative theory of this trend of thought is undoubtedly Haye. On the one hand, as the most influential economist of Western neo-liberalism, he knows the thought of western economics deeply and develops his jurisprudence by it, so his philosophy of law has typical significance; on the other hand, the thought represented by his theory is the main object of criticism of Western Marxism. Hayek is first of all a modern West. The representative of the philosophy of law, he divided the theoretical path of the former western philosophy of law into two branches, one is constructive rationalism, the other is evolutionary rationalism. He abandoned the metaphysical rationalistic natural law theory represented by Rousseau and Hegel in the modern western philosophy of law, and he respected the classics represented by Adam Smith and Hume. Evolutionary rationalism, in Hayek's case, is based on human ignorance and knowledge decentralization. It is nothing more than a philosophical variant of the free market theory of vulgar economics, for the ideological market. Everyone's knowledge is limited and can only be freely exchanged in the ideological market according to market rules. In this market, people are dispersed, atomized individuals, knowledge is dispersed, organized in accordance with the spontaneous order among individuals to promote social progress, and government orders can not violate this order and its rules. The person who can sign a free contract, as to his property, status, and so on, has been withdrawn. This is still another metaphysics, no doubt, out of material conditions of production.
Chapter 2 makes an overall analysis of the thinking methods of Western Marxism through the most representative and dominant theories of Western Marxist theory. These theories include Lukacs'totalism which embodies "social existence determines social consciousness", Gramsci who embodies the economic foundation and the principle of superstructure: "state = politics" "Society + Civil Society" embodies the Althusser theory of Marxist values, and finally is the Marcuse theory that fully embodies the inheritance of Western Marxism to Marxist methodology and values.
Chapter 3, through the specific analysis of Western Marxist legal concepts to see its methodology in detail, at the same time, this perspective and the theory of Chinese theoretical circles and the reality of Chinese society, including globalization, environmental protection technology, political democracy in the concept of law and the reality of the system to better explore Western Mark. The significance of thinking theory to the methodology of law.
The conclusion is that only when we have a deep understanding of the background and connotation of the western mainstream jurisprudence and the connection between the methods and achievements of jurisprudence and other disciplines can we really learn to use Marxist methodology to guide the development of jurisprudence. The fundamental difference between learning and ideological trend is that it focuses on restoring the methodological basis of historical materialism and the Marxist value concept of "all-round development of human beings and freedom of all human beings". Western Marxism's social and historical analysis of the social and political practice of modern and contemporary capitalist and socialist societies has provided us with a rich understanding of the capitalist operating mechanism, including the philosophy of law and the internal structure of law. Rich resources also provide many references for the concept, essence, structure and function of law under the new historical conditions of socialism.Jurisprudence research and the concept of law show that the most important thing is methodology.Methodology is not only the macro-methodology of historical materialism, but also the economy, politics and culture. In order to prevent the metaphysical characteristics of Western rule of law, we should pay more attention to sociological research, not only as a method, but also as a source of information and theory.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)人民大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號(hào)】：D90

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 李強(qiáng);當(dāng)前中國(guó)社會(huì)的四個(gè)利益群體[J];學(xué)術(shù)界;2000年03期

2 郭忠華;吉登斯對(duì)歷史唯物主義的反思與“重建”[J];現(xiàn)代哲學(xué);2005年04期

3 李紅專;吉登斯社會(huì)歷史觀研究——一種批判性的解析[J];學(xué)術(shù)探索;2004年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：2199441