纯粹法学中的“应当”

发布时间：2018-04-28 01:40

本文选题：纯粹法学 + 应当　；参考：《中国政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：纯粹法学立基于实然与应然的两分。这就是休谟问题:事实与价值处于不同的领域,事实命题无法推导出价值命题,价值命题也无法推导出事实命题。该问题在法律上的表述就是:法律是什么与法律应当是什么是两个截然不同的问题。前者描述法律,是实然问题。后者评价法律,是应然问题。 “应当”是规范的中心,而规范又是纯粹法学的中心。正因为凯尔森对是与应当之间做出了最彻底的区分,在其规范之中既排除了道德也排除了事实,纯粹法学独特的架构才得以构建,纯之又纯的规范世界才得以形成。所以“应当”在纯粹法学之中有相当重要地位。本文拟在现有凯尔森著述和中文论文的基础上,对纯粹法学中的“应当”做一梳理。同时,既然纯粹法学的特点就是从结构上分析实在法。所以从规范内部结构出发对应当与存在进行研究有其无法替代的重要意义。本文也意图贯彻此点:从规范内部结构着手分析存在与应当之间的关系。提供一个通过“应然”视角观察纯粹法学的角度。本文结构是首先简介纯粹法学是一门独立科学之原因,该门科学的先天条件。科学的研究对象是特定的解释框架。而法学的解释框架则是实在法规范。接着分析规范的架构,指出其内容是强制而形式则是应当。进而分析应当的特点。第四章内容是应当与存在的区分,凯尔森通过自然法与实在法的区分,将正义排除出法学。通过法的效力与实效之间的区分,将事实排除出规范的概念之外。通过在规范内部的区分,将命令说中的意志成分排除出规范,经过这样三次提纯,最后得出规范的概念,纯粹法学得以形成。
[Abstract]:Pure law is based on both real and deserved two points. This is the question of Hume: the fact and the value are in different fields, the fact proposition can not deduce the value proposition, the value proposition can not deduce the fact proposition. The question in law is that what the law is and what the law should be are two completely different problems. The latter describes the law as a matter of fact.
"Ought" is the center of norm, and the norm is the center of pure law. It is precisely because Kelsen makes the most thorough distinction between it and it. In its norms, it excludes morality and excludes facts. The unique structure of pure jurisprudence is constructed, pure and pure standard world can be formed. So "should" There is a very important position in pure jurisprudence.
On the basis of the existing writings of Kelsen and Chinese, this article is to sort out the "ought" in the pure law. At the same time, since the characteristic of the pure law is to analyze the actual law from the structure, it has its irreplaceable significance to the study of the existence and the existence from the internal structure of the standard. This article also aims to carry out this point. From the standpoint of internal structure, we should analyze the relationship between existence and ought to provide a perspective of pure jurisprudence from the perspective of "ought to be".
The structure of this article is first to introduce the reason that pure law is an independent science, the innate condition of the science. The object of science is the specific framework of interpretation. The framework of the interpretation of law is the standard of reality. Then, the framework of the standard is analyzed, and the content is the compulsory and the form is ought to be. Fourth The content of the chapter is the distinction between the law and the existence. Through the distinction between the natural law and the real law, Kelsen excludes the justice from the law. Through the distinction between the effectiveness and the effectiveness of the law, the fact is excluded from the concept of the standard. Through the distinction between the norms, the will components in the command theory are excluded from the norms, and the three purification, finally, is the last. The concept of standard is obtained, and pure law is formed.

【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90

【参考文献】