中国古代耻辱刑的演进及影响
本文选题:中国古代耻辱刑 + 演进 ; 参考:《山东师范大学》2017年硕士论文
【摘要】:耻辱刑在古代刑罚体系中占重要地位,然而作为一种以侮辱犯罪人格的刑罚方式,在近代以来被认为是非人道的、残酷的,在当今世界范围内已经被绝大多数国家所废除,我国自清末修律之后的刑罚体系中便不再存在耻辱刑。虽然中国古代耻辱刑在当今看来是非人道的,且违背国际刑罚的发展趋势,但是作为一种刑罚能够绵延适用数千年,在古代刑罚体系中占一席之地,必然有其出现的原因和任其发展的因素。如今,我们应当在坚持刑罚人道主义的前提之下,挖掘其存在的价值及其对现代刑罚的意义。中国古代的耻辱刑的产生和发展有着深刻的社会根源和思想根源,是我国传统的仁义礼治、宗法等级等价值观念在法律中的具体体现,其本身随着时代的发展而展现出的时代特征和与时代相匹配的刑罚思想是值得推敲的。本文主要是对耻辱刑的定义进行完善,对中国古代耻辱刑的演进过程、与中国传统思想和中国古代社会结构之间的关系、对中国古代刑罚体系的影响进行分析,进而挖掘出中国古代耻辱刑对当代刑罚体制建设的启示。在导言部分,本文对耻辱刑的定义及其国内外研究现状作了分析和探究。在对耻辱刑的定义方面,通过对前人研究的阐述和分析,将耻辱刑当前的定义进行了梳理,并在此基础之上,对本文中的耻辱刑进行了定义,将对耻辱刑的定义由原本介于以刑罚目的为分类和以刑罚方式为分类之间的一种方式,转为以刑罚所侵犯的权益为主要划分标准进行了定义。在对国内外研究现状方面,本文将国内的研究现状分为对专业著述的梳理、期刊方面的梳理及学术论文方面的梳理,其中以期刊方面为主要内容,将对耻辱刑的研究沿革进行了阐述并指出其中存在的疑虑之处,并以此作为本文主要的论述内容进行展开。在第一部分,本文对中国古代耻辱刑的演进进行了论述和分析。结合中国古代耻辱刑在不同时期发展的特征将其演进过程分为三个时期阶段,即萌芽期(尧舜禹时期)、产生发展到鼎盛期——夏代至秦代、轻缓到衰落期——汉文帝刑罚制度改革至清末修律时期。在尧舜禹时期的耻辱刑属于萌芽阶段,刑法的内容主要是通过外在形式的变化对犯罪者进行标记,称之为象刑。到了夏代至秦代时期,随着血亲关系为纽带的氏族部落逐渐演变为以地域关系为纽带的封建国家,原本的社会规范和族内风俗不再奏效,因为更残酷的刑罚方式受到统治者的青睐,于是延伸出了以残害肉体为刑罚方式的耻辱刑,即墨、劓、刖、宫、弃市、鞭笞之刑等;以及以毁损身体毛发为刑罚形式的耻辱刑,即髡、耐,此外还包括古代象刑的遗存:明刑。在第一部分的最后,本文通过对三个时期内耻辱刑的内容及特征,得出中国古代耻辱刑演进的总体趋势,即刑罚的目的由教化目的转向惩戒目的、刑罚程度由轻到重再由重到轻、刑法的适用由主刑转向附加刑的趋势。在第二部分,本文对中国古代耻辱刑在演进过程中受到的思想基础进行了探析,通过对古代思想文化,如古代耻感思想、古代宗法思想、古代礼仪道德思想和古代人文思想的分析,探析其对中国古代耻辱刑得以演进所产生的影响。在第三部分,本文在前两部分对中国古代耻辱刑的论述基础上,结合史料对中国古代耻辱刑的积极影响进行阐述,主要包括对耻辱刑中的惩罚犯罪、防阻犯罪、安抚受害者、促进刑罚宽缓化进程等方面的功能。在第四部分,本文在前文的分析基础之上对中国古代耻辱刑德尔消极影响进行论述,主要分为两方面,一方面是从耻辱刑危害到古代统治秩序方面,将耻辱刑带来的危害进行分述;另一方面是从当今的角度,分析耻辱刑对当代司法和执法的消极影响。
[Abstract]:The stigma punishment plays an important role in the ancient penalty system. However, as an insulting criminal personality, the punishment method, which has been considered as inhumane and cruel in modern times, has been abolished by the vast majority of countries in the world today, and there is no stigma in our country since the late Qing Dynasty. The ancient humiliation punishment appears to be inhumane today and violates the trend of the development of international punishment, but it can be applied for thousands of years as a penalty, and it occupies a place in the ancient system of punishment. It is bound to have its reasons and the factors for its development. Now, we should excavate it under the premise of upholding the humanitarianism of the penalty. The value of the existence and its significance to the modern penalty. The generation and development of the ancient Chinese humiliation punishment has profound social and ideological roots. It is the concrete embodiment of the traditional benevolence and righteousness, the patriarchal hierarchy and other values in the law, which itself shows the characteristics of the times and matches the times with the development of the times. The concept of penalty is worthy of deliberation. This article is mainly to improve the definition of humiliating punishment, the evolution process of ancient Chinese humiliation punishment, the relationship between Chinese traditional thought and Chinese ancient social structure, the influence of the ancient Chinese penal system, and then excavate the construction of the modern penal system in China. In the introduction, this article analyses and explores the definition of humiliating punishment and the current research status at home and abroad. On the definition of humiliating punishment, the definition of humiliating punishment is combed through the exposition and analysis of previous studies, and on this basis, the definition of stigma punishment in this article will be defined and the definition of stigma punishment will be defined. By a way between the classification of the purpose of punishment and the classification of penalty as a classification, the rights and interests violated by the penalty are defined as the main criterion. In the field of research at home and abroad, the present situation of domestic research is divided into the comb of professional writings, the combing of Periodicals and the academic papers. In the first part, the author expounds and analyzes the evolution of the ancient Chinese humiliating punishment in the first part. In the first part, this article discusses and analyzes the evolution of the ancient humiliating punishment in China. The characteristics of the development of the period divided its evolution into three stages, that is, the germination period (Yao Shunyu period), developed to the peak period - the Xia Dynasty to the Qin Dynasty, gently to the decline period - the reform of Han Wendi's penal system to the period of the late Qing Dynasty. The humiliating punishment in the Yao, Shun and Yu period belongs to the embryonic stage, and the content of the criminal law is mainly through the external. In the period of the Xia Dynasty to the Qin Dynasty, the clan tribe with the relationship of blood relatives gradually evolved into a feudal state with regional relations as a link. The original social norms and internal customs no longer worked, because the more cruel way of punishment was favored by the rulers, and extended to the period of the period of the Xia Dynasty to the Qin Dynasty. The stigma punishment in the way of the punishment of the body as a punishment, the punishment of Jimo, the palace, the palace, the discarding of the city, the flogging punishment, as well as the stigma in the form of the punishment of the body hair, including the ancient relics of the elephant punishment, and the Ming sentence. The general trend of the evolution of the humiliating punishment is that the purpose of the penalty is turned from teaching purpose to disciplinary purpose, the degree of punishment is from light to heavy to weight to light, and the application of criminal law is from main punishment to additional penalty. In the second part, the ideological basis of the ancient Chinese humiliating punishment in the process of evolution is discussed, and the ancient thought is made through the ancient thought. Culture, such as ancient stigma thought, ancient patriarchal thought, ancient etiquette and moral thought and ancient humanistic thought, analyzed its influence on the evolution of ancient Chinese humiliating punishment. In the third part, on the basis of the first two parts of the ancient Chinese humiliating punishment, the positive influence of historical materials on the ancient Chinese humiliation punishment was combined. In the fourth part, in the fourth part, this article discusses the negative influence of the ancient Chinese humiliation punishment on the basis of the previous analysis, which is divided into two aspects, on the one hand, from the stigma punishment to the ancient times. In terms of ruling order, the harm brought by humiliation punishment is divided. On the other hand, it analyzes the negative influence of humiliation on contemporary judicature and law enforcement from today's perspective.
【学位授予单位】:山东师范大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:D929
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 宋思宇;董进;;刑罚的多重意蕴[J];广西民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2006年05期
2 江溯;;社会学视野下的刑罚:刑罚社会学研究[J];刑事法评论;2008年02期
3 邓小刚;;从功利刑罚观到现代刑罚观——社会管理创新视野下刑罚观的发展[J];山东警察学院学报;2012年03期
4 韩瑞丽;;刑罚有限性原因新论[J];学术探索;2013年01期
5 黄伟明;;论刑罚本位立场之倡导[J];法治研究;2013年02期
6 袁彬;帅美琴;;论科学刑罚观的现代标准及内涵[J];刑法论丛;2011年03期
7 龚华;;从国家刑到社会刑——重新认识我国刑罚的本质[J];刑事司法论坛;2011年00期
8 赵秉志,陈志军;刑罚价值理论比较研究[J];法学评论;2004年01期
9 杨开湘;;拉姆佩论刑罚哲学的双重任务[J];中南大学学报(社会科学版);2005年03期
10 张宗亮;解永照;;对刑罚报应论的再思考[J];河南公安高等专科学校学报;2006年04期
相关会议论文 前3条
1 刘强;;试论犯罪学应加强对刑罚改革的研究[A];中国犯罪学研究会第十二届学术研讨会论文集[C];2003年
2 温万名;马绍明;;董老刑罚思想与我国缓刑适用条件的立法完善[A];董必武法学思想研究文集(第八辑)[C];2008年
3 何萍;;累犯制度的演变及解读[A];国家治理:民主法治与公平正义——上海市社会科学界第十届学术年会文集(2012年度)政治·法律·社会学科卷[C];2012年
相关重要报纸文章 前6条
1 中国人民大学法学院 李燕涛;所有惩罚都是损害[N];人民法院报;2011年
2 中国应用法学研究所博士后工作站 牛克乾;刑罚的难题与刑事法官的使命[N];人民法院报;2012年
3 李晓林 张熙照;黑格尔刑罚观探析[N];吉林日报;2003年
4 福建省莆田市秀屿区人民检察院 何万发;现代刑罚观重人道也重罪刑对等[N];检察日报;2014年
5 郭理蓉;刑罚体系与刑罚制度的现代化[N];法制日报;2004年
6 杨鸿雁;中国古代耻辱刑沿革[N];人民法院报;2002年
相关博士学位论文 前9条
1 杨金玉;论俄罗斯联邦刑罚的本质和构成[D];吉林大学;2009年
2 董淑君;刑罚的要义[D];中国政法大学;2003年
3 黄立;刑罚的伦理审视[D];湖南师范大学;2004年
4 郝方f ;刑罚现代化研究[D];中国政法大学;2009年
5 张丽;论刑罚对犯罪的制约[D];西南财经大学;2010年
6 高艳东;刑事可罚根据论纲[D];西南政法大学;2005年
7 房绪兴;刑罚制度的历史阶段演进[D];中国政法大学;2006年
8 张明;量刑基准论[D];中国政法大学;2004年
9 刘军;刑法学中的被害人研究[D];山东大学;2010年
相关硕士学位论文 前10条
1 陈乃富;刑罚价值的理性解析[D];山东大学;2009年
2 尤金亮;论刑罚的效益[D];湘潭大学;2004年
3 韩劲松;论刑罚宽和化[D];黑龙江大学;2005年
4 刘淑丽;论刑罚的功能[D];中国政法大学;2004年
5 郭倩;刑法哲学的界定[D];苏州大学;2015年
6 贾立军;论罪责刑相适应原则在实践中的实现[D];兰州大学;2015年
7 赵航;沈家本刑罚人道主义思想研究[D];首都经济贸易大学;2016年
8 袁斯潮;论边沁功利主义刑罚观[D];湖南师范大学;2016年
9 杨莹;量刑规范化研究[D];南京师范大学;2015年
10 姜仁孝;论当代中国预防刑的限制适用[D];大连海事大学;2016年
,本文编号:1848118
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/falilunwen/1848118.html