中国古代推类思想及其司法应用

发布时间：2018-10-12 12:04

【摘要】：推类是中国古代的主导推理类型，最早萌芽于《周易》，历经春秋，后由墨家将其发展为具有鲜明特色的中国古代逻辑推理类型。惠施的“夫说者，固以其所知喻其所不知而使人知之”是对推类最准确的定性概括。古人运用推类进行由此及彼、由已知到未知的推理，和现代类比是一脉相承的。也正因为这样的特征，，推类在历史上得到了深入的研究和广泛的应用。在古代，人们特别热衷论辩，而推类作为一种特殊的思维方式，能以最浅显的道理论证复杂的难题，所以往往成为求知、论辩的工具。虽然古人在很多方面十分重视推类所发挥的指导性作用，但却甚少关注推类在司法过程中的运用。推类运用于司法，能有效提高法律适用的灵活性，加快司法办案效率，并在一定程度上保证司法公正的实现。本文的研究主要从两个方面入手——对古代推类思想的细致阐释和对推类思想运用于司法实践的具体探究，其中最主要、也最有意义的部分是研究推类思想作用于司法实践的具体方式。具体来说，文章内容分为四个部分：第一部分是对古代推类思想的综合阐述，从对推类思想产生的社会历史根源的探寻，到系统论述各个时期、各家思想中推类思想的逐步产生、完善，最后通过与亚氏三段论的比较总结出推类是中国古代特色鲜明的主导推理类型。第二部分是对古代推类思想的具体阐释，包括推类应遵守的“同类相推，异类不比”的规则、“譬、侔、援、推”四种主要的推类方法，以及尝试根据“类可推而不可必推”的结果对推类的性质进行定位。第三部分开始尝试将推类与司法实践相联系，通过对古代司法裁判过程的关注，探求其中的推类指导思想。古代司法中推类适用的前提是“断罪无正条”，适用的方式是比附援引，比附援引又分为在定罪时“举轻以明重，举重以明轻”的比附，以及在量刑时对概括性禁律、成案等的援引。第四部分是文章的创新部分，主要思考古代推类思想对现代司法的启示。古代推类与现代类比虽然一脉相承，但又不完全同于现代类比。推类所具有的一些不同于类比的特性，也可能对现代司法过程的完善有所裨益。侦查中运用推类的两条基本原则，侦查实验强调同类相推，并案侦查注重异类不比；法庭论辩中借鉴推类思维中的人文性因素，使推理论证更关注人的情感诉求；最后，通过对推类和罪刑法定价值的比较分析，结合判例法和案例指导制度发展的现状，探究怎样解决二者的冲突。
[Abstract]:Push is the dominant type of reasoning in ancient China. It originated in the Book of changes. After the Spring and Autumn period, it was developed by Mohism into a kind of logic reasoning with distinctive characteristics in ancient China. Huishi's the most accurate qualitative summary of the push-type is to explain what he knows and make people know what he knows. The ancients used the inference from the known to the unknown, and the modern analogy is the same as that of the modern analogies. Because of this characteristic, push class has been deeply studied and widely used in history. In ancient times, people were especially keen to argue, and push, as a special way of thinking, can demonstrate complex problems with the simplest reason, so it is often a tool for seeking knowledge and debating. Although the ancients attached great importance to the guiding role of pushing in many aspects, little attention was paid to the application of push in the judicial process. It can effectively improve the flexibility of the application of law, speed up the efficiency of judicial case handling, and to a certain extent guarantee the realization of judicial justice. The research of this paper mainly starts from two aspects: the detailed explanation of ancient push thought and the concrete exploration of its application in judicial practice, among which the most important is, The most significant part is to study the specific ways of pushing thought in judicial practice. Specifically, the content of the article is divided into four parts: the first part is the comprehensive elaboration of the ancient push thought, from the exploration of the social and historical origin of the push thought, to the systematic discussion of each period, The thought of pushing is gradually produced and perfected. Finally, through the comparison with Aristotle's syllogism, it is concluded that push is the dominant type of reasoning with distinct characteristics in ancient China. The second part is the concrete explanation of the ancient thought of pushing, including the rule of "the same kind pushing, the other kind is not comparable", the four main kinds of pushing methods: "analogy, Mou, aid and push". And try to locate the nature of the class according to the result that the class can be pushed but cannot be pushed. In the third part, the author tries to find out the guiding ideology of pushing through the attention of ancient judicial adjudication process. The premise of pushing category application in ancient judicature is that "there is no right article", and the applicable way is to compare and invoke, which is divided into "lifting light with light weight, lifting weight with light" when conviction, and general prohibition law in sentencing. An invocation of a case, etc. The fourth part is the innovation part of the article, mainly thinking about the enlightenment of ancient pushing thought to modern judicature. Although the ancient analogy and the modern analogy are in the same vein, they are not exactly the same as the modern analogies. Some different characteristics of the analogy may also benefit the improvement of the modern judicial process. In the investigation, the two basic principles of pushing are used, the investigation experiment emphasizes that the same kind is pushed, and the case investigation pays attention to the difference between the others. In court argument, the humanism factor in the pushing thinking is used for reference to make the reasoning and argumentation pay more attention to the people's emotional appeal. Based on the comparative analysis of the value of deduction and legality, and the current situation of case law and case guidance system, this paper explores how to resolve the conflict between them.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D90-051

【参考文献】