法律论辩术研究

发布时间：2018-05-20 05:12

本文选题：法律逻辑学 + 论辩术　；参考：《西南政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 论辩之风早在古希腊就已盛行。先贤们不但自发地把论辩之术运用到社会生活当中，而且也进行了较为深入的理论探讨，尤以亚里士多德等人的论辩术对后世影响至巨。论辩术在中西方也曾一度沉沦，幸而在20世纪后半叶开始复兴。汉布林把论辩术重新规定为研究论证的使用语境，并首先使用“形式论辩术”一词。凡·爱默伦则提出了更重视实践的处理方法，即“语用论辩术”。道格拉斯·沃尔顿则把汉布林的形式论辩术和凡·爱默伦的语用论辩术结合起来，恢复了对论证进行语形、语义和语用研究的平衡。论辩术的当代复兴，在一定程度上促进了逻辑研究更加注重论证实践，使逻辑更加关注社会、关注生活，使逻辑不仅仅确保正确思维，而且也有助于促进成功交际，这深刻地影响到逻辑学的发展。现在法律逻辑的研究领域早已被大大拓宽，再也不是传统的形式逻辑所能涵盖的，非形式化已经成为法律逻辑研究和发展的重要方向。论辩术亦于逻辑的非形式化中日益凸显其强大的生命力。论辩在我国也有着深厚的文化土壤，早在春秋战国时期，论辩之风也已盛行，论辩双方骋辞竞说，唇剑舌枪，已经展现出高超的论辩水平，尤以《鬼谷子》和《战国策》为最杰出的代表。本文的研究重点——法律论辩术，是在法律这一特殊领域中运用的论辩术，是研究法律活动中的论辩方法和技巧，无疑也是法律逻辑学的一个重要组成部分。法律论辩术就是在法律这一特殊领域中进行的说服法官及陪审团认可自己主张的论证活动，包括证明和反驳两种模式；它建立在事实和规则基础之上，是一种使法庭能对争议或纠纷从事实上和法律上得出正确的认识并获得正确、合法、公正的判决的说服性论辩；它贯穿于起诉、法庭调查、法庭论辩、被告人最后陈述等庭审的各个阶段之中，更广泛一点说，也包括诉讼、仲裁、调解等其他一切解决争议或纠纷的法律活动之中。当然，法律论辩最激烈的场合是法庭论辩，它是法庭审理案件的一个重要环节，控辩双方就争议事实、性质及法律的适用条款等问题在法庭上展开辩论，证明己方主张、反驳对方主张，为裁判者最后做出正确的判决奠定基础，同时也起着向旁听者及社会宣传法律的作用。诉讼双方的论辩虽然是对立的，但其目的却具有一致性，即充分挖掘案件情况，核查案件事实，然后选择适用的法律规范，推导出可接受的法律结论，，最终维护法律的尊严，维护双方的合法权益。法律论辩术是实践性的学问，对司法实践有着重要意义。它不仅有利于查明事实，分清责任，促进案件公正、合理地解决，也有利于维护当事人的合法权益，维护社会的安定团结。同时，它也拓展了法律逻辑学的研究领域并丰富了法律逻辑学的理论，促进了法律逻辑学理论向司法实践的转化和关联，使得法律逻辑学熔入了法律的实质内容。
[Abstract]:The wind of debate prevailed in ancient Greece. The sages not only spontaneously applied the art of argument to the social life, but also carried out a more in-depth theoretical discussion, especially with the argument of Aristotle and others on the later generations. Lin redefined the argumentation as the context of the use of argumentation, and first used the word "formal argument". Van emolen proposed a more practical approach to practice, namely, "pragmatic argument". Douglas Walton combined the form argument of Han brin and van emolen's pragmatic argumentation. In a certain degree, the revival of argumentation has promoted logical research to pay more attention to the practice of argument, to make logic pay more attention to society, to focus on life, to make logic not only to ensure correct thinking, but also to promote successful communication, which profoundly affects the development of logic. The research field of legal logic has been greatly widened, and it is no longer covered by traditional formal logic. Non formalization has become an important direction of the research and development of legal logic. Argumentation is also becoming more and more powerful in the non formalization of logic.
Debate in our country also has a profound cultural soil, as early as the spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period, the debate of the wind has also prevailed. The debate between the two sides of the debate, lips sword tongue gun, has shown superb argumentation level, especially the "ghost millet >" and "national policy >" as the most outstanding representative.
The key point of this paper - legal argumentation is the argumentation used in the special field of law, the argumentative method and skill in the study of legal activities, and is undoubtedly an important part of the legal logic. The legal debate is to persuade the judges and the jury to recognize their own owners in the special field of law. The argumentation of Zhang, which includes two modes of proof and refutation; based on facts and rules, is a persuasive argument that allows a court to get a correct understanding of a dispute or dispute from the fact and the law, and to obtain a correct, legitimate, and fair judgment; it runs through prosecution, court investigation, court argument, and the defendant's last. In the various stages of the trial, a more extensive point is made, including litigation, arbitration, mediation, and other legal activities to resolve disputes or disputes. Of course, the most intense legal debate is court debate. It is an important link in the trial of a case, and the two sides argue the disputed facts, the nature and the application of the law. Issues such as money and other issues are debated in the court to prove that the party's opinion is to refute the opponent's opinion and lay the foundation for the referee to make the final decision, and also to play the role of the side listener and the social propaganda law.
Although the argument between the two sides of the lawsuit is opposite, the purpose of the two sides is consistent, that is, to fully excavate the case situation, to check the facts of the case, and then choose the applicable legal norms, to deduce the acceptable legal conclusion, to safeguard the dignity of the law and to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of both sides. It is of great significance. It not only helps to find out the facts, distinguish the responsibility, promote the fair and reasonable solution of the cases, but also helps to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and safeguard the stability and unity of the society. At the same time, it also expands the research field of legal logic and enriches the theory of legal logic, and promotes the legal logic theory to the judicial reality. The transformation and relevance of practice make legal logic melt into the substance of law.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D90-051

【引证文献】