从法律思维到法治思维:中国法治进程的拓展与深化
发布时间：2019-08-03 12:15
【摘要】：法律思维主要是法律职业群体依据法律进行思考的方式,具有十分重要的意义。但是,法律思维也有着一定局限,包括仅仅聚焦于个案、过于专业化和本土化难题等方面。如果说法律思维是根据法律进行思考的话,那么法治思维就是以法律规范为基础,围绕法律及其相关社会规范进行思考的方式。相比较而言,法治思维更加全面和综合。法治思维能够弥补法律思维的不足,二者的区别表现在主体、评价标准、作用范围和学科属性上,其中主体的区别具有决定意义。法律思维与法治思维共同指向于中国法治建设的实践。在未来的发展中,法治思维将成为社会转型期的主流意识形态,而法治方式将成为主导社会治理的手段。从法律思维到法治思维展现了法治的拓展和深化,在推动法治建设的过程中,法律职业群体和权力阶层需要携手共进,法律思维和法治思维也需要深度融合。正式法律制度是实现这种深度融合的主要方式,具体制度形式包括法律顾问制度、规范性文件、重大决策合法性审查机制和考核问责机制等。
[Abstract]:Legal thinking is mainly a way for legal professional groups to think according to the law, which is of great significance. However, legal thinking also has some limitations, including only focusing on individual cases, too professional and localization problems and so on. If legal thinking is to think according to the law, then the thinking of the rule of law is based on the legal norms, around the law and its related social norms to think about the way. In contrast, the thinking of the rule of law is more comprehensive and comprehensive. The thinking of rule of law can make up for the deficiency of legal thinking. The differences between the two are manifested in the subject, the evaluation standard, the scope of function and the subject attribute, in which the difference between the subject is of decisive significance. Legal thinking and legal thinking both point to the practice of the construction of the rule of law in China. In the future development, the thinking of rule of law will become the mainstream ideology in the period of social transformation, and the way of rule of law will become the means of leading social governance. From legal thinking to rule of law thinking shows the expansion and deepening of the rule of law. In the process of promoting the construction of the rule of law, the legal professional groups and the power class need to work together, and the legal thinking and the thinking of the rule of law also need to be deeply integrated. The formal legal system is the main way to realize this kind of deep integration. The specific institutional forms include the legal adviser system, normative documents, the review mechanism of major decision-making legitimacy and the assessment and accountability mechanism, and so on.
【作者单位】： 山东大学(威海)法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目“社会矛盾化解的法律适用方法研究”(11CFX002) 2014年司法部项目“实现个案正义的法律方法论研究”(14SFB3003)
【分类号】：D920.0
[Abstract]:Legal thinking is mainly a way for legal professional groups to think according to the law, which is of great significance. However, legal thinking also has some limitations, including only focusing on individual cases, too professional and localization problems and so on. If legal thinking is to think according to the law, then the thinking of the rule of law is based on the legal norms, around the law and its related social norms to think about the way. In contrast, the thinking of the rule of law is more comprehensive and comprehensive. The thinking of rule of law can make up for the deficiency of legal thinking. The differences between the two are manifested in the subject, the evaluation standard, the scope of function and the subject attribute, in which the difference between the subject is of decisive significance. Legal thinking and legal thinking both point to the practice of the construction of the rule of law in China. In the future development, the thinking of rule of law will become the mainstream ideology in the period of social transformation, and the way of rule of law will become the means of leading social governance. From legal thinking to rule of law thinking shows the expansion and deepening of the rule of law. In the process of promoting the construction of the rule of law, the legal professional groups and the power class need to work together, and the legal thinking and the thinking of the rule of law also need to be deeply integrated. The formal legal system is the main way to realize this kind of deep integration. The specific institutional forms include the legal adviser system, normative documents, the review mechanism of major decision-making legitimacy and the assessment and accountability mechanism, and so on.
【作者单位】： 山东大学(威海)法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目“社会矛盾化解的法律适用方法研究”(11CFX002) 2014年司法部项目“实现个案正义的法律方法论研究”(14SFB3003)
【分类号】：D920.0
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 谌洪果;法律思维:一种思维方式上的检讨[J];法律科学.西北政法学院学报;2003年02期
2 谢新竹;;论判决的公众认同[J];法律适用;2007年01期
3 陈金钊;法律思维及其对法治的意义[J];法商研究;2003年06期
4 江必新;;法治思维——社会转型时期治国理政的应然向度[J];法学评论;2013年05期
5 李梅;张红扬;;论领导干部法治思维和法治方式的养成[J];毛泽东思想研究;2013年06期
6 孙笑侠;;法律思维方法的“器”与治国理政的“道”[J];暨南学报(哲学社会科学版);2013年11期
7 李茂春;吕丽梅;;提高领导干部运用法治思维和法治方式的能力[J];求实;2013年10期
8 陈金钊;;“法治思维和法治方式”的意蕴[J];法学论坛;2013年05期
9 董倩;张璐;黄R，
本文编号：2522549
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/fashilw/2522549.html
