论孙斯坦“未完全理论化协议”及其对中国的启示

发布时间：2018-02-22 08:49

本文关键词： 未完全理论化协议司法最低限度类推案例指导制度　出处：《上海师范大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文通过探讨孙斯坦“未完全理论化协议”的理论深意以启迪中国现今之司法实践。文章第一部分讲述“未完全理论化协议”基本内涵，与罗尔斯的“重叠共识”概念相比较，指出孙斯坦强调低层次的一致性在法律领域中的普遍适用性。第二部分是“未完全理论化协议”在法律领域的具体表现，包括司法最低限度主义、类推推理思维。在论述司法最低限度主义部分，孙斯坦强调法官审判在程序上遵循“窄”或“浅”裁判方式的同时，仍旧受最低限度实体内容的限制。在此，孙斯坦总结出“核心价值”作为最低限的审判理念。在笔者看来，这正是孙斯坦正视“未完全理论化协议”的局限性，，保障最低限度审判有效运行的理论努力。在讨论“宽”和“深”裁判方式时，孙斯坦指出“传统主义”、“赫拉克勒斯”式法官审判方式的不足，并以“一封哲学家之信”的事例反驳了德沃金的“整体论”。值得强调的是，他未否认“宽”或“深”的审判方法，认为一切讨论应依赖于具体的实践情境。在具体个案中实现“未完全理论化协议”，需要类推的思维方法。人类认识事物的类型化倾向决定了类推模式的整体性，普通法与成文法推理方法之间并没有清晰的界限。就类推可能出现的错误，孙斯坦亦提出了合理运用的注意点。第三部分对整体理论进行评价。未完全理论化协议解决的核心问题是价值多元与司法统一的紧张关系。意识到审判中完全的理论论成是不现实的，采取的是一种实用主义的进路，虽都以结果为导向，但比之经济学分析更多对多元化的包容。在可以预设的法官裁判的三种情形中，最低限度的审判介于“理想”与“现实”之间，与德沃金理想化的整体性裁判以及法律现实主义的裁判方式有重要区别。针对“理论上升”的质疑，笔者给出自己的理解。第四部分是应用孙斯坦的理论以启发中国现在。理论对实践的作用往往是有限的，法学理论与司法实践存在一定的距离。能动司法是一种整体性的审判思维，本身具有局限性并可能使司法越加政治化，而最低限度的审判能够使政治与司法保持一定的安全距离。第二点的启示是案例指导制度。参照指导案例审判完成的是一种未完全理论化协议，依据个案类推的裁决方法达致公正——相似情形相似处理，实现一种关系的统一。类推推理本身具有局限性，有效地运用需要关注个案的具体细节，依赖于对审判理由的充分说理。
[Abstract]:This paper discusses Sun Stein's theory of incomplete theorization Agreement to enlighten China's judicial practice nowadays. The first part of the article describes the basic connotation of incomplete theorized Agreement, which is compared with Rawls's concept of "overlapping consensus". It is pointed out that Sun Stein emphasizes the universal applicability of low-level consistency in the field of law. The second part is the concrete manifestation of incomplete theorization Agreement in the field of law, including judicial minimalism. Analogy reasoning thinking. In discussing the judicial minimalist part, Sun Stein emphasizes that judges' trials follow a "narrow" or "shallow" manner of adjudication, while still subject to the restrictions of the minimum substantive content. Sunstein summed up the "core value" as the lowest trial concept. In the author's view, this is the limitation of Sun Stan's face to "incomplete theorization agreement". Theoretical efforts to guarantee the effective functioning of the minimum trial. In discussing the "broadness" and "deep" adjudication methods, Sun Stein pointed out the shortcomings of the "traditionalism" and the "Hera Klees" style of judge's trial. And refutes Dworkin's "holism" with the example of a letter from a philosopher. It is worth emphasizing that he did not deny the "lenient" or "deep" method of judgment. It is believed that all discussions should depend on specific practical situations. To realize "incomplete theorization agreement" in a specific case requires a method of thinking by analogy. The stereotyped tendency of human cognition determines the integrity of analogy model. There is no clear line between common law and statutory reasoning. The third part evaluates the whole theory. The core problem solved by incomplete theorization agreement is the tense relationship between value pluralism and judicial unity. Theoretical theory is unrealistic. It takes a pragmatic approach, all of which are results-oriented, but more tolerant of diversity than economic analysis. In the three cases where judges can be preset, The minimum trial is between "ideal" and "reality", which is different from Dworkin's idealized holistic judgment and legal realism. The author gives his own understanding. Part 4th is the application of Sun Stan's theory to enlighten China now. The effect of theory on practice is often limited. There is a certain distance between the theory of law and the judicial practice. Active justice is a kind of holistic judicial thinking, which has its own limitations and may make the judicature more and more politicized. And the minimum trial can keep a certain distance between politics and justice. The second revelation is the case guidance system. Referring to the guidance case trial, the completion of the trial is a kind of incomplete theoretical agreement. According to the adjudication method of case analogy, we can achieve fair similar treatment of similar cases and realize the unity of a relationship. Analogy reasoning has its own limitations, so it can effectively use the specific details that need to be paid attention to. Rely on the full justification of the trial.
【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D916.2

【参考文献】