概念涵摄与规则适用:一个概念与逻辑的分析
发布时间：2018-10-12 13:14
【摘要】：在理论探讨与裁判实务中,人们经常会不自觉地将概念涵摄与规则适用在概念或逻辑上等同起来。这既不利于清晰地阐明司法推理的不同环节及其逻辑顺序,也会给本就质疑司法推理客观性的人们留下口实。概念涵摄与规则适用在概念上是有区别的,在逻辑上是不等值的。它们之间存在规范性的联系,即概念涵摄的成立给规则适用提供了推定的理由,这种理由在性质上既不同于初显的理由,也不同于终局的理由。对概念涵摄与规则适用之间区别与联系的澄清,有助于我们思考相关的法理学问题,特别是,它能够使我们在足够清晰的概念基础上谈论法律难题与司法推理的客观性。
[Abstract]:In the theoretical discussion and the practice of judgment, people often unconsciously equate the concept of inclusion and the application of rules in concept or logic. This is not only unfavorable to clarify the different links and logical sequence of judicial reasoning, but also to the people who question the objectivity of judicial reasoning. Conceptual inclusion and rule application are different in concept and not equivalent in logic. There is a normative connection between them, that is, the establishment of the concept of inclusion provides a presumptive reason for the application of the rules, which is different in nature from both the prima facie reason and the final reason. The clarification of the difference and relation between the concept inclusion and the application of the rules is helpful for us to think about the relevant jurisprudence problems, especially, it enables us to talk about the legal problems and the objectivity of the judicial reasoning on the basis of sufficient clear concepts.
【作者单位】： 南京大学法学院;
【基金】：2015年度国家社科基金青年项目“基于可驳斥性逻辑的法律推理研究”(15CFX005)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923.5
[Abstract]:In the theoretical discussion and the practice of judgment, people often unconsciously equate the concept of inclusion and the application of rules in concept or logic. This is not only unfavorable to clarify the different links and logical sequence of judicial reasoning, but also to the people who question the objectivity of judicial reasoning. Conceptual inclusion and rule application are different in concept and not equivalent in logic. There is a normative connection between them, that is, the establishment of the concept of inclusion provides a presumptive reason for the application of the rules, which is different in nature from both the prima facie reason and the final reason. The clarification of the difference and relation between the concept inclusion and the application of the rules is helpful for us to think about the relevant jurisprudence problems, especially, it enables us to talk about the legal problems and the objectivity of the judicial reasoning on the basis of sufficient clear concepts.
【作者单位】： 南京大学法学院;
【基金】：2015年度国家社科基金青年项目“基于可驳斥性逻辑的法律推理研究”(15CFX005)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923.5
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 洛风;;精神赡养:老龄社会法律难题[J];检察风云;2011年02期
2 小非;;精神赡养:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];政府法制;2011年04期
3 小非;;“精神赡养”:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];法治与社会;2011年02期
4 小非;;“精神赡养”:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];现代养生;2011年05期
5 小非;;“精神赡养”:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];黄河.黄土.黄种人;2011年03期
6 小非;;精神赡养:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];法庭内外;2011年05期
7 小非;;精神赡养:老龄化社会的法律难题[J];老友;2011年04期
8 张猛,张猛,孔怡,胡丰,赵立见,史湘洲;法律难题 基因图谱如何保管[J];w挛胖芸，
本文编号：2266253
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2266253.html
