合法则性条件说的厘清与质疑
发布时间：2019-03-11 12:10
【摘要】：合法则性条件说是以取代条件说为宗旨的、独立的刑法因果关系学说,而非某个既有的刑法因果关系学说的翻版或变体。合法则性条件说尽管能够在一定程度上避免条件说的困境,但自身存在难以克服的缺陷,因而无法取代条件说。首先,在自然科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,关于能否以主流意见或学术代表人物的意见认定自然法则的问题,合法则性条件说无法给出令人满意的答案。其次,在社会科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,合法则性条件说面临着难以找到普遍性法则的难题。最后,在具体因果关系层面,合法则性条件说由于采用了力学、物理学的判断标准,不仅会在逻辑上陷入自相矛盾,而且还会在不作为犯的场合不可避免地得出错误的结论。此外,合法则性条件说不具备与条件说共存兼容的前提性条件,无法成为条件说的有益补充。因此,合法则性条件说是一个失败的刑法因果关系理论学说,不值得提倡。
[Abstract]:The theory of legal conditions is an independent theory of causation in criminal law, rather than a copy or variation of some existing theory of causality in criminal law, with the aim of replacing the theory of conditions in lieu of the doctrine of conditionality in criminal law. Although the legal condition theory can avoid the dilemma of the condition theory to a certain extent, it has its own hard-to-overcome defects, so it can not replace the condition theory. First of all, when it comes to the determination of general causality in the field of natural science, there is no satisfactory answer to the question of whether or not the law of nature can be determined by the opinion of the mainstream opinion or the opinion of the academic representative. Secondly, on the cognizance of general causality in the field of social science, the legal condition theory faces the difficult problem of finding the universal rule. Finally, at the specific cause-effect level, the legality condition theory, due to the use of the mechanical and physical criteria, will not only fall into logical contradiction, but also inevitably draw the wrong conclusion on the occasion of inaction. In addition, the legal conditionalism does not have the presupposition of coexistence and compatibility with the conditional theory, so it cannot be a useful supplement to the conditional theory. Therefore, the legal condition theory is a failure of the theory of causality in criminal law, it is not worth advocating.
【作者单位】： 天津财经大学法学院;
【基金】：2016年度中国法学会部级法学研究课题“刑事指导性案例的法教义学研究”(CLS2016D45)的研究成果
【分类号】：D914
本文编号：2438271
[Abstract]:The theory of legal conditions is an independent theory of causation in criminal law, rather than a copy or variation of some existing theory of causality in criminal law, with the aim of replacing the theory of conditions in lieu of the doctrine of conditionality in criminal law. Although the legal condition theory can avoid the dilemma of the condition theory to a certain extent, it has its own hard-to-overcome defects, so it can not replace the condition theory. First of all, when it comes to the determination of general causality in the field of natural science, there is no satisfactory answer to the question of whether or not the law of nature can be determined by the opinion of the mainstream opinion or the opinion of the academic representative. Secondly, on the cognizance of general causality in the field of social science, the legal condition theory faces the difficult problem of finding the universal rule. Finally, at the specific cause-effect level, the legality condition theory, due to the use of the mechanical and physical criteria, will not only fall into logical contradiction, but also inevitably draw the wrong conclusion on the occasion of inaction. In addition, the legal conditionalism does not have the presupposition of coexistence and compatibility with the conditional theory, so it cannot be a useful supplement to the conditional theory. Therefore, the legal condition theory is a failure of the theory of causality in criminal law, it is not worth advocating.
【作者单位】： 天津财经大学法学院;
【基金】：2016年度中国法学会部级法学研究课题“刑事指导性案例的法教义学研究”(CLS2016D45)的研究成果
【分类号】：D914
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前4条
1 汤泽利;;因果关系判断的理论转向[J];法制与社会;2014年08期
2 王志远;;实质违法观的续造:客观归责理论的真正贡献[J];吉林大学社会科学学报;2011年03期
3 邹兵建;;论刑法归因与归责关系的嬗变[J];刑事法评论;2012年02期
4 ;[J];;年期
，本文编号：2438271
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2438271.html
