摘要
后果主义论辩是法律论证的一种重要的形式,其存在的目的就是从后果论的角度为规范适用提供"二次证明"。尽管后果主义论辩受到诸多批判,如以损害形式逻辑为代价、引入法官动机破坏法律的确定性、以法律工具主义作为价值预设等,但是后果主义论辩也有其存在的合理性:其作为重要的论证方法,是法官思维的组成部分,也是协调规则安定性与灵活性之间矛盾、解决权利相对性困境的重要方法。基于不同类型的后果,可以将后果主义论辩区分为制度型、目的型、道德型和政策型,这四种类型的后果主义论辩都有独特的适用领域和适用限制。在个案裁判中,后果主义论辩以"显性"和"隐性"的方式存在,作为一种辅助性依据,它在一定意义上可以将法律问题还原为事实问题。然而,受制于人的有限理性、法官的价值偏好,后果主义论辩在适用时需要就个案事实与逻辑后果的相关性进行论证,必要时辅之以其他的论证形式,并对适用的推理过程展开细致的说理。
The consequentialist argument is an important form of legal justification which provides a ＂secondary justification＂ for application of norms applied from the consequentialism perspective. On one hand, the consequentialist argument has confronted with many criticism such as being at the cost of under- mining formal logic, destructing the legal certainty by introducing the judge＇s motivations, and taking legal instrumentalism as its value presupposition. On the other hand, the consequentialist argument has its ration- ality. For instance, as an important method to justify, it is essential part of judge thinking as well as a measure to reconcile conflict between the stability and flexibility of rules, and an important way to solve the relativity dilemma of rights. According to different consequences, the consequentialist argument can be di- vided into four types of institution, purpose, morality and policies with their respective scope and applicable limitation. In the case - by - case decision making, consequentialist argument can exist either ＂recessively＂ or ＂dominantly＂. As a complementary approach, the consequentialist argument can restore legal issues into factual ones to some extent. However, subject to human limited rationality and judges＇ value preferences, judges should provide, inter alia, justification for the relevance between the facts and logical consequences with other argumentations if necessary. In the meanwhile, judges should provide detailed reasoning for the application process.
出处
《北方法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2016年第1期133-147,共15页
Northern Legal Science
关键词
后果论
后果主义论辩
辅助性依据
相关性
形式法治
consequentialism
consequentialist argument
subsidiary reason
relevance
the rule of law in form
作者简介
张顺，中国政法大学法学理论专业博士研究生。
