摘要
自由裁量是法哲学和法理学的一个基本概念。哈特从语言哲学的进路,以规则为核心来理解自由裁量,但其自由裁量概念缺乏一种法律论证理论,未能有力反驳德沃金的强自由裁量批判。麦考密克承续哈特的分析实证主义法学,给出一种以演绎推理为基础的“二阶证立”理论,通过后果主义论证、融贯性论证和一致性论证共同建构一种“理想的形式正义”,从而为强自由裁量辩护;但他在回应各种非演绎主义挑战的过程中深受佩雷尔曼新修辞学影响,继而转向一种修辞学进路的法律论证理论。我们坚持为麦考密克的演绎主义法律论证理论辩护,坚持自由裁量应当是一种以演绎推理为精髓,非演绎推理参与其中的实践理性活动;而且,法律类推、论题学和修辞学进路的自由裁量实质上都是以演绎推理为基础或旨归,无法反驳演绎主义作为自由裁量的理性限度。
Discretion is a fundamental concept of philosophy of law and jurisprudence.Taking the language philosophy approach,Hart understood rule-based discretion as a key point.However,his concept of discretion lacks a theory of legal argumentation and so fails to refute Dworkin’s "strong discretion" critique.Carrying on Hart’s analytical positivist jurisprudence,MacCormick produced a "second-order justification" theory based on deductive reasoning and combining consequentialist,coherence and consistency arguments to construct an "ideal formal justice," thus presenting a defense of strong discretion.However,in the course of responding to various non-deductivist challenges,he was strongly influenced by Perelman’s new rhetoric,and turned to rhetoric as an approach to the theory of legal argumentation.We strongly support MacCormick’s defense of the deductivist theory of legal argumentation,and uphold the idea that discretion should be a rational practice with deductive reasoning as its essence and non-deductive reasoning as a participant.Moreover,the legal analogy,topical and rhetorical approaches to discretion are all essentially based and purposed on deductive reasoning;they will not be able to refute deductivism as the rational limit of discretion.
出处
《中国社会科学评价》
CSSCI
2021年第4期4-15,155,共13页
China Social Science Review
