摘要
在兰代尔倡导的"案例法"影响下,法律形式主义思维在美国的法学界、实务界盛极一时,但这种思维遭到了现实主义法学的批判。在现实主义法学看来,在普通法秩序下,法官裁判并非只是围绕法律规范而展开抽象思维,而是应逐案权衡,考量个案背后的社会现实,并且积极吸纳、回应社会民意,由此,普通法与民主天然契合。法官要在个案裁判中准确客观地掌握和判断社会民意,需在方法上求助于社会科学研究,以此来强化司法裁判权的正当性及普通法的民主要素。对此,权利法学给予了批判,然而,该批判并未理解现实主义法学所型构的普通法、民主与社会科学研究之间理论构造,当然,也就未能真正洞彻现实主义法学所蕴含的理论诉求。
American legal realism claims that judgments should be made case by case in court,and a judge should well respond to the public opinion under the condition of common law,which naturally gets well along with democracy. To better understand the public opinion in a more objective way,a judge should resort to social science methodology so as to strengthen the legitimacy of legal adjudication and the democracy elements of common law. In this regard,the jurisprudence of right offers some criticisms,which,nevertheless,cast no insight into the theoretical appeals of the legal realism and even misunderstand it.
出处
《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2014年第3期135-146,160,共12页
Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)
基金
浙江省"之江社科青年学者行动"
浙江省高校人文社科重点研究基地课题"民法权利若干重大问题研究"(JDM1201)
