论文部分内容阅读
传统法律推理模型将法律思维的过程区分为发现与证立两个步骤,以此来调和法律现实主义对法律形式主义的挑战。从当代认知心理学的角度看,发现的过程对应着人类普遍决策模型中的系统1,即非反思的快速直觉决策系统;而证立的过程对应着系统2,即反思的慢速逻辑决策系统。由于动机取向推理的影响,困难案件中系统1很大程度上决定了案件的判决结果,系统2无法在实质上修正最终判决。这就使得法律发现的过程中法官品格和动机的重要性被忽视。孟子的两难实践推理模型提示我们,法官在法律发现过程中应恰当地运用司法想象力等司法美德,以便在困难案件的判决中获得最佳的判决结果。
The traditional legal reasoning model divides the process of legal thinking into two steps of discovery and establishment in order to reconcile legal challenges of legal formalism with legal realism. From the perspective of contemporary cognitive psychology, the process of discovery corresponds to System 1, a non-reflective quick intuitionistic decision-making system in the universal model of decision-making. The process of establishment corresponds to system 2, ie, the slow logic decision of reflection system. Due to the influence of motivation-oriented reasoning, System 1 in difficult cases largely determines the judgment result of the case, and System 2 can not substantially amend the final judgment. This neglects the importance of the character and motivation of judges in the process of legal discovery. Mencius’ s dilemma of practical reasoning suggests that judges should properly use judicial virtues such as judicial imagination in the process of legal discovery in order to obtain the best verdict in the judgment of difficult cases.