论文部分内容阅读
“法治反对解释”是一个强调“规则主义司法”的修辞性命题,对“法治反对解释”命题的“真/假”和“妥当/不妥当”的一般质疑,只会消解我们对“解释限度”问题讨论的深度和广度。从“法律的决定性”和“法律的解释性”这一对法律属性来看,“认真地对待规则”和“反对解释”之间存在着某种内在关联性。同时,正是这种内在关联性充分地说明了“法治反对解释”命题的实践意义。在法治理论层面的讨论上,无论是主张“如何解释”问题具有重要性,还是主张“如何适用”问题具有重要性,这种争论却共同开启了一场法治时代的“法律方法论危机”。
“The rule of law against interpretation” is a rhetorical proposition emphasizing “rule of justice ”, “true / false ” and “proper / improper ” in the proposition of “rule of law against interpretation” Queries will only dispel our depth and breadth of discussion of the “interpretation limit” issue. Judging from the “decisiveness of the law” and the “interpretativeness of the law,” there is some intrinsic connection between “treating the rules seriously” and “opposing interpretation”. At the same time, it is this intrinsic relation that fully illustrates the practical significance of the proposition “rule of law against interpretation.” At the theory-level discussion of the rule of law, both the importance of proposing the issue of “how to interpret” and the question of “how to apply” Methodological crisis ".