一、导言当证据学思想史的老前辈William Twining处于其探索的较早阶段时,他得出了这样的结论,即尽管正统的证据文献有诸多优点,仍可以对其提出许多指摘。第一,它过于狭隘,关注的几乎完全是可采性规则。第二,它是非理论性的,因为许多讨论都是在假定的常识性的经验主义范围内进行的。第三,它是非连贯性的,因为法律理论的概念框架没有为建立与其他论域的联系提供足够的基础。第四,它导 I. INTRODUCTION When William Twining, a veteran of the history of evidence-based thought, was at an earlier stage of his exploration, he came to the conclusion that despite the many advantages of orthodox evidence documents, many allegations can still be made. First, it is too narrow and focuses almost entirely on admissibility rules. Second, it is non-theoretical, because much of the discussion is done within the presumed common-sense empiricism. Third, it is non-coherent because the conceptual framework of legal theory does not provide a sufficient basis for establishing links with other discourses. Fourth, it leads