论文部分内容阅读
方法多元化的景象已次第呈现于中国宪法学研究中,于此背景中应运而生的规范宪法学,一方面主张适度地接近规范主义,但又不至于完全退到法律实证主义的立场,另一方面有意识地保持着理论体系的开放性:作为实践面向的方法论,它重视学理解释与有权解释之间的良性互动;在围绕规范形成思想的基础上,强调着方法的多元性;作为价值导向的思维,即使对于规范外的价值与事实亦保持谨慎的开放性。宪法解释学是中国宪法学者强调的另一股强音,通过两者的比较可进一步突显宪法学方法论的开放性取向:两者在核心立场上更多的是具有交叠共识,微小的区别仅体现在价值立场上的开放性形态。
On the one hand, it advocates a modest approach to normative doctrine but does not completely retreat from the position of legal positivism; on the other hand, it advocates a moderate approach to normative doctrine. On the other hand, On the one hand consciously maintain the openness of the theoretical system: as a practice-oriented methodology, it emphasizes the positive interaction between the theoretical interpretation and the right to explain; on the basis of the normative formation of the thought, emphasizing the diversity of the method; as the value Oriented thinking, even with the open norms of the values and facts remain cautious. Constitutional hermeneutics is another strong voice emphasized by Chinese constitutional scholars. The comparison of the two can further highlight the openness of the methodology of constitutional law. Both of them have overlapping consensus in the core position, and the slight difference is only Embodied in the value position of the open shape.