论文部分内容阅读
司法实践中的法律论证既不是完全的演绎,也不是完全的归纳,而是在次协调统摄之下的似真论证。与经典逻辑本身研究精确性来看,似真论证并不是精确的。所以,法律论证作为一个复杂的论证系统,是协调性与非协调性的、精确性与非精确性的统一。精确性的形式论证能满足人们对法律结论确定性的要求,非经典的似真论证可以满足人们对法律公平正义的要求,二者的适度结合可使司法者既注意到司法判决的法律效果,又注意到社会效果。因此,次协调逻辑当是法律论证的逻辑基础之一。
Legal argumentation in judicial practice is neither a complete deduction nor a complete induction, but a plausible argument under subordinate coordination. With the study of the classical logic itself, the plausible argument is not accurate. Therefore, legal argumentation as a complicated system of argumentation is a combination of coordination and non-coordination, accuracy and inaccuracy. The formal argumentation of accuracy can satisfy people’s certainty requirement of legal conclusion. The non-classical authentic argument can satisfy the people’s requirement of legal fairness and justice. The proper combination of the two can make the judicial person not only notice the legal effect of judicial decision, Also note the social effect. Therefore, the second coordination logic should be one of the logical bases of legal argumentation.