论文部分内容阅读
动态体系论正在为国内越来越多的学者所接受,并越来越频繁地出现在民法学各个领域的解释论和立法论当中。然而,学界却在一定程度上误读了动态体系论,并由此对其抱有过高的期待。作为评价法学的一个版本,动态体系论既要对抗概念法学的僵硬,也要对抗自由法学的恣意和非合理性。国内学界往往忽略了后者的意义,片面强调结果的弹性化,导致其所主张的立法论和解释论并不能克服自由法学带来的恣意和不确定性。另一方面,即便澄清了误读,动态体系论也存在自身的局限性。动态体系论的体系性,由要素体系和基础评价这两大支柱构成,但是内在体系本身的捉摸不定导致了要素体系的不限定性,实定法上也普遍缺失基础评价。先天的不足极大地限制了动态体系论发挥作用的空间。
Dynamic system theory is being accepted by more and more scholars in our country and more and more frequently appeared in the field of interpretation and legislation in all fields of civil law. However, the academic circles misread the theory of dynamic systems to a certain extent and thus have high expectation on them. As a version of evaluation jurisprudence, the dynamic system theory must not only combat the rigidness of conceptual jurisprudence, but also resist the arbitrary and irrationality of free jurisprudence. The domestic academics often neglect the meaning of the latter, emphasizing the flexibility of the results one-sidedly, leading to the legislative and interpretative theories they advocate can not overcome the arbitrary and uncertainty caused by liberal jurisprudence. On the other hand, even if the clarification of misreading, dynamic system theory also has its own limitations. The systematicness of the dynamic system theory consists of two main pillars: the system of elements and the foundation evaluation, but the elusiveness of the intrinsic system itself leads to the indefiniteness of the factor system and the lack of basic evaluation in the real law. Inherent deficiencies have greatly limited the space for dynamic systems theory to work.