论文部分内容阅读
法社会学作为独立的研究领域究竟与法教义学研究有何不同?后者能否以及在何等程度上成为前者的研究客体?针对上述问题本文从两者观察视角、研究方法的差异入手,分析法社会学形成其特有的研究路径的原因:主流法社会学家的影响、个别错误社会学认知造成的障碍,认为法社会学对于促进抑或削弱法律规则发挥效力的社会因素的研究对于立法、司法都大有裨益,法社会学对于实然法以及法教义学对应然法的研究不是竞争关系,而是互补关系,两者在研究中存在诸多结合点。基于法律规范在实际运作与应然目标上存在差异,致使法社会学对于经验性法系统统产生很多疑虑,对法教义学也产生错误印象,一些既成的错误理论加重了这些误解,但是法社会学与法教义学的严格区分实际上是一种分类错误,前者绝非限于研究现实中的法,后者也并非仅仅沉溺于法律理想之中。尽管如此,现今法社会学仍然缺乏对法教义学的研究兴趣,然而作者指出,该现象乃是通向复杂研究的过渡阶段,日后法社会学需要也必将法教义学纳入研究视野之中。
What is the difference between legal sociology as an independent research field and legal doctrine research? Whether the latter can and will not become the former research object? To solve the above problems, this paper analyzes the differences between the two perspectives and the research methods, The reason that sociology of law formed its unique research path: the influence of the mainstream sociologists, the obstacles caused by the individual errors in sociological cognition, the research on the social factors that sociology of law promotes or weakens the legal rules, Justice and law are of great benefit. The study of legal sociology for real law and the law corresponding to legal teachings is not a competitive one, but a complementary one. There are many points in the study of the two. Due to the difference between the actual operation and the expected goal based on legal norms, the sociology of law has many doubts about the empirical system of law and wrong impression on the teaching of law. Some erroneous theories add up to these misunderstandings, but the legal society The strict distinction between learning and legal teaching is actually a misclassification. The former is by no means limited to studying the law in reality, and the latter is not merely indulging in legal ideal. However, the current sociology of law still lacks the research interest in legal doctrines. However, the author points out that this phenomenon is a transitional phase leading to complex studies. In the future, sociology of law needs to incorporate legal doctrines into the research field.