美国普林斯顿大学哲学教授罗蒂认为:思想交流是一种旨在达到相互理解的对话。对话有两种隋况:一是在同一语言规范内展开的,叫“常规对话”;一是在不同语言规范之间进行的,叫“非常对话”。常规对话中发生的思想冲突,不难根据同一规范达成一致的意见.但非常对话之间的思想冲突,却不可能以对话者各自的规范为根据来消除。几年来,我国法学界对法本质的争论见智见仁,莫衷一是。虽呈百家争鸣之象,却也暴露两大缺陷,一是以经学思维方法代替科学思维方法;二是语义歧生、概念混乱,无法进入常规对话。因此,我认为,必须以科学思维方法使法学争论从非常对话,进入常规对话。 Rorty, a philosopher of philosophy at Princeton University in the United States, believes that the exchange of ideas is a kind of dialogue aimed at mutual understanding. There are two kinds of dialogue sui: First, launched in the same language specification, called “regular dialogue”; First, between different language specifications, called “very dialogue.” It is not difficult to reach agreement based on the same norms in the ideological conflicts that occur in regular dialogues, but the ideological conflicts between the very dialogues can not be eliminated on the basis of the respective norms of the interlocutors. Over the past few years, our legal circles have different views on the nature of the law. Although there are a hundred schools of thought contending, they also reveal two major defects. One is replacing the scientific thinking with the method of classical thinking; the other is the semantic discrimination and the confusion of concepts that make it impossible to enter the regular dialogues. Therefore, I think it is necessary to move the legal debate from a very dialogue to a regular dialogue in a scientific way of thinking.