论文部分内容阅读
形式解释论与实质解释论的最核心的争论在于运用的位阶上。而在逻辑上的争论又不断上升到对罪刑法定原则理解的争论,刑法价值理念的争论。形式正义与实质正义存在着张力,二者之间的争论似乎永远存在。学者力求寻找二者之间的平衡点,但又因为社会的变化而显得难以把握。法律一方面要在公众的可预测范围内显现出一种刚性的法律结构,另一方面又要在正义与公平的价值观下富于柔性的人性关怀。然而,形式解释论与实质解释论的争论在刚性与柔性中相互掺杂,但二者的争论目的都是为了得以实现法律的公平正义。
The most central argument of formalist and substantive interpretation lies in the level of application. However, the arguments in logic have been continuously raised to the controversy over the legal principle of legality and the controversy over the concept of value of criminal law. There is tension in formal justice and substantive justice, and the dispute between them seems to exist forever. Scholars strive to find a balance between the two, but because of social changes and seem difficult to grasp. On the one hand, the law should show a rigid legal structure within the predictable range of the public, and on the other hand, it should have flexible human feelings under the values of justice and fairness. However, the arguments of formal interpretation and substantive interpretation are mixed with each other in rigidity and flexibility, but both of them are aimed at achieving the fairness and justice of the law.