论文部分内容阅读
在民间法的效力来源的争论中,国内大多数学者回答这一问题,认为乡土权威是其效力来源。但往往却忽视了乡土权威本身的合法性。这使得民间法的有效性缺乏合理的理由。这种观点也许存在着问题:一方面,它没有考虑到民间法是变化的、发展的,具有一种动态性;另一方面,仅以一种描述性的方式去看待民间法的有效性或许还不够全面。因此,本文尝试用规范性的方法,试图将民间法的发展分为权威道德的民间法、社团道德的民间法、原则道德的民间法三个阶段,通过对这三个阶段的分析来追问民间法的效力来源。
In the controversy over the sources of validity of civil law, most domestic scholars answered this question, arguing that local authority is the source of its effectiveness. But often overlooked the legitimacy of local authority itself. This makes the validity of civil law lacks a reasonable reason. There may be problems with this view: on the one hand, it does not take into account that civil law is changing, developing and dynamic; on the other hand, the effectiveness of civil law can only be viewed in a descriptive way Not enough comprehensive. Therefore, this paper tries to use the normative method to try to divide the development of folk law into three stages: the civil law of authoritative morality, the folk law of social morality, and the folk law of principle morals. Through the analysis of these three stages, The source of the law.