论文部分内容阅读
在当下国内学术界,对法律解释学的研究呈现出一派欣欣向荣的态势。然而,在一些基本问题上,许多人的认识或是含混的,或是错误的。这些含混或错误的认识一方面给法律解释的研究带来了障碍,另一方面也可能对司法实践造成负面影响。本文通过批判法律学者对哲学诠释学的错误借鉴,明确了法律解释学的学科定位;通过批判法律解释的建构模式,维护了传统的沟通模式;通过批判作者反映论与客观含义说,澄清了法律解释的目标;通过论证作者意图的存在与可获得,揭示了法律解释的客观性;力图通过澄清解释与理解以及解释与判断之间的区别,论证了法律解释的有限性。
In the current domestic academic community, the study of legal hermeneutics has shown a thriving trend. However, on some basic issues, many people’s awareness is either vague or wrong. These ambiguities or misperceptions not only bring obstacles to the research of legal interpretation on the one hand, but also may have a negative impact on judicial practice on the other hand. This article defines the subject orientation of legal hermeneutics by criticizing the false references of legal scholars to philosophical hermeneutics, and maintains the traditional mode of communication by criticizing the constructive mode of legal explanation. It clarifies the legal interpretation by criticizing the author’s reflective theory and objective meaning . By demonstrating the existence and availability of the author’s intention, the objectivity of legal interpretation is revealed. Attempting to clarify the difference between interpretation and understanding and interpretation and judgment demonstrates the limited legal interpretation.