合法则性条件说是以取代条件说为宗旨的、独立的刑法因果关系学说,而非某个既有的刑法因果关系学说的翻版或变体。合法则性条件说尽管能够在一定程度上避免条件说的困境,但自身存在难以克服的缺陷,因而无法取代条件说。首先,在自然科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,关于能否以主流意见或学术代表人物的意见认定自然法则的问题,合法则性条件说无法给出令人满意的答案。其次,在社会科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,合法则性条件说面临着难以找到普遍性法则的难题。最后,在具体因果关系层面,合法则性条件说由于采用了力学、物理学的判断标准,不仅会在逻辑上陷入自相矛盾,而且还会在不作为犯的场合不可避免地得出错误的结论。此外,合法则性条件说不具备与条件说共存兼容的前提性条件,无法成为条件说的有益补充。因此,合法则性条件说是一个失败的刑法因果关系理论学说,不值得提倡。 Legitimacy of the conditions that is based on the principle of substituting for the purpose of the independent theory of causality of criminal law, rather than an existing version of causal theory of criminal law, a copy or variant. Legitimacy of the conditions that, although to a certain extent, to avoid the dilemma of conditions, but there are insurmountable defects, and therefore can not replace the conditions. First of all, regarding the determination of the general causality in the field of natural science, the question of whether the law of nature can be decided by the opinions of the mainstream or academic representatives, the lawful and prescriptive conditions can not give a satisfactory answer. Second, in the determination of the general causation in the social sciences, the legal conditions are faced with the difficulty of finding universality laws. Finally, at the level of specific causality, the lawful and prescriptive conditions say that due to the mechanical and physical criteria, not only will they be logically contradictory, but they will inevitably lead to errors in the field of omission in conclusion. In addition, the legal and normative conditions that do not have the conditions that coexist with the conditions that are compatible preconditions, can not be a beneficial supplement of conditions. Therefore, the legal normative condition is a theory of causality theory of criminal failure, it is not worth advocating.