一百多年前,美国大法官霍姆斯在对以兰代尔为代表的形式主义法学的批判中,提出了“法律的生命不在于逻辑,而在于经验”的经典命题。但在之后一百多年中逻辑学得到革命性的发展。苏珊·哈克撰文说,尽管如此,霍姆斯的经典命题依然有效,并对被称为现代兰代尔主义的布柳金、布鲁尔等人的逻辑理论进行了批判,而这些人也给与了针对性的回应。事实上,关于法律中的逻辑与经验的争论中存在大量的误解、误读,这一持续一百多年的争论给我们的启示是,逻辑所要求的概念明确,命题恰当,推理有效,论证充分对于所有的理性论证,尤其是法律论证具有其他方法不可替代的作用。 More than 100 years ago, Holmes, the United States chief justice, put forward the classic proposition that “the law of life is not logic but experience.” In his critique of formal law represented by Randall. But logic developed revolutionaryly in more than one hundred years. Susan Harker wrote that in spite of this, Holmes’s classic proposition remained valid and criticized the logic theory of Bululkin and Brewer, who were called Modern Landerism, Also gave a targeted response. In fact, there are a lot of misunderstandings and misreadings in the debate over logic and experience in law. The enlightenment we received from this debate, which lasted over a hundred years, is that the concepts required by logic are clear, propositions are correct, and reasoning is valid For all rational arguments, especially legal argumentation, it has the irreplaceable role of other methods.