论文部分内容阅读
美国法律现实主义的许多思想归根到底植根于现实主义者们对司法过程的看法。本文从三个角度探讨了美国现实主义的司法观。首先,对于司法过程的性质而言,究竟是创造性的还是宣告性的,现实主义与形式主义针锋相对,形式主义认为司法过程就是逻辑演绎的过程,是宣告法律适用的过程,而现实主义认为法律的生命不在逻辑,而在经验,是创造性的过程。其次,对于司法裁判的主导因素而言,形式主义强调了法律的单方面决定作用,而现实主义认为司法裁判是由事实主导的,裁判结果只是对事实刺激的一种反应。再次,对于司法判决的可预测性而言,本文着重探讨了现实主义阵营内部的分歧:现实主义的社会科学之翼认为司法裁判虽然不确定,但还是可以预测的,而现实主义的个人习性之翼认为司法判决取决于个人习性,因而本质上是不可预测的。现实主义的司法最重要的贡献在于恢复了事实在裁判过程中的中心地位。
Many of the ideas in American legal realism are rooted in the realists’ perception of the justice process. This article explores the American realistic view of justice from three perspectives. First of all, whether the nature of the judicial process is creative or declarative, realism is diametrically opposed to formalism, which considers the judicial process as the process of logical deduction, the process of proclaiming the application of law, and realism that legal Life is not logic, but experience is a creative process. Second, formalism emphasizes the unilateral decision-making role of law in the dominant factor of judicial adjudication. Realism holds that judicial adjudication is fact-driven and the result of adjudication is only a reaction to factual stimuli. Thirdly, in the context of the predictability of judicial decisions, this article focuses on the disagreements within the realism camp: Realistic Social Science Wings believe that judicial decisions, though uncertain, are still predictable, whereas realist personal habits Wings believe that judicial decisions depend on personal habits and are therefore inherently unpredictable. The most important contribution of the realist judiciary lies in restoring the centrality of the fact in refereeing.