Impotence of response： Comments on the defects of P. Selznick and P. Nonet＇s theory of responsive law  

回应的无力——评诺内特与塞尔兹尼克的“回应型法”理论之缺陷

作　　者：陈华彬[1] 杨文杰[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海师范大学法政学院,上海200234

出　　处：《US-China Law Review》2007年第3期1-5,共5页美中法律评论（英文版）

摘　　要：The theory of Responsive law of P. Nonet and P. Selznick, who are American jurist, were created to solve the intense relationship between the integrality and openness and to achieve the perfect coexistence of procedural justice and substantive justice of law. Though this theory has certain reference value, it is not mature and has some fatal defects. For example, objective as the core concept of the theory is difficult to get generalization and reification, the authors have no enough confidence with their theory, the intense relationship between the integrality and the openness of law is difficult to overcome, there is obvious confusion of frame of reference in the authors＇ study method, and so on.美国法学家诺内特与塞尔兹尼克的“回应型法”理论欲解决法律的完整性和开放性之紧张关系，从而实现法的程序正义和实质正义的完美共存，其理论有一定的参考价值，但该理论很不成熟，且存在广些致命的缺陷，如回应法理论的核心概念“目的”难以普遍化和具体化、作者对“回应型法”理论的严重不自信、法的完整性和开放性的紧张关系难以克服，以及作者的研究退路中存在参照系混乱，等等。

关 键 词：responsive law objective inner contradiction frame of reference impotence of response 

分 类 号：D90-052[政治法律—法学理论]