认识全球化的“问题化”进路——对中国法学“全球化论辩”中理论问题的追究与开放  

Chinese Jurisprudence's "Debate about Globalization":A General Definition and Analysis

作　　者：邓正来[1] 

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院,吉林长春130012

出　　处：《河北法学》2008年第2期2-17,共16页Hebei Law Science

基　　金：2004年国家社科重点项目"经济全球化与中国法学"(项目批准号:04AFX002)中核心部分的导论

摘　　要：对全球化本身做"问题化"理论处理首先便要求对中国法学的"全球化论辩"进行分析和反思,因此在本文中,我首先把中国法学之"全球化论辩"的"四步骤套路"转换成了一种参照性背景;其次通过把"全球化是经济全球化还是多维度的全球化"与"法律全球化"这两个问题转变成了对具体问题的分析进路,对中国法学的"全球化论辩"进行一般性的厘清和分析:在对中国法学两种对立的全球化论说的分析中,我批判了那种"经济主义"的全球化论说,认为全球化是一个多维度的既依凭民族国家又脱离民族国家的社会变迁过程;同时,本文也分析了与上述两种全球化学说紧密联系的中国法学学者有关"法律全球化"争辩之"肯定"、"否定"和"折衷主义"三种观点及其背后不同的理据。The primary work of “questionization” of globalization itself is to inquire and rethink Chinese jurisprudence＇s “debate about globalization”. In this thesis, I turn this debate,in which the most popular pattern of argument was what I called “four-step argument” , into a frame of reference; then I make a general definition and analysis of the debate in the approach of transforming these two questions, namely, “Globalization, economic or multifaceted” and “legal globalization”, into particular questions. In my discussion on two conflicting doctrines of globalization in Chinese jurisprudence, I critique the “economic” doctrine of globalization. I regard globalization as a multifaceted process of social transformation,whlch relies on and is at the same time independent of nation state. Moreover, I discuss Chinese legal writers＇ respective “positive”, “negative” and “eclectic” attitudes towards legal globalization in the debate and the grounds behind them, since the attitudes and their grounds are closely related to the former two doctrines.

关 键 词：全球化 中国法学 经济全球化 法律全球化 

分 类 号：DF0[政治法律—法学理论]