比喻在司法中的适用与原则——“半影”的得失与启示  

On Metaphor Application and Its Principle in Judicial Adjudication——A Comment on “Penumbras" and the Inspirations

作　　者：郭春镇[1,2] 张薇薇[1] 

机构地区：[1]厦门大学法学院 [2]吉林大学法学院博士后科研流动站

出　　处：《北方法学》2012年第4期16-24,共9页Northern Legal Science

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学青年基金项目"转型期积极权利的法律保障研究"(项目编号10YJC820034);中国博士后科学基金第四十七批面上资助项目;第四批特别资助;华东政法大学外国法与比较法研究院课题"美国宪法第九修正案发达史"的阶段性成果

摘　　要：比喻是司法裁判中一种重要的技艺,它能够弥补逻辑推理的不足、增加裁判的说服力和可接受性,但它的适用必须特别审慎。比喻在美国联邦法院推定隐私权的过程中起到了重大作用,但这种适用有得有失。其"得"体现在经由比喻推导出了隐私权;其"失"体现在论证过程的不甚严谨且造成高昂的机会成本。在司法裁判中运用比喻时,至少应考量历史与传统、现实与社会、远景与近景等因素,以期能够达成一个有效而合理地衔接过去与现在,既能满足现实需求,又有利于社会长期发展的开放性裁判。Metaphor is an important technique in judicial adjudication being helpful to overcome the disadvantage of critical reasoning and to make the decision more persuasive and acceptable. But using metaphor should be cautious. In determining the right to privacy by American federal courts, metaphor played a key role though with both benefit and cost. As to the benefit, the right to privacy is introduced and justified by metaphor. As to the cost, there are defects in reasoning with high opportunity cost. With regard to the application of metaphor in judicial adjudication, judges should consider the following factors ： history and tradition, reality and society, short -term and long -term goals, so as to effectively and reasonably integrate the past and present, to satisfy current requirements and to be beneficial to the open judgment model for the long -term social development.

关 键 词：比喻 隐私权 适用原则 

分 类 号：DF0[政治法律—法学理论]