法律论证的共荣性正义标准探究  

The Criterion of Co-prosperous Justice of Legal Argumentation

作　　者：冉杰[1] 

机构地区：[1]广州大学政治与公民教育学院,广东广州510006

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2014年第2期13-25,共13页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：正义可区分为共荣性正义和优先性正义。但是,对于正义标准应该是什么的问题,迄今仍然没能得到解决。本文仅探究共荣性正义标准问题。这一问题的解决,目前主要有两条路径。其一是以人性为依据的理论路径。但是,以何种人性为依据,人们充满争议,而且合乎人性的未必是正确的,这使得这一理论路径难以实现其目的。其二是德性伦理理论路径。但是,它们以之为依据的善或善人,要么是不具有公共的正当性,要么是没有被清楚的界定,因而不能满足法律论证的要求。基于此,依据共同善特别是人类的繁荣,德性法律论证理论建立起了立法和司法论证的共荣性正义标准,并以此为基础,对泸州情妇遗嘱案进行了评析。Justice may be divided into co - prosperous and precedent justices. However, up till now, the issue what the criterion of justice should be still unresolved. This article researches only on the issue of criterion of co - prosperous justice. There are two main approaches to resolve this issue： The first is theoretical approach based on human nature, how- ever people disagree on what kind of human nature should be depended, and what coincides with human nature is not nec- essarily right, thus this approach does not succeed. The second is theoretical approach of virtue ethics. However some of them did not define the goodness or well - doer, and what the other definitions have not public legitimacy, therefore this ap- proach cannot satisfy the requirement of legal argumentation. Because of this, based on common goodness, especially flour-ishing of human beings, the theory of virtue legal argumentation established the criterion of co - prosperous justice of legis-lative and judicial argumentations, and then analyzed and commented on the case of testament in favor of mistress succes-sion case in Luzhou Sichuan.

关 键 词：法律论证 共荣性正义标准 德性 共同善 人类的繁荣 

分 类 号：DF0-051[政治法律—法学理论]