证据科学的研究现状及未来走向  

Current Research Status and Trend of Future Development of Evidence Science

作　　者：郑飞[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京交通大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2015年第4期146-165,共20页Global Law Review

基　　金："2011计划"司法文明协同创新中心资助;北京交通大学中央高校基本科研业务费人才基金项目"证据法的运行机制与社会控制功能"(2015RC001)的阶段性成果

摘　　要："证据学"、"证据法学"抑或"证据科学",有关证据学科称谓的"群雄混战"无疑推动了中国证据学科理论与实践的发展,但隐藏在学科称谓之争背后的,却是对研究对象的确定、学科性质的归属、理论基础的构建乃至学科体系的建立等学科基本问题阐释的混乱。中外证据学科称谓及其理论体系的历史演变表明,这场论战的焦点主要集中在学科独立性与跨学科研究范式之争。然而二者并不矛盾,因为学科专业化和综合化都是现代学科发展的必然趋势。因此,应该顺应学科发展和司法实践的需要,在走向独立的"证据法学"与深入规律的"证据学"之基础上,形成一种"事实认定一体化"研究范式,从而更加自信且坚定地迈向整合的"证据科学"。＂Evidence＂, evidence law＂, or evidence science ？ No doubt, the controversy which presents ＂a scuffle＂ situation in legal scholarship has promoted the development of evidence theory and practice in China. However, the interpretation of some fundamental subject issues behind this controversy, including the choice of research object, the categorization of disciplinary attribute, and the construction of theoretical basis and system, has been confused. By investigating the development history of the terminologies and theoretical systems of evidence research paradigm. However, the two trends are not contradictory to each other, because disciplinary specialization and integration are both necessary for the development of a modern discipline. Therefore, we should comply with the need of disciplinary development and judicial practice, and head toward the evidence law which constitutes an independent law subject, the evidence which focuses on fact finding laws, and the integrative evidence science which is based on the integrative research paradigm of fact finding.

关 键 词：证据学 证据法学 证据科学 事实认定 

分 类 号：D915[政治法律—诉讼法学]