义务及其道德内涵:对法律命令论的规范主义诠释  

Duty and Its Moral Implication:An Interpretation of Imperative Theory of Law in a Prescriptive Way

作　　者：马斌 Ma Bin

机构地区：[1]辽宁师范大学法学院

出　　处：《南大法学》2023年第6期59-74,共16页NanJing University Law Journal

基　　金：国家社科基金“法律形式的一般理论及中国立法科学化启示”(18CFX003)的研究成果。

摘　　要：法律体系的内容构成是一般法理学的核心问题。主流观点至今认为,牛津学者哈特对法律命令论的致命一击使其成为全盘失败的理论方案,义务规则和授权规则二元并置的本体论构造成为不证自明的原理。尚未引起注意的是,哈特在依循描述社会学方法的同时暗中征用规范主义策略增强论证效果,但他并未展现命令论在规范法学下的最有力面貌。授权规则的本体论介入可保证法理论的最大解释力度却无法为现代法治理念下的法律形态提供完备的规范前设,并不完全满足规范法理学的元理论判准。政治道德效果的最佳化实现使得法律命令论虽然单方面强调法律内容的义务向度,对当下法理论甚至立法学而言仍为一个富有生命力的理论方案。The composition of legal system is the important issue of general jurisprudence.The mainstream view still holds that since Hart's fatal blow to the imperative theory of law,defeating it as a completely failed theoretical solution,the juxtaposition of duty-imposing rule and power-conferring rule has become an self-evident basic principle.What has not yet been observed is that Hart secretly used normative strategies to enhance the effectiveness of his argument while following descriptive sociological methods,but he did not demonstrate the most powerful imagination of imperative theory of law under normative jurisprudence.Although the ontological intervention of power-conferring rule can ensure the most explanatory power of legal theory,it cannot provide a complete normative premise for the legal form under the modern ideal of rule of law,which does not fully meets the meta-theoretical criteria of normative jurisprudence.The best moral-political consequences resulted from the imperative theory of law by emphasizing the obligation dimension of legal content makes it a vibrant theoretical solution for current legal theory and legislation.

关 键 词：法律命令论 义务重心 授权规则 规范法理学 

分 类 号：D90[政治法律—法学理论]