条件公式的检讨与反思——合法则的条件说之提倡

Eine Reflexion über die Conditio-sine-qua-non-Formel——Befürwortung der Theorie von Gesetzm?βige Bedindung

在因果关系或客观归属理论中,通常将条件公式作为事实归因的判断方法,在此基础上再进行规范性的归责判断。但是,经条件公式圈定的因果关系范围极为宽广,而因果关系中断论与条件公式存在逻辑矛盾,不能胜任事实归因阶段限定因果关系的任务;条件公式虽不会导致处罚范围扩大,但会造成刑法评价范围的过度扩张,有损理论的经济性;条件公式无法圆满地处理假定的因果关系和择一竞合的问题,存在理论的不完满性;更为致命的是,条件公式采用的"思维排除法"这一运作机制并非纯粹形式性的,而是以科学法则作为其判断的基地,其本来就蕴含着合法则的条件说的思考方式。合法则的条件说可以还原事实归因判断的本来面目,且能够更好地处理假定的因果关系和择一竞合的问题,是比条件公式更优越的学说。

In the theory of causality or attribution theory,the conditional formula is usually used as a judgement method in the factual attribution,before making a normative judgment of attribution.But the causal relationship delineated by the conditional formula is too broad,causality interruption theory has a logical contradiction with the conditional formula,therefore it cannot complete the task of restriction to causality.The conditional formula will not lead to the enlargement of the scope of punishment,but it will lead to the excessive expansion of the scope of criminal evaluation and damage the efficiency of the theory.Conditional formula fails to deal satisfactorily with hypothetical causality and alternative concurrence,and there is theoretical imperfection.Even more lethal is that the operational mechanism of the"thinking exclusion"adopted in the conditional formula is not purely formal,while it is based on scientific principles.So the conditional formula inherently contains the thought of the theory of conditions in accordance with the law.The theory of conditions in accordance with the law can restore the true nature of the factual attribution judgment,and can better deal with the hypothetical causality and the problem of alternative concurrence,and is therefore a superior theory to the conditional formula.