原始思维、经验思维和逻辑思维——对法律事实认定思维类型历史变迁的考察

Original Thinking,Experimental Thinking and Logical Thinking

从思维类型的理性化程度的高低来考察,法律事实认定的思维类型大致可以划分为原始思维、经验思维、逻辑思维三种类型。原始思维是古代民族认定事实共有的特点,该种思维注重神秘原因在事实认定中的作用;经验思维以传统中国司法实践为代表,是一种主客体不分、重经验轻逻辑的整体思维。逻辑思维奠基于概念,以认识主体与客体的主客二分为前提,在因果关系的认定方面既强调必然性,又承认盖然性。从历史逻辑发展来看,从原始思维、经验思维到逻辑思维,大致呈现出了线性逻辑的历史发展轨迹,其理性化程度不断加强。随着科学知识的普及和受证据规则的制约,原始思维早已退出了历史舞台,经验思维也早已经缩小了其发挥作用的空间,而逻辑思维在法律事实认定中则占据了绝对主导地位。法律事实认定中的逻辑思维是法制现代化进程中应当倡导的思维方式,也是法律现代化的一个重要层面。

Inspected from the rational level, the thinking types of legal fact finding can generally be divided into original thinking, experimental thinking and logical thinking. Original thinking focuses on the role of mysterious reasons in fact finding. Experimental thinking, represented by the traditional Chinese judicial practice, is overall logic thinking regardless of the subject and the object and focuses on experience. Based on concepts, logical thinking stresses the necessity and recognizes probability in finding the causal relationship with understanding of subject and object as premise. From the historical logical development, it generally shows a linear logic of historical development trajectory （original thinking, experimental thinking and logical thinking） and increases the degree of rationality. With the popularization of scientific knowledge and constrained by rules of evidence, the original thinking has already left the stage of history, experimental thinking has narrowed its role in space, and logical thinking has absolutely occupied the dominant position in legal fact finding. Logical thinking in legal facts finding should be promoted in the process of legal modernization and is an important dimension in modern law.