裁判推理的四种有效模式——以否定式裁判推理为中心

Four Valid Forms of Judicial Deduction: Negative Judicial Deduction as the Centre

当前的主流理论把裁判推理的有效模式刻画为一个充分条件假言推理,其缺陷在于忽视了法律规定的多样性和事实不明的可能性,特别是不能说明否定式裁判推理之有效性。重建裁判推理的有效模式,须以整体适用的思维反映裁判推理的实际,将所有那些或明或暗地起着实际作用的法律规范都纳入大前提之中,并且注意证明责任对裁判的特殊影响。由此,可以确立以充要条件假言规范命题为大前提的四种裁判推理有效模式。

In the popular theory, the valid form of judicial deduction is regarded as a sufficient condition hypothetical deduction. It ignores the diversity of norms, and the possibility of unknown facts. Especially it can not explain the validtity of negative judicial deductions. In order to reconstruct the valid forms of judicial deductions, the actual judicial thinking must be reflected with an overall application opinion, all kinds of legal norms which overtly or covertly play a practical role must be brought into the major premise, and the special influenc of pursuation burden should also be taken into account. Thus, four valid forms of judicial deduction with a necessary and sufficient condition hypothet- ical normative proposition as the major premise will be established.