论司法裁判的多重评价标准

On Multiple Criteria of Judicial Judgment

司法裁判总会遭遇多重标准的评价。从理想标准来说,确定性与唯一正解论,为人们提供了一副值得追求的美好图景。而从现实的司法实践来说,合法(律)性标准要求通过法律追求个案正义;合理性标准旨在将价值判断置于理性的检视之下,因而与法律命题的可证立性相联系;可接受性标准则将复杂的局面化约为"面向谁"的问题,强调针对不同群体进行针对性的说服。虽然,司法裁判的多重评价标准渊源各异,但在当下转型中国的特殊语境下,仍应该在实用主义的意义上形成一个大致的体系。

Judicial judgment is always evaluated by multiple criteria. In ideal condition, legal certainty or the thesis of ＂the only right answer＂ is worth pursuing. However,in judicial practice , ＂legality＂ cri teria demand that we pursue justice through law; ＂reasonability＂ criteria emphasize that value judgment should be rational, so it relates to justification of legal thesis; ＂acceptability＂ criteria simplify complicated situations into the questions which are ＂who the audience of the case are＂ and ＂how to persuade these people＂. In spite Of great difference in these criteria,it is still hopeful that a pragmatism evaluation system can be formed in the special circumstances of China.