法理学“指导”型知识生产机制及其困难——从法理学教材出发

The Mechanism of Jurisprudence to Produce Directive Knowledge and the Predicament: from the Perspective of Textbooks

从知识生产机制的整体视角来看,中国法理学教材还没有走出苏式法理学的框架。苏式法理学教材的"指导"型知识生产机制基于法理学与部门法学具有不同的研究对象这一基本原理,认为法理学是部门法学的指导性学科,并由此决定了"指导"型知识生产机制的运行机制;运行机制包含正面向度和反面向度两个方面,正面向度指的是法理学针对部门法学生产"指导"型知识,反面向度指的是部门法学帮助法理学生产"指导"型知识,法律关系理论和法律行为理论分别典型地对应着这两个方面。然而,对上述理论的检讨表明,"指导"型知识生产机制在运行机制层面是无效的;进一步地,该机制在基本原理层面及其理论基础层面也是错误的,因而应当被抛弃。

From the holistic view of knowledge production mechanism, Chinese jurisprudence textbook has failed to look beyond the framework of the textbooks in Soviet Union in which the research objects of jurisprudence and that of sectors of law are different. Besides, it is believed that jurisprudence is the ＂directive＂ discipline for sectors of law, thus the operation mechanism of ＂directive＂ knowledge production is determined therefrom. Such operation mechanism includes obverse and reverse dimensions. The obverse dimension means jurisprudence produces ＂directive＂ knowledge for sectors of law while the reverse dimension means sectors of law facilitates jurisprudence to produce ＂directive＂ knowledge. The legal relation theory typically corresponds to the obverse dimension while the legal act theory corresponds to the reverse dimension accordingly. However, the production mechanism of ＂directive＂ knowledge is found invalid on the level of operation mechanism. Furthermore, the production mechanism should be abandoned for it is false on either the basic principle or the theoretical foundation.