期刊文献+

法律的生命是什么——重新解读霍姆斯的一个经典论断

What Is the Life of Law:An Interpretation of One of Holmes's Classic Propositions
下载PDF
导出
摘要 霍姆斯的"法律的生命不是逻辑,而是经验"是法律界的至理名言。不可否认,这句话的确让我们对于逻辑与经验在法律中的作用和二者的关系产生了不少误解。事实上,法律中的逻辑与经验在一定程度上是相互补充的,可以说逻辑是"骨架",经验是"血肉",霍姆斯并未否定逻辑的作用,他反对的是逻辑是法律发展的唯一动力的观点。理解这句话的真实含义我们要联系霍姆斯提出这一论断的历史背景和他的论证角度,同时还要厘清句中关键词的含义进而全面地把握法律中逻辑与经验的作用以及二者的关系。 Holmes proposition"The life of law is not logic but experience"is the true saying in the filed of law,which was widely permeated and dictated by lawyers.There is no denying that his proposition has made a lot of misunderstanding about the role of logic and experience in law and the relationship between the two.In fact,logic and experience in law is complementary to a certain extent.It can be said that logic is the"skeleton"and experience is"flesh and blood".Holmes did not deny the role of logic,what he truly opposing is the view that logic is the only power in the development of law.To understand the real meaning of this sentence we should contact the historical background when he put forward it and in consideration of Holmes' s perspective of this thesis.We can try to clarify the role of logic and experience in law and get comprehensive grasp of the relationship between the two by understanding the meaning of the key words in the proposition.
作者 霍中警
出处 《成都理工大学学报(社会科学版)》 2017年第5期24-30,共7页 Journal of Chengdu University of Technology:Social Sciences
关键词 霍姆斯 逻辑 经验 遵循先例 Holmes logic experience stare decisis
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献12

  • 1杨建军.三段论法律推理的合理性与不足[J].宁夏社会科学,2007(2):12-16. 被引量:4
  • 2[美]斯蒂文·J·伯顿 张芝梅译.《法律的道路及其影响》[M].北京大学出版社,2005年版.第169页以下.
  • 3Oliver Wendell Holms, The Common Law, Harvard University Press, 1963, P5.p173.
  • 4Thomas C. Grey, Holmes and Legal Pragmatism, 41 Stanford Law Review 787, 1989, P817.p807
  • 5Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45, 76 (1905).P75—76.
  • 6Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Path of the Law, Reprinted in 78 B.U.L. Rev. 699. 1998, P705.P700,P699.p712.p713-714.P712.P715.P708.,P715.
  • 7Oliver Wendell Holmes, Law in Science and Science in Law, 12 Harv. L. Rev. 443, 1899, P461.
  • 8Southem Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 244 U. S. 205, p. 221 (1917).
  • 9[美]理查德·A.波斯纳(RichardA.Posner)著,苏力.法理学问题[M]中国政法大学出版社,2002.
  • 10(德)魏德士(BerndRuthers)著,丁晓春,吴越.法理学[M]法律出版社,2005.

共引文献31

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部