法律正当性论证的实践理性范式——对“休谟问题”的回应

The Practical Rationality Paradigm of the Argumentation of Legitimacy of Law-Response to Hume's Problem

法律的正当性论证经历了多次的否定过程。自然科学的发展使得自然法被斥为抽象的空谈,实在法转而从社会事实中寻求正当性。"休谟问题"提出之后,从社会事实寻求法律的正当性也被称为"自然主义谬误"。后来分析实证主义法学派把正当性转变为有效性,转而从法律内部寻求正当性,但是理论的最后根基仍然跳不出"休谟问题"的限制。法律作为实践理性,目的在于为人们的行为提供指引,解决法律问题,实现社会公正,所以把纯粹理论的"休谟问题"引入实践的法学领域是不明智的。在经历了否定之否定的认识过程之后,坦然面对法学的实践理性属性,以实践的态度来理解和对待"休谟问题",才是处理好法律与道德、社会事实之间关系的关键。

The argumentation of legitimacy of law has gone through the process of several negations.The development of natural science has made natural law become empty metaphysical talk,and positive law begins to look for its legitimacy in social facts.After Hume＇s problem was raised,looking for legitimacy of law in social facts was called a＂naturalistic fallacy＂.Analytical legal positivism then turned legitimacy into validity,looking for legitimacy in the law itself,however,its theoretical foundation was not able to jump out the restriction of Hume＇s problem.The purpose of law,as practical rationality,is to guide people’s act,solve legal problems,and realize social justice,so it is not very wise to introduce Hume＇s problem,which is purely theoretical,into the practical province of law.After going through this cognitive process of negation of negation,it is crucial to face the law＇s nature of practical rationality,understand and treat Hume’s problem with a practical attitude,so as to properly handle the relationship of law and morality or law and social facts.