解释是一种“连锁活动”吗——法律解释理论的费什—德沃金之争

Is Interpretation a“Chain Activity”——Fish-Dworkin Debate on Legal Interpretation Theory

自20世纪80年代初至90年代中期,斯坦利·费什和罗纳德·德沃金进行了一场长达十多年的法律解释论战。该论战从德沃金的"连锁小说"隐喻开始,内容涉及法律规范的意义来源、文本和读者之间的关系、解释行为之限制甚至法律解释的道德性等更深层次的问题。费什从文艺批评和文学解释的角度对德沃金提出的批评和反驳极富启发性,他认为解释总是先在地渗透于我们的思考之中,受我们自身的镶嵌性背景所约束。这一观点无疑有助于丰富和深化人们对于法律解释性质的认识,对于正确看待解释者的自由裁量,增进对解释者解释合理性的信赖具有重要意义。

From early 1980s to mid-1990s,Stanley Fish and Ronald Dworkin,had been involved in a debate on legal interpretation for more than ten years.The debate began with Dworkin’s metaphor of"chain novel"and touched upon some deeper issues such as the source of legal norms’meanings,the relationship between texts and readers,the limitation of interpretative behavior,and even the morality of legal interpretation.Fish’s criticism and refutation on Dworkin’s came from the perspective of literary criticism and literary interpretation,and were very enlightening.He convincingly pointed out that interpretation always permeated our thinking first and was constrained by our own embedded background.This explanation could undoubtedly deepen people’s understanding of the nature of legal interpretation,and is of great significance for justifying the interpreter’s discretion and could enhance the trust in the interpreter’s rationality and reasonableness of interpretation as well.