预判确定性命题的证立与捍卫——以卢埃林法律现实主义观为线索

Justification and Defending of the Predictive Determinacy Proposition——Taking Llewellyn’s view of legal realism as a clue

预判确定性命题能够穿越错综复杂的司法决策,在一定程度上满足民众对纠纷解决的公正期待。美国法律现实主义'怀疑论'对这一命题提出严峻挑战,但恰恰通过考察'敌方'阵营中卢埃林开辟的具有建设性的'中间道路',反而证明在寻求一种新的更真实的预判确定性或可估量性。通过内外二阶视角可以澄清预判确定性的存在现象,卢埃林为此提供了操作技艺约束、事实导向型决策与现实生活规范等理由以及更细化的上诉法院14种稳定性因素,并进行了充分的证立。其中,操作技艺由于自身的弱点,使命题遭遇内部的质疑和瓦解。但卢埃林系统建构的普通法传统之宏大风格,其实无声修正甚至消除了来自命题内部引发的质疑。卢埃林提出的证立理由与反驳质疑的主张,也可以用认知心理学的双重加工模型与认知风格理论进行较好地科学阐释。在当今智能互联的新时代,智慧法院建设利用大数据对案情信息进行全样本分析,对捍卫预判确定性命题及其审慎对待提供了新的契机。

The predictive determinacy have been able to go through the intricate judicial decisions and to some extent meet the public’s expectation for a fair settlement of disputes.The skepticism of American legal realism poses a severe challenge to the proposition,but by examining the constructive'middle way'opened by Llewellyn in the'enemy'camp,it proves to be seeking a new and truer predicative determinacy or estimability.Through the internal and external secondorder perspective,the existence of predicative determinacy can be clarified,and Llewellyn provides reasons such as operational skill constraints,fact-oriented decision-making and real life norms,as well as 14 more detailed stability factors of the court of appeal,which are fully justified.Due to the weakness of operational skill,the proposition encountered internal doubts and collapse.However,the grand style of the common law tradition constructed systematically by Llewellyn,which actually silently corrects and even eliminates the doubts raised by the proposition.Llewellyn’s proposition of justifying reasons and refuting doubts,which can also be scientifically explained by the dual-processing model of cognitive psychology and the theory of cognitive style.In today’s new era of intelligent interconnection,construction of Intelligent Court uses big data to conduct a full sample analysis of cases information,which provides a new opportunity to defend the proposition of the predictive determinacy and its prudent treatment.