认识法律责任应当性内涵的四个维度

法律责任概念的中心称谓集中体现了法律责任的本质内涵。"应当性说"将法律责任定义因行为人的违反法律义务的行为和意愿是导致他人损害的原因所引起的、社会公认的、行为人承担不利后果的应当性。该说将法律责任的本质内涵界定为应当性,契合了法本质的契约论观念,符合法律规则逻辑结构的要求,并与法律责任的理论基础保持了内在一致性,有助于法律责任的实现。

反对解释的基本机理及其应用规则

反对解释被普遍地视为论理解释的重要方法,且对反对解释的阐释较少有不同意见,原因在于反对解释遵循的是一种严格的形式逻辑的推理方法。反对解释方法的运用可以体现和直接服务于平等、人权、法益和秩序等主要法律价值目标,反对解释是建构一个公平的、人道的、正当的法律秩序不可或缺的法律方法,反对解释所体现的“不同情况应当受到法律的同等的不同对待”补充了公平价值,是现代法律制度形式合理性的重要体现。反对解释方法的存在,不但可以使立法内容更加简洁,还可以使法官通过运用此解释方法准确地重构规范前提以解决疑难案件,尤其重要的是,这种逻辑化的操作为实质正义的达成提供了严谨的形式标准,是以形式正义确保实质正义的典范思维方法,可谓现代法律形式合理性的重要体现。

On the inference rules in legal logic

Inference rules are at the heart of studies of logic. Although legal logic is an applied logic, it is not a simple application of the inference rules of formal logic in the legal domain, but the outcome of a combination of the inference rules of formal logic and inference rules peculiar to the legal domain. Therefore, although legal inference rules have some features in common with the inference rules of formal logic, they also have a distinctive character. Their common features are to be found in the fact that the basic inference rules of formal logic are an indispensable part of the inference rules of legal logic, while their distinctiveness lies in the fact that legal inference rules contain a special inference rule that does not exist in formal logic, the rule of burden of proof.