中国古代司法推理中的误区研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 04:14

本文选题：司法推理 + 法律推理　；参考：《天津商业大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：司法推理活动广泛存在于中国古代司法实践中，为当时的裁判活动提供重要的解决纠纷的途径，这是值得肯定的，但同时应引人注意的是古代司法推理也存在着误区，本文主要采用了个案分析的方法，引用古代司法推理活动的典型实践，分别从演绎司法推理、归纳司法推理、类比司法推理及实质司法推理方法的分类角度，还原司法案例中所运用的司法推理方法，并进行分析和评价，这是本文的主要创新。在对中国古代司法推理的实践系统分析的基础上，对其中的误区得出了基础性的总结，并引以典型案例为着手点，，演绎推理存在忽视程序以及排斥演绎推理适用的误区，归纳推理存在着缺少对案件事实的归纳推理之弊端，类比推理存在着不恰当适用这一方式的情况，实质推理有着司法官个人主观臆断的严重倾向。误区产生的背后必然有一定原因，本文主要从四个方面对误区的形成原因进行了探析，这些误区形成的主要原因在于当时缺乏完备的逻辑学基础、受到情理法的较大影响、轻视程序现象普遍以及刑讯逼供紧密联系。相比之下，当今的司法推理活动在裁判文书写作、大前提缺失情况下的司法推理及法官行使自由裁量权有着类似的误区，因此，对古代司法推理中的误区深刻分析足以引起对当今司法推理运用的警示作用。
[Abstract]:Judicial reasoning exists widely in ancient Chinese judicial practice, which provides an important way to resolve disputes for the judicial activities at that time, which is worthy of recognition, but at the same time, it should be noticed that there are also some misunderstandings in ancient judicial reasoning. This paper mainly adopts the method of case analysis, quoting the typical practice of ancient judicial reasoning, from the angle of deductive judicial reasoning, inducting judicial reasoning, analogy judicial reasoning and substantive judicial reasoning, respectively, from the angle of classification of deductive judicial reasoning, inductive judicial reasoning, analogical judicial reasoning and substantive judicial reasoning. The main innovation of this paper is to restore the judicial reasoning method used in judicial cases and to analyze and evaluate it. Based on the systematic analysis of the practice of judicial reasoning in ancient China, this paper draws a basic summary of the misunderstandings, and takes the typical cases as the starting point. The deductive reasoning has the misunderstanding of neglecting the procedure and excluding the application of deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning has the disadvantages of lacking inductive reasoning to the facts of cases, analogical reasoning has the situation of improper application of this way, and substantive reasoning has a serious tendency of individual subjective judgment of magistrates. There must be some reasons behind the misunderstandings. This paper mainly analyzes the forming reasons of the misunderstandings from four aspects. The main reason for the formation of these misunderstandings lies in the lack of a complete logical foundation at that time, which is greatly influenced by the method of reason. The phenomenon of contempt procedure is common and the extortion of confessions by torture is closely related. In contrast, there are similar misunderstandings in judicial reasoning activities in the writing of adjudicative documents, judicial reasoning in the absence of major premises and the exercise of discretion by judges. The deep analysis of the misunderstandings in ancient judicial reasoning is sufficient to give warning to the application of judicial reasoning today.
【学位授予单位】：天津商业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926

【共引文献】