《民事审判哲学范式初论（On the philosophical paradigm of civil trial）.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《民事审判哲学范式初论（On the philosophical paradigm of civil trial）.doc（17页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、民事审判哲学范式初论（On the philosophical paradigm of civil trial）Abstract contemporary China is in a historical period of social transformation, and the construction of the rule of law requires the judge to establishA professional community, and the soul of the community is a certain paradigm. The judicial p
2、aradigm stipulates that the judge should deal with itCommon basic theories, basic views and basic methods affect the judges knowledge in the process of litigation,Thinking and acting. We should analyze the basic process of trial settlement of disputes from the paradigm point of view. adoptFocusing o
3、n the characteristics of the trial in ontology, methodology and epistemology, we can see the course of the trialHow does the judicial paradigm guide the judges to realize the facts and the legal issues, so as to explore the new paradigm of trial?.Judicial paradigm; trial; mediationThe term paradigm
4、comes from Greek and contains the meaning of common display, which leads to the model and model,Paradigm equivalence. This word has a long history and has many meanings in different times and in different fields. American SocietyThomas Kuhn, a sociology scientist, brought meaning to sociology and be
5、came a member of a particular communityThe sum of accepted beliefs, accepted values, and techniques. Edgar, a French scholar, thinks that onePeople recognize, think, and act on the paradigm that culture is written on themselves. It guides, rules, controlsThe organization of individual reasoning and
6、the organization of those who follow the paradigm are systematically organized. Theoretical circles in our country believe thatIt is the common belief of a group of scientists in a particular subject or disciplineTheir common basic theories, basic views and basic methods provide a common theoretical
7、 model for themAnd problem solving frameworks, thus forming a common tradition of the discipline, and for the development of the disciplineSet a common course. Limited to the length and cognitive level of the article, we take into consideration the word paradigmAt the same time, it is based on Chine
8、se legal theory and judicial practice, from ontology, methodology andThe extension of epistemology to define the judge as this community justice paradigm, and as a guide, the trialThe trial process is a tentative exploration.Ontology: the subjective and objective relations in the trial - based on fa
9、ctsThe German philosopher Kant will be a rational person called chasing making primitive ability, and primitive, is placedIn the first thing. For the judge as a typical rational person, the fact of the case is calledThe ability to trace the facts of the case is the trial of the originalReason. There
10、fore, in ontology, the trial attaches importance to the relationship between subject and object, and regards object asThe object of being outside is the object of human being, and the subject uses the object of understanding to conquer the object. The subject hereNot only the plaintiff, the defendan
11、t, but more importantly, the judge: the object here is the fact of the case, tooIt can be said that the object of trial is the dispute that leads to the trial.The subjective and objective relations in the trial are concentrated in a dynamic reasoning process. No matter what authority it isModel or a
12、dversary model, and the action is under the participation of the judge and the parties and their agentsProceed in accordance with legal procedures. The legal experts of both parties and their employ lawyers in their own interestsAct in search of the best evidence provided by the law, and make the mo
13、st favourable explanation to ones own. Judge pressIn the trial procedure, from the fact investigation to the court debate, a formal reasoning process is completed: the application of the legal norms isThe logic of the syllogism, the logic of the case, the fact that the case is the minor premise, the
14、 courts decisionIs the conclusion of this reasoning process.It needs to be explained that the legal norm is not only a logical proposition, but also a judgment of authorityBroken. At the same time, because of the fact of the case and the court statement, there is not only time interval, but alsoTher
15、e is a gap between reality and language. What is more important is that.,The judge as the third party and the facts of the caseThere are different cognitive backgrounds among manufacturers. All this may lead to the failure of formal reasoning functionThe result is that the conclusion is far from the
16、 objective facts, and may also be related to the term of the Party (even the winning party)Far cry from.We are all speculative, instinctively, about the most difficult questions, the least of themThe fundamental exploration of the problem exhibits a particular preference. For those obsessed with using tr
