《法学理论论文伽达默尔的法律解释学思想》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《法学理论论文伽达默尔的法律解释学思想（3页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、伽达默尔的法律解释学思想 【论文标题】 伽达默尔的法律解释学思想【英文标题】 【中文摘要】 伽达默尔的哲学解释学思想在解释学史上占有极其重要的历史地位,其哲学解释学体系的建立开创了解释学史上的第二次哥白尼革命,完成了解释学由方法论向本体论的转向,奠定了其哲学解释学集大成的历史地位。正是在这种大的背景下本文试图通过对伽达默尔哲学解释学的分析来探讨其对法律解释的影响。本文的第一章从主要代表人物的思想和观点中对解释学和哲学解释学作了一番梳理。并分别对施莱尔马赫、狄尔泰、海德格尔和伽达默尔的解释学理论逐一做了介绍。特别指出伽达默尔的哲学解释学理论(其三个核心概念:前理解、效果历史和视域融合)对于法律领
2、域的解释学具有指导和借鉴作用。论文第二部分考察伽达默尔解释学对法律解释的意义。解释学认为,如果只是将我们的视野局限于单纯的文本、立法者的预期或者当前的政策,都获得法律含义之真理。这些视角应当协同努力,并互为补充。伽达默尔的解释学将法律解释看作是解释者的当下视角和文本以及立法者的历史视角之间所进行的对话。法律解释的辩证法既不是考古学或文本主义的观点对解释者的强加,也不是解释者用自己的观点取代法律文本的观点,而是这些不同的观点之间富有成效的对话。在元理论的层面上,伽达默尔的解释学为动态法律解释提供了一个非常重要的哲学基础,有利于建立一个法律解释的一般理论,并且为思考法律解释中的一些特别的问题提供帮
3、助。论文第三部分主要是考察我们能否从那些对伽达默尔式法律解释的持反对态度的主要观点中获得一些有关法律解释的真知灼见。以对伽达默尔理论的哲学上的反对意见为基础,对于伽达默尔式动态性法律解释理论存在三种反对意见。第一种涉及被广泛提出的反多数民主的困境,这种反对意见认为动态性法律解释无视议会作为首要的甚至排他的立法主体的宪法地位。这种反对意见的存在的问题在于,解释学已经说明对于久已通过的法律进行解释时法官无可避免地要运用其创造性,并且这种创造性的运用也是值得肯定的。当然对于反多数民主困境的关心是在西方法律文化中为法官们所共有的一种前理解,并且还有助于保证法官在进行法律解释时能够以一种对法律的负责的态
4、度进行解释。但解释学的启发是反多数民主的困境并不能通过采取一种更具约束性的方法来解决。论文的第四部分主要是对前三部分的综合和概括。这一部分通过对解释学的概括和总结,来论述伽达默尔哲学解释学思想在创立了本体论解释学后,其哲学解释学思想对法律解释的影响。从哲学层面上来讲解释学的重心转换影响着法律解释理论的发展走向,传统法律解释理论将解释作为追寻立法者意图的方法而消解了司法者的历史性,解释学的本体论转向使这一企图成为无法实现的空想,但也由此强化了法律解释的创造性而解构法治的确定性,而现代的法律解释理论将解释学的方法论纳入其本体论框架之中,实现了本体论解释学对法律解释的建设意义。【英文摘要】 Gada
5、mers philosophical hermeneutics study the history of thought in the interpretation of the history of an extremely important position to explain its philosophy to create a study set up a system to explain the history of the second study Copernican revolution, to complete the explanation of the method
6、ology to the study by the ontology complete turn, laid the study to explain their philosophy and the history of the status of expression.It is in this larger context of this article attempts to explain the philosophy of Gadamer study analysis to explore its impact on legal interpretation.Chapter I o
7、f this article from the main representative of the thought and opinion in the study and philosophy to explain the interpretation made a study card. And separately for Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamers hermeneutic theory one by one to do the introduction.That Gadamers philosophical herm
8、eneutics theory (with its three core concepts: pre-understanding, the effect of history and the fusion of horizons) for the law to the interpretation of the study guide and reference.Gadamer thesis to explain the second part of study to learn the meaning of legal interpretation. Explained that the s
9、tudy will be limited to our vision of simple text, legislators, or the current policy is expected, can assist in obtaining legal meaning of truth. These perspectives should be concerted efforts and complement each other.Gadamers Hermeneutics as a legal interpretation of the current interpretation of
10、 the text, as well as perspective and the historical perspective of the legislators of the dialogue between. Legal interpretation of the dialectic is not archeology or text of the opinion and the imposition of the interpreter, the interpreter nor the views of their own to replace the opinion of lega
11、l texts, but between these different points of view fruitful dialogue.At the level of theory, Gadamers explanation of the legal interpretation of dynamic study provides an important foundation of philosophy, will help build a general theory of legal interpretation and legal interpretation to conside
12、r some special problems, such as the interpretation of rules, legislative history and legal precedent for the use of such issues as the role to help.The third part of our thesis study can type from the object to the legal interpretation of Gadamers main opinion in the legal interpretation of some of
13、 the insights. To Gadamers philosophical theory on the basis of the objection, for Gadamer dynamic theory of legal interpretation there are three objections.Of course, the majority of anti-democratic concern for the plight of legal culture in the West are for the judges before a total understanding,
14、 and also help ensure that judges in the legal interpretation of the law can in a responsible way should be interpreted. However, the interpretation of the study are inspired by the plight of the anti-democratic and the majority can not take a more restrictive approach to the solution.The first has
15、been widely involved in the “anti-democracy and the plight of the majority”, the dynamic object to the view that legal interpretation of the disregard of Parliament as a primary or even exclusive constitutional status of the main legislation. Object to the views of this problem is to explain the stu
16、dy has indicated that for a long time ago through the interpretation of the law the judge will inevitably have to use their creativity, and creative use of such would also be welcome.From a philosophical level, the focus of the study to explain the conversion affect the development of the theory of legal interpretation to the traditional theory of legal interpretation will explain the intention of the legislators as a way to trace the digestion of the hist
