頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 法律語句及其意義之矛盾性--法律概念之分析與理解=The Ambivalence between the Legal Words and Its Significance--The Analysis and Comprehension of the Legal Concept |
---|---|
作 者 | 郭德厚; | 書刊名 | 國立中正大學法學集刊 |
卷 期 | 22 2007.05[民96.05] |
頁 次 | 頁41-94 |
分類號 | 580.1 |
關鍵詞 | 法律語句; 意義; 矛盾性; 指示對象; 法律概念區分理論; 法律概念同一性理論; 功能; 類型; 原則; 規則; Legal words; Significance; Ambivalence; Referent; The formal significance of the legal concept; Material significance of the legal concept; Function; Type; Principle; Rule; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 這篇文章嘗試藉由變遷與功能之觀點來分析法律概念,思考重點係置於法概念本身所產生之效力面向,並且在方法上運用類型以及原則論證之觀點,重新來詮釋法律概念。本文論證重心並不在於法學理論結構上之精緻性,而在於揭示法律語句及其意義之間的各種可能關係,毋寧說這是一種發現其實的思考過程。期盼於分析之後可更進一步認識「法律概念」此一指示對象的可能本質、結構及其內容。筆者認為,作為「規則」型態之形式意義之法律概念與作為「原則」型態之實質意義之法律概念,始終具有相互溝通、補充之可能性。因此,憲法第一百七十條僅說明了法律之形式意義,至於形式意義與實質意義相互結合之狀況,則應由類型觀點與原則論證予以補充。不同學門的知識相互參與挪用固然具有工具關係,可以增進、改善思考操作上的合目的性;不過由於知識本身的巨大性,有可能在認識論上產生滲透效果而翻轉整個思考態度。筆者藉由語言及其意義是否可能產生斷裂此一分析思路,展開對法律這個話語及其意義之間的論證,其中法律此話語所處之「意向環境」以及與其關聯之「外觀察對象」的探討,是認識法律此一指示對象的重要資訊。易言之,對於法律概念之觀察不可執念於靜態之結構模式,因為任何事物之合理性絕非客觀的存在,而係由一系列動態辯證過程中所獲致。於此同時,法律概念方可自概念性符碼轉化為如何使用之意向。惟筆者以為,此一思路並未逸脫法釋義學之思考,因為所關注者仍在於邏輯上的無反駁性以及論證上的融貫性。 |
英文摘要 | This paper attempts to analyze the legal concept by the viewpoint of the change and the function. This article thought that the legal concept should observe from the legal effect side. At the same time it will have an annotation through the principle proof and type thought. The discussion does not lie in the fineness of the legal theory structure, but in the solution of real issue. Namely, this is one kind of function-like thought, the goal should lie in the meaning of the instruction and content. The Constitution Article 170 only stipulates the formal significance of the legal concept. The material significance of the legal concept obtains from the interactive relations between the principle and the rule. It is a tool relations between the different professional knowledge of discipline,and it may increase the efficiency of the making knowledge. It is possible that the transformation of the thinking manner may happen as a result of the permeability of the knowledge. The purpose of this article try to analyze the relations between the legal words and its the significance by the ambivalence between the language and its significance. But, I considered that this paper still was a viewpoint of the legal dogmatism. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。