查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 純粹法學如何看待規範與現實的關係?--以司法院釋字第728號解釋之檢討為例
- 文化傳承與社會批判--回顧Apel, Habermas, Gadamer, Ricoeur間的詮釋學論爭
- 「社會改革」之文化層面思維
- 家庭政策之兩難--從傳統意識型態出發
- 傳統領域/主權爭議中的基督信仰
- 「擬仿文化研究、調動文體要素、深化寫實觀」共同建構的文體意識型態 --論韓少功《暗示》的小說文體實驗
- 凱爾生:《純粹法學第一版》導讀
- John Makeham訪談林安梧論「新儒學」與「後新儒學」(2)
- John Makeham訪談林安梧論「新儒學」與「後新儒學」(1)
- 臺語流行文化的傳統意識型態及解構性質分析--以「鐵獅玉玲瓏」為例
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 純粹法學如何看待規範與現實的關係?--以司法院釋字第728號解釋之檢討為例=The Relationship between Norm and Reality from the Perspective of the Pure Theory of Law: A Methodological Critique of J. Y. Interpretation No. 728 |
---|---|
作 者 | 黃舒芃; | 書刊名 | 政治與社會哲學評論 |
卷 期 | 56 2016.03[民105.03] |
頁 次 | 頁163-211 |
分類號 | 580.1 |
關鍵詞 | 純粹法學; 應然與實然; 規範與現實; 祭祀公業; 傳統; 意識型態; Pure theory of law; Is and ought; Norm and reality; Ancestor worship; Tradition; Ideology; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 純粹法學(Reine Rechtslehre; Pure Theory of Law)主張「應然與實然的區分」,眾所皆知。然而,如果進一步追問:這個主張究何所指?其重點何在?又如何在法律世界當中彰顯其意義?則恐怕不只是無法得到清楚解答,反而還可能看見各式各樣的誤會和曲解。長久以來,純粹法學因為主張應然與實然的區分,而往往被認為是一種與現實脫節,因而耽溺於形式主義的象牙塔理論。然而這樣的論斷不僅暴露出對純粹法學的嚴重誤解,也往往忽略了主張「規範與現實密切結合」本身的盲點。有鑑於此,本文透過釋字第728號解釋的案例檢討,指出在純粹法學觀點下,混淆規範與現實究竟會造成什麼樣的弊端,並藉此澄清純粹法學區分規範與現實的主旨與目的何在。 |
英文摘要 | The Pure Theory of Law has long been recognized as one of the most significant and influential legal theories in the world. Nevertheless, the way it looks at the relation between norm and reality has invited so many misunderstandings that its well-known argument for a clear distinction between norm and reality has repeatedly been criticized for isolating legal norms from the real world. Through a critical analysis of the reasoning of J. Y. Interpretation No. 728, this essay purports not only to illustrate why and how numerous misunderstandings of the Pure Theory of Law have occurred, but also to clarify the relationship between norm and reality in light of the Pure Theory of Law. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。