查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 康德哲學抑或結構一般法學說?--凱爾森法理論(純粹法學說)淵源澄清
- 牟宗三先生對於康德哲學有一涵蓄的反向嗎﹖
- 牟宗三先生對於康德哲學有一涵蓄的反向嗎﹖
- 通往「體系」之路:青年黑格爾體系的萌芽與其對康德哲學的批判
- 先驗思維與康德的批判哲學體系
- 理性遠超過僅僅是吾人的囚車--康德哲學[Immanuel Kant]當代意義的省思:兩百週年逝世紀念
- The Metaphor of the Judge in the Critique of Pure Reason (B xiii ff): A Key for Interpreting
- What Does Kant Say about the Theoretical Recognition of God?
- 華人有關康德哲學的研究資料
- 《康德哲學問題的當代思索》自序
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 康德哲學抑或結構一般法學說?--凱爾森法理論(純粹法學說)淵源澄清=Kantian Philosophy or Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre?--A Clarification of the Origins of Hans Kelsen's Legal Theory |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 黎健初; | 書刊名 | 澳門法學 |
| 卷 期 | 2025:2=60 2025.06[民114.06] |
| 頁 次 | 頁126-144 |
| 分類號 | 580.1 |
| 關鍵詞 | 康德哲學; 康德法權學說; 結構一般法學說; 凱爾森法理論; 純粹法學說; Kantian philosophy; Kant's rechtslehre; Strukturale allgemeine rechtslehre; Hans Kelsen's legal theory; Pure theory of law; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 康德哲學被視為凱爾森法理論(純粹法學說)的主要理論淵源,它也成為了純粹法學說研 究的主流視角。儘管有學者主張,其他理論資源,尤其是興起於19世紀的結構一般法學說對純粹法學說 的產生和發展也有較大的影響,但由於相關研究未能澄清康德哲學與結構一般法學說的關係,更未能在 此基礎上探究純粹法學說受到的影響更多來自康德哲學還是結構一般法學說,該主張的說服力尚顯不 足,未能動搖主流觀點。本文通過揭示和論證康德哲學與結構一般法學說的分歧以及純粹法學說與結構 一般法學說的緊密聯繫,試圖破除學界對純粹法學說理論淵源的成見,為純粹法學說研究提供一種能夠 與主流視角競爭的新視角,以彌補時下凱爾森研究角度過於單一的不足。 |
| 英文摘要 | Kant's philosophy is regarded as a primary origin of Kelsen’s legal theory (the Pure Theory of Law). It has also become the dominant research perspective of the Pure Theory of Law. Although some scholars have claimed that other theoretical sources—particularly the Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre— had a significant influence on the emergence and development of the Pure Theory of Law, the relevant research has failed to clarify the relationship between Kantian philosophy and the Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre. Nor has it, on that basis, examined whether the Pure Theory of Law is more profoundly influenced by Kantian philosophy or by the Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre. As a result, this claim remains insufficiently persuasive and has not succeeded in challenging the dominant view regarding the origins of the Pure Theory of Law. By uncovering and demonstrating the differences between Kantian philosophy and the Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre, as well as the close connection between the Pure Theory of Law and the Strukturale Allgemeine Rechtslehre, this paper attempts to dispel academic prejudices regarding the origins of the Pure Theory of Law and offer a new perspective on its study —one that can serve as a viable alternative to the dominant perspective—in order to address the current lack of diversity in research perspectives on the Pure Theory of Law. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。