论文部分内容阅读
在法律实证主义的理论框架中,承认规则奠定了法律规范性的基础。围绕如何说明承认规则的性质,存在两种竞争性的理论。社会成规理论认为承认规则是一种存在于法官之间的社会成规,而规划理论则认为该规则是一种旨在合理解决共同生活中出现的合作难题的共享合作规划。然而,只有规划理论所提供的规范性说明,符合法律实证主义对法律规范性的基本看法,因此规划理论是最佳的法律实证主义理论。但规划理论成立所预设的理论前提和法律实证主义对法律规范性的基本看法之间存在内在的紧张。这也说明规划理论可能是最好也是最后的法律实证主义理论。
In the theoretical framework of legal positivism, recognition of rules laid the foundation of legal normativeness. There are two competing theories around how to explain the nature of the recognition rules. The socio-formalism holds that admitting rules is a social convention existing between judges, while planning theory considers the rules as a shared cooperative plan that aims to reasonably solve the cooperation problems that arise in common life. However, only the normative statements provided by planning theory are in line with the basic legal legal legitimacy of legal positivism, so planning theory is the best legal positivism theory. However, there are inherent tensions between the theoretical premises presupposed by the establishment of planning theory and the basic view of legal positivism on legal normativeness. This also shows that planning theory may be the best and final legal positivism.