论司法裁判的不确定性从法律逻辑的视角

　　内容摘要：自 20 世纪 70 年代正式提出以来，法律逻辑便成为很多法学家研究的对象，对法律逻辑的研究也逐步深入，在当下法律逻辑学界的非形式逻辑更是对法律实务产生着重要影响。由此，也就体现了法律领域的逻辑应用顺应了逻辑学的发展需要。而随着我国建设法治国家的不断深入，法律正在越来越多地影响我们的社会生活，而司法裁判是法律实现的重要方式。随着社会的发展和法学研究的深入，人们越来越认识到，司法裁判是充满了变数和不确定因素的动态曲折的过程而并非完全确定的单向的直线的发展过程。
　　因此，以法律逻辑的视角审视司法裁判这一动态过程并寻求对司法裁判过程进行指引的法律逻辑方法便具有极其重要的意义。
　　本文就以法律逻辑的视角审视司法裁判过程中法律逻辑方法的应用，并把这一主题作为研究内容，试图通过对司法裁判基本内涵的分析出发，深度发掘导致司法裁判不确定性的各类因素，进而寻求能有效控制司法裁判不确定性的法律逻辑方法。本文主要分为以下五部分：
　　第一部分为绪论。该部分从论述我国法治建设现状出发，法治建设就离不开传统观念所表明的两个方面：“普遍服从良法”，即“已成立的法律获得普遍的服从，而大家所服从的法律又应该本身是制定得良好的法律”。而众所周知，要使得法律得以很好的服从就必然离不开司法裁判这一动态过程，正是这一过程使得法律得以实现。要使得司法裁判的作用得以发挥，就必然要求司法裁判的权威性、确定性。
　　第二部分为司法裁判不确定性概述。这一部分主要包括三个方面：一是司法裁判不确定性的涵义，司法裁判是指国家审判机关将法律规范适用于具体案件事实从而作出某种结论这样一个动态的过程。二是司法裁判不确定性的特征，司法裁判的不确定性有以下两个特征：客观性--通过论述，我们可以看到，司法裁判不确定性因素是客观存在的，并不以参与这一过程的人员的意志为转移；可控性--虽然司法裁判不确定性是客观存在的，但是司法裁判不确定性的现象并不是绝对的任意的，而是相对的有限制的，而这种不确定性是可以通过限制多种不确定性因素得到控制的，特别是法律逻辑的相关方法会在这一过程中起到很重要的作用。三是司法裁判不确定性的负面影响。司法裁判不确定性产生着许多负面的影响，主要体现在个案影响和对法律价值的毁损两个方面。
　　第三部分为司法裁判不确定性的成因剖析。司法裁判不确定性的出现是由多种原因导致的。主要有司法裁判的被动性、事实的不可重现性（尤其是法律事实认定上的难度）、法律规则的不确定性（主要体现在法律概念的不确定性上面）三种原因。
　　第四部分为法律逻辑对司法裁判不确定性的控制。这也是本文重点论述的地方，论述了法律逻辑对司法裁判不确定性的有效控制，分为三个部分：类比推理、法律概念内涵与外延的明晰以及两者的互动机制。首先，对类比推理对司法裁判不确定性的控制进行论述。类比推理是法律推理的一种基本形式，在司法裁判过程中有着举足轻重的作用。
　　本文主要是从类比推理中比较特殊的一种推理方式：案例类比出发进行论述。类比推理体现了相同案件相同处理的基本法律原则，判例制度对司法裁判人员的思维亦能产生一定影响，从而大大降低司法裁判过程中的不确定性。其次，司法裁判这一动态过程离不开法律规则，而法律规则又是由许多法律概念构成，对这些法律概念尤其是不确定法律概念的内涵与外延进行明晰有着非常重要的作用。最后，司法裁判不确定性是多种因素共同作用的结果，单纯某一方法均不能使其得到有效控制。因此，只有法律概念内涵与外延的明晰与类比推理甚至其他法律逻辑方法进行协作的互动机制才是对司法裁判不确定性进行有效控制的最好方法。
　　结语部分重申了本文重点论述内容，并指出其中的问题，希望通过整个法律逻辑学界的共同努力寻求一些行之有效的方法对司法裁判过程进行指引。

　　关键词：司法裁判；法律逻辑；法律事实；法律概念；类比推理； 定义

　　Abstract：Since being putting out officially in the 1970s, the theory of legal logic has beenset as the research subject of many jurists. With further research, the non-formedthought has exerted a substantial influence upon the legal practice. Thus, it proves thatthe practice of legal logic has adapted the development of logical theory. Also, as thelegal construction of our country gets strengthened, the law is affecting our life moreand more. Justice is the most important way of law realization. As the socialdevelopment and law research goes deeper, people get to realize that the process ofjustice is full of uncertainty which is changeable but not always a one-way line.
　　Therefore, seeing the justice in the view of legal logic and seeking the legal logicalmethod as the guide of the process of justice is of great significance.
　　The paper looks into the applying of legal logic in the process of justice in theview of legal logical theory, and takes the topic as the research subjection, trying toanalyze the basis of justice, then finds out the elements which leads to uncertainty ofjustice in order to seek for a legal logical method which could effectively avoids it.
　　The first part is the introduction. It begins with the current situation of the legalconstruction of our country: the legal construction is intensely associated with thisfamous motto saying by Aristotle “the legislation and rules should be widely obeyedwhile the legislation and rules which are widely obeyed are supposed to be goodones.” As far as we know, in order to make the law obeyed well, we couldn’t drop thedynamic process of justice. And it is the process that makes the law effectivelyrealized. If we want the justice exerts its influence, we need to guarantee the authorityand certainty of justice.
　　The second part is talking about the uncertainty of justice. It contains three pointsas followings: The definition of uncertainty of justice. The justice is a dynamicprocess in which the Judge applies the law and rules into specific cases and forms ajudgment. The features of uncertainty of justice: one is the objectivity--we shouldsee the uncertainty of justice as objective and can’t be controlled by the willing ofhuman being who participates in that process; the other one is the controllability--even the uncertainty of justice objectively exists, it would never be in a random.
　　It is comparative and limited; therefore we could control the uncertainty by limitingthe elements which lead to it in which the relevant methods of legal logical theory willbe of great influence. The negative side of the uncertainty of justice: it produces manynegative influences which mainly reflect on the specific case and the destruction oflegal values.
　　The third part is the analysis of the uncertainty of justice. The is mainly becauseof the passivity of justice、the disability of re-existing of facts(especially the difficultyof indentifying the legal facts)、the uncertainty of legal rules(mainly reflected in theuncertain of the definition of legal concept).
　　The fourth part is trying to explain how the legal logic could control theuncertainty of justice which is also the key to this whole paper. It divides into threeparts: to make definite the legal concept、analogical reasoning and the interactionmechanism of both of them. First, it discusses the meaning of the definition of legalconcept, and step further into the situation in which how the Jurists and legalpractitioners apply the definition of legal concept in the process of justice. Second, ittalks about the control of uncertainty of justice. Analogical reasoning is one basicform of legal reasoning which plays quite an important role in the justice. It is talkingfrom cases analog which is also one of the most special analogical reasoning.
　　Analogical reasoning exemplifies the same basic law principles in the same cases;besides, the case law also effects on the Judges so to lower down the uncertainty ofjustice. Last but not least, the uncertainty is caused of the combination of differentelements and couldn’t be effectively controlled by one single way. Therefore, only theusing both the definition of legal concept and analogical reasoning with other legallogical methods paralleling could the uncertainty in the process of justice beeffectively manipulated.
　　The conclusion reviews the main contents the whole paper is talking about andpoints the problems, and expects some effective way guiding the justice through theuniting efforts of the whole legal logical academicians.

　　Key Words：Justice；Legal Logic；Legal Facts；Legal Concept；AnalogicalReasoning；Define

　　目 录
　　一、绪论
　　二、司法裁判不确定性概述
　    　（一）司法裁判不确定性的涵义
　    　（二）司法裁判不确定性的特征
　    　1.客观性
　    　2.可控性
　    　（三）司法裁判不确定性的负面影响
　    　1.个案影响
　    　2.法律价值的损毁
　　三、司法裁判不确定性的成因剖析
　    　（一）司法裁判的被动性
　    　（二）事实的不可重现性
　    　1.事实的基本界定
　    　2.法律事实的认定
　    　3.法律事实认定的不确定性对司法裁判的影响
　    　（三）法律规则的不确定性
　    　1.法律规则语言的局限性
　    　2.法律规则的缺失
　    　3.法律规则的滞后性
　　四、法律逻辑对司法裁判不确定性的控制
　    　（一）类比推理
　    　1.类比推理的含义
　    　2.类比推理的理论渊源
　    　3.类比推理对司法裁判不确定性的控制
　    　（二）法律概念内涵与外延的明晰
　    　1.不确定法律概念释义
　    　2.不确定法律概念的理论渊源
　    　3.不确定法律概念内涵与外延的明晰对司法裁判不确定性的控制
　    　（三）两种逻辑方法的互动机制
　　结 语
　　致 谢
　　参考文献