论文部分内容阅读
类推解释是指解释边界、事实到事实的判断以及规则到原则的规范解读路径。类推解释反对论深受分析哲学影响,基于数理逻辑与形式正义诠释规范文义,但并没提出有效的类推解释界分措施,致使其可行性与可信性受到颇多质疑。类推解释赞同论在哲学层面上多受语言哲学影响,主张吸收语用学的优点以推动法律语言的理解。然而,赞同论过于青睐语境色彩与价值导向,致使规范文义确定性受到威胁。鉴于语言的开放性、诠释的本体性、认知的语用性,希望通过构建类推解释界限无疑是困难的,不过,围绕类推解释建构若干有效措施(如,探寻刑法规范目的、解读符合语言习惯、进行合宪性分析等)以最大程度抑制越权解释则是可行的。
Analogy interpretation refers to the interpretation of the border, the facts to the fact that the judge and the rules to the principle of the normative interpretation of the path. The analogical interpretation of opposition theory is deeply influenced by analytic philosophy, based on mathematical logic and formal justice to interpret the normative literary, but did not put forward effective analogy interpretation of the sub-measures, resulting in its feasibility and credibility of many questioned. The analogical interpretation of homophism is more philosophically influenced by linguistic philosophy, and advocates the absorption of the advantages of pragmatics to promote the understanding of legal language. However, agreeing to be overly-favored by contextual values and values leads to a threat to the normative literal certainty. In view of the openness of language, the noumenon of interpretation and the pragmatism of cognition, it is undoubtedly difficult to hope that the boundary of interpretation can be constructed by analogy. However, some effective measures are constructed based on analogy (for example, to explore the purpose of criminal law, , Conduct a constitutional analysis, etc.) in order to minimize the ultra vires interpretation is feasible.