拉兹法律权威理论中的理由范式研究

【作者】 王琦；

【导师】 庞正；

【作者基本信息】 南京师范大学 ， 法学理论， 2023， 博士

【摘要】 “人们为何服从法律”与法律权威命题相对应,该命题长期处于不同法学派学者的争论之中。拉兹认为对法律权威进行传统的概念分析的方法,无法彰显法律权威自身的品格,而“理由”范式可以实现补足。这一范式与实践哲学同出一脉,对个体行为的基础及根据展开了系统研究,分析了个体行动的具体理由。“理由”既可视为拉兹联结法律与权威概念的“桥梁”,更可以作为打开拉兹深邃的法哲学和政治哲学思想的一把关键的“钥匙”。拉兹的理由范式建基于哈特法理论之上,尽管哈特并没有形成与“法律权威”直接关联的论断,但其在晚年提出了“独立于内容的阻断性理由”命题,也即法律提供了一种独立于内容并具有阻断性的行动理由。该命题的提出使其法理论更具可理解性,也由此对法律权威的解释形成了重要意义。拉兹通过实践的理由范式,在将规则确立为排他性理由的同时,以证成规则具有实践权威的方式赋予了规则以规范性。拉兹对于法律权威的理解克服了哈特法理论的不足,其以实践哲学为基础将法律的权威与规范性的权威相结合,一定程度上是对法律实证主义的更新。权威的常见分类有两组:一是理论权威和实践权威;二是事实权威和合法性权威。法律作为一种权威,背后蕴含的是理由的支撑。权威是改变理由的能力,以理由为分析概念对权威进行论证标志着权威成为了一种实践性概念。拉兹提及的行动理由具备解释、评价与引导三个方面的具体功能。在我们思考某个行动时,通常会同时存在许多理由,不同理由之间既有可能相互兼容,也有可能发生冲突。一阶理由与二阶理由的划分是拉兹的一大创造性贡献。一阶理由是法律权威的基础,尽管法律权威所提供的理由试图阻断人们对一阶理由的思考,但只有其权威本身立基于道德性之后,它才能完成这种运作。二阶理由本身不能成为行动的理由,但能够以干涉的形式对一阶理由的规范状态造成影响。二阶理由具备肯定与否定两种形态,否定的二阶理由也可谓之排他性理由,其在排除与之冲突的一阶理由之时以理由的具体类型为参照标准,并不考虑理由是否重要的因素。权威指令作为排他性理由,将与权威指令相悖的一阶理由予以排除,与其相兼容的理由则得以保留,因而其仅是从实践层面排除了行动者的部分思考。法律是具有权威的规范,因此无法与关于权威的讨论相区隔,并且这种权威是一种面向行动的实践权威。法律区别于强制的一个独特之处在于其对合法性权威的主张,民众因而有理由服从法律。实践权威同命令紧密相连,其为行动增加了一个排他性理由。法律与权威之间存在必然关联,法律的排他性来源于权威。法律规则可视为行动的理由,也即要求行动者遵守这一理由,此种约束力是在法律权威具备独立性的框架之下产生的。拉兹以理由为基础所构建的服务性权威观,彰显了法律自身的权威性。在此种权威观的指导下,其构筑了以“权威-规则-理由”为内容的整体性法律权威理论。拉兹的理由范式引发了内在论与外在论的论争。拉兹通过揭示规则作为理由的独特性对此论争予以回应,认为法律权威属于特别的行动理由,法律规范属于一种权威性理由。法律所具备的权威与道德无涉,具备指导人的行为的功能。这一论断正是拉兹强社会论(渊源命题)的核心,并由权威命题予以支撑。其进一步认为,理由的排他性特征和内容的独立性特征,是权威命题得以立论的基础,任何社会规范都必须在实践中找寻其合法性,这也是经由理由范式所深刻揭示的。从形式上看,法律具有权威,这来自法律本身所提供的理由,而不依赖于作为规则承受者的个人或集体对它的解释、承认或接受。对于人们为何服从法律这一命题而言,尚存在外在客观理由和内在主观理由之分。法律规则作为社会规则的一种,显然以一定的社会现实秩序为基础,由此得到了社会主体的内在认同,内在认同也成为了促成社会主体遵守法律的规制力的来源。良法之治应当以形塑此种规制力为要旨,即致力于引导社会主体在内在认同的基础上遵守法律。如若该要旨得以实现,那么绝大多数社会成员会基于自身的主观认同,自觉地遵守并服从法律,法律至上的观念也将由此以一种“看不见的权威”的形式深入人心。更多还原

【Abstract】 "Why do people obey the law"corresponds to the proposition of legal authority,which has long been debated by scholars of different schools of law.Raz believes that the traditional conceptual analysis of legal authority cannot highlight the character of legal authority itself,while the"reason"paradigm can complement it.This paradigm is in the same vein as practical philosophy,which conducts systematic research on the basis and basis of individual behavior,and analyzes the specific reasons for individual actions."Reason"can be regarded not only as a"bridge"between Raz’s concept of law and authority,but also as a key"key"to unlock Raz’s profound legal philosophy and political philosophy.Raz’s justification paradigm is based on Hart’s theory of law.Raz’s reasoning paradigm is based on Hart’s theory of law,and although Hart did not form an assertion directly related to legal authority,he put forward the proposition of"blocking reason independent of content"in his later years,that is,the law provides a content-independent and blocking reason for action.The proposal of this proposition makes the theory of law more understandable,and thus forms an important significance for the interpretation of legal authority.Through the paradigm of practical reasons,Raz gives rules normativity in a way that proves that rules have practical authority,while establishing them as exclusive reasons.Raz’s understanding of legal authority overcomes the shortcomings of Hart’s theory of law.It combines legal authority with normative authority on the basis of practical philosophy,which is an update of legal positivism to to some extentThere are two common classifications of authority:one is theoretical authority and practical authority;the second is the authority of facts and legitimacy.As a kind of authority,the law is supported by reason.Authority is the ability to change reasons,and using reasons as an analytical concept to demonstrate authority marks that authority has become a practical concept.The reason for action mentioned by Raz have three specific functions:explanation,evaluation and guidance.When we think about an action,there are usually many reasons at the same time,and the different reasons may be compatible or conflicting.The division of first-order reason and second-order reason is a major creative contribution of Raz.First-order reason are the basis of legal authority,and although the reason provided by legal authority attempt to block people’s thinking about first-order reason,it can only complete this operation if its authority itself is based on morality.The second-order reason itself cannot be a reason for action,but it can affect the normative status of the first-order reason in the form of interference.The second-order reason has two forms:positive and negative.The second-order reason of negation can also be called an exclusive reason.When excluding the first-order reason that conflicts with it,the specific type of reason is used as the reference standard,regardless of whether the reason is important.As an exclusive reason,the authoritative order excludes the first-order reason that is contrary to the authoritative order,while the reason that is compatible with it is retained,so it only excludes part of the actor’s thinking from the practical level.Law is an authoritative norm,and thus cannot be separated from discussions about authority,and this authority is an action-oriented practical authority.A unique distinction between law and coercion is its assertion of legitimacy and authority,which gives the population reason to obey the law.Practical authority is closely linked to command,which adds an exclusive reason to action.There is an inevitable relationship between law and authority,and the exclusivity of law derives from authority.Legal rules can be regarded as reason for action,which means that actors are required to abide by this reason.This binding force is produced under the framework of the independence of legal authority.Raz’s view of service authority based on reason demonstrates the authority of the law itself.Under the guidance of this view of authority,it constructs a holistic legal authority theory with"authority-rules-reason"as its content.Raz’s reason paradigm sparked the debate between internalism and externalism.Raz responded to this debate by revealing the uniqueness of rules as reason,arguing that legal authority belongs to a particular reason for action and legal norms to an authoritative reason.The authority of the law has nothing to do with morality,and has the function of guiding human behavior.This assertion is the core of Raz’s social theory(origin proposition),and it is supported by the authority proposition.It further believes that the exclusive characteristics of reason and the independence of content are the basis for the establishment of authoritative propositions,and any social norms must find their legitimacy in practice,which is also profoundly revealed by the reason paradigm.From a formal point of view,law has authority from the reason provided by the law itself,without relying on its interpretation,recognition or acceptance by individuals or groups as rule-bearers.For the proposition of why people obey the law,there is still a distinction between external objective reason and internal subjective reason.As a kind of social rules,legal rules are obviously based on a certain social reality order,which has obtained the internal recognition of social subjects,and internal identification has also become the source of the regulatory force that promotes social subjects to abide by the law.The rule of good law should take the shaping of this regulatory force as the main purpose,that is,it is committed to guiding social subjects to abide by the law on the basis of internal recognition.If this gist is realized,then the vast majority of social members will consciously abide by and obey the law based on their own subjective identification,and the concept of the supremacy of law will thus be deeply rooted in the hearts of the people in the form of an"invisible authority".更多还原