【作者】 彭美；

【导师】 潘佳铭； 崔延强； 陶林；

【作者基本信息】 西南师范大学 ， 外国哲学， 2002， 硕士

【摘要】 本文选取了一位当代享有盛誉的美国法学家罗纳德·德沃金(Ronald Dworhn)作为研究对象，主要考察了他以权利论和原则论为基础的解释论法律思想，《法律帝国》一书就是这一思想的集中体现。在这部书中，德沃金批判了因袭主义和法律实用主义的法律观，提出了作为整体性的法律观。所谓整体性是指一种政治道德原则，也是一种独特的政治理想，包括立法中的整体性原则和判决中的整体性原则。整体性的原则要求法官在判决时，若法律规则清楚明确，那么法官应当按遵循先例的原则对类似的案件给予类似的判决；若法律规则含混不清或模棱两可，法官就可以不适用规则而适用一般法律原则；即使在适用一般原则也有困难时(例如存在着多个法律原则时)，法官还可以诉诸更广阔的超出法律范围的政治道德原则或理想。德沃金坚信在英美社会中法律文化与政治道德原则具有高层次上的一致性。因此，法官在对疑难案件的判决中的主要任务就是找出并保持这种“一致性”，避免损害公民权利的判决，以期在新的情况下继续保持法律的整体性。 但是，通常的情况是在一个疑难案件中，法官可能发现同时存在着两种以上互相竞争的政治道德原则可供选择。在这种情况下，德沃金建议法官选择“在他看来距抽象正义的要求最接近的解释。”也即是说法官必须决定哪些基本的价值观念(如自由、平等、个人权利等)更居优势地位。这样一来，解释又上升到了一个至关重要的地位，解释成为德沃金研究论证的重点。正是在此意义上，笔者将德沃金在《法律帝国》一书中表达的法律思想称为解释论法律思想。 －2－ 文章除“引言”外，拟分三部分进行论述： 第一章，以什么是法律这个基本问题开篇，德沃金指出过去的法理学家没有能够提 出令人信服的学说。他站在法官的角度主要关注司法过程，提出了自己的观点：法律是 一种解释性概念。通过简要追溯解释学的发展历史，德沃金论证了他所理解的“解释” 概念。 第二章，从“法律是一种解释性概念”的观点出发，德沃金认为有三种对法律解释 的看法，分别代表了三种法律观，它们分别是因袭主义、法律实用主义和作为整体性的 法律。德沃金集中批判了因袭主义和法律实用主义的法律观，论证了他认为最合理的法 律观，即作为整体性的法律观。 第三章，法律的整体性体现在立法中的整体性和审判中的整体性。德沃金详细论证 了整体性的法律观不仅适合、而且充分地解释了美国的宪政结构和法律实践。更多还原

【Abstract】 This essay chooses a jurist named Ronald Dworkin, who is very famous at present in America, as the object of study. It mainly inspects the law ideology of the theory of interpretations, which is based on the theory of rights and the theory of principles. The book Law’s Empire has epitomized such thought. In this book, Dworkin has criticized the legal concept of conventionalism and legal pragmatism and put forward the law as integrity. What is known as integrity refers to a kind of political moral principle that is to say a kind of unique political ideal. It contains the integrity principle in legislature and judgment. The integrity principle requires judge to pay attention when they pronounced on somebody, if the law principle is clear and definite the judge should follow the precedent to deal with the similar cases. If the law principle is ambiguous or equivocal, the judge can use average law principle not according to the rule. Even if there are some problems during using average law principle (for example when there exist many law principles) the judge can adopt much wider political moral principle or ideal which is beyond law range. Dworkin confirmed law culture and political moral principle have high administrative level consistency in British and American society. So the main task is to find and maintain the consistency, avoid from damaging the judgment of citizen rights and go on keeping the integrity of law in the new condition when judge deals with hard cases.However, as usual, the judge may find that there are over two mutual competitive political principles to be chosen. In this case, Dworkin suggested the judge to choose "The closest interpretation to the demand of abstract justice in his opinion". In other words, the judge should decide which elementary values gain the upper hand (such as freedom, equality, personal rights and so on). In this way, the interpretation rise up to a position of the utmost importance, and becoming the focal point of Dworkin’s research demonstration. Just in this condition, the author named the law ideology in law’s Empire as the law ideology theory of interpretation.The article is divided into three sections:Section I, Beginning with the basic problem that what’s the law, Dworkin pointed out that the jurist in past time wasn’t able to put forth the convincing theory. He mainly paid attention to the administration of justice course from the angle of the judge, and gave his opinion: The law is explanatory conception. Tracing back to the evolution history of heraieneutics, Dworkin proved the explanatory conception that he understood.Section II, From the opinion that is "the law is explanatory conception", Dworkin considers that there are three kinds of the opinions of it which stand for three kinds of legal idea, encompassing the conventionalism, the legal pragmatism and the law as integrity. Dworkin mainly criticized the conventionalism and legal pragmatism’s legal idea, and argued the legal idea that is the most reasonable. That is the law as integrity.Sectionin, Law as integrity reflect on the integrity of legislating and judging Dworkin elaborately proved that the law as integrity not only fitted for, but also exclaimed sufficiently the constitutional political structure and the law practice of the United States.更多还原