Vol.658 域外法学 | 《法哲学与社会哲学论丛》（ARSP) 第106卷（2020）第3期

Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosphie

《法哲学与社会哲学论丛》  

                   Volume 106, Number 3 | September 2020

《法哲学与社会哲学论丛》（Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie）由国际法哲学与社会哲学协会（IVR）出版发行。自1907年创刊以来，期刊注目于社会生活、法律文化及其交互作用的智识基础，进而开展法哲学基础研究。期刊接纳所有的当下思想学派，并尤为注重国际视野。同侪评审的程序保证了刊文的高学术水准。

《法哲学与社会哲学论丛》现任主编为乌尔弗里德·诺依曼（Ulfrid Neumann），德国法兰克福大学法哲学、法社会学、刑法和刑事诉讼法学教授，国际法哲学与社会哲学协会前主席（2011-2015），拉德布鲁赫基金会主席。

01

知性牺牲？

Sacrificium Intellectus?

van den Daele, Wolfgang

基督教神学以“知性牺牲”为设想来说明圣保罗的预言，即他将要“俘获一切思想，顺从基督”。人类的洞察力让位于宗教揭示的真理。在现代西方文化中，解释自然世界已然成为科学的领域，规定我们应如何生活的集体性规则的强制措施已经转移至民主选举的议会手中。在德国，生物伦理立法的正当化通常要依靠一些违反认知理性的标准证成。这是知性牺牲的另一实例吗？联邦宪法法院通过承认对立法者的赞美之词来避免受立法讨论的控制。然而，人们有辩护的权利，他们绝不能屈服于专断的法律权力。虽然民主统治的实践可能很少符合“经过讨论的政府”的期望，但也不可能作为“不经讨论的政府”而被接受。将法律强制力加诸于错误的论证和荒谬的推理之上的行为不是一种合法的知性牺牲，而是智力丑闻。

Christian theology conceives of ‘sacrificium intellectus’ to account for the message of Saint Paul that he will “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5). Human insight gives way to the revealed truths of religion. In modern western cultures to explain the natural world has become the domain of science, and the imposition of collective rules of how we should live was shifted to democratically elected parliaments. In Germany legislation of bioethical issues is often justified with reasons that violate standards of cognitive rationality. Is this another case of sacrificium intellectus? The Federal Constitutional Court refrains from the control of legislative arguments by conceding a broad margin of appreciation for the legislator. People have, however, a right to justification; they must not be subjected to arbitrary legal power. While the practice of democratic rule may seldom comply with the expectations of ‘government by discussion’, it is neither likely to gain acceptance as ‘government without discussion’. To impose legal force on the basis of false arguments and unsound reasoning is not a legitimate sacrificium intellectus, it is an intellectual scandal.

02

国家中立性、道德多元主义和针对协助自杀行为的议会决定

Staatliche Neutralität, Moralischer Pluralismus Und Die Parlamentarische Entscheidung Zum Assistierten Suizid

Schöpke, Alexander

国家对其公民在幸福生活上的不同概念观保持中立，是自由与多元宪制的基本核心。本文旨在分析，德国宪法中关于各种中立性的陈述在议会对协助自杀的决定上受到尊重的程度。作者发现，在议会决定禁止商业性协助自杀时（“业务性协助自杀罪”，刑法典第217条），德国联邦议院在机会和论证上没有采用充分中立的方式。从法律上的论证来看，德国联邦议院的成员错误地将基本法第4条和第38条中不同的良心概念等同视之。如此一来，议会的多数成员将其关于善终的个人道德观以多数决的方式转化为普遍有效的法律。结果，德国联邦议院在很大程度上限制了在善终问题上偏离法律规定的多元道德理论的实施，因而也限制了宪法保障的公民个人的良心自由。

The neutrality of a state towards different theories of its citizens’ conceptions of the good life is an essential core of liberal, pluralistic constitutions. The purpose of this article is to analyze the extent to which various types of neutrality stated in the German constitution were respected in the parliamentary decision on assisted suicide. The author finds that the German Bundestag did not act in a sufficiently neutral way with regard to opportunities and justification when parliament made its decision to prohibit business-like assistance to suicide (“Geschäftsmäßige Förderung der Selbsttötung”, § 217 Strafgesetzbuch). The law’s justification shows that the members of the German Bundestag mistakenly interpret the different concepts of conscience in Articles 4 and 38 Grundgesetz identically. In doing so, the majority of parliament has turned its individual moral concepts of good dying into a generally valid law by majority decision. As a result, the German Bundestag has considerably restricted the implementation of pluralistic moral theories of good dying that deviate from the one within the law, and thereby also the constitutionally guaranteed individual freedom of conscience of the citizens.

03

什么是法律的演化？

Was Heißt Evolution des Rechts?

Ladeur, H. C. Karl-Heinz

尼古拉斯·卢曼的演化理论聚焦于系统的内部复杂性，这一复杂性带来了多种不同的可能性。尽管通过适应变革，这一理论可以摆脱外部原因的观点。这样一种假定可与自创生系统的结构相容。根据这一观点的基本内容，社会转型中的破坏性进程也应不能阻碍有用的复杂性的结构和维持。这篇文章发展了一个论点，那就是如果法律实践的转型被纳入考虑，那么法律系统的中心（法院决定）和边缘（比如契约）的区别就不再是可信的。边缘日益增长的重要性迫使我们去观察实践对于演化过程的影响，而在系统中这种重要性不总是被预见的。

Niklas Luhmann’s theory of evolution is focused on the internal complexity of a system which brings a lot of varieties of possibilities into play, although it is capable of avoiding the idea of an external causation with the consequence of adaptation to innovation. Such an assumption would not be compatible with the construction of the autopoiesis of systems. Upon the basis of this idea, disruptive processes of societal transformation are also supposed to be unable to impede the construction and preservation of useful complexity. The article develops the argument that the distinction of a centre (court decisions) and a periphery (e. g., contracts) of the legal system is no longer plausible if the transformation of legal practices is taken into consideration. The increasing importance of the periphery compels us to observe the impact of practices on evolutionary processes which have not always already been anticipated by the system.

04

尼古拉斯•卢曼的权力理论

Niklas Luhmann’s Theory of Power

Konertz, Paul

尼克拉斯•卢曼以其社会系统理论而闻名。鲜为人知的是，他也是一个权力理论家。在他早期的作品《系统中的权力》(1969)和《权力》(1975)中，他提出了一种对于权力的全面理解，这种理解在很大程度上偏离了流行概念。对卢曼来说，权力不是一种能力，也不是人类的一种品质。对他而言，权力是交往过程的一部分，也是他早期的作为交往媒介的系统理论的一个中心方面。为了更好地理解，卢曼的权力概念首先被归入系统理论。然后，得出卢曼对于权力的理解的基本前提。最后，本文讨论了卢曼权力概念的一些方面，并将其置于一个更大的语境中。

Niklas Luhmann is particularly known for his sociological systems theory. He is less well known as a power theorist. In the early works “Macht im System” (1969) and “Macht” (1975), he presents a comprehensive understanding of power that deviates considerably from prevailing concepts. For Luhmann, power is not an ability or a human quality. For him, power is part of the communication process and a central aspect of his early systems theory as a communication medium. For a better understanding, Luhmann’s concept of power is first classified into systems theory. Then, the essential premises of Luhmann’s understanding of power are worked out. Finally, the paper discusses some aspects of Luhmann’s concept of power and places them in a larger context.

05

法的形成与文明过程

Rechtsgenese und Zivilisationsprozess

Benkel, Thorsten | Nienhaus, Christoph

本文以社会理论的比较观点为基础，探讨现代社会的规范基础（如布迪厄、涂尔干和卢曼的社会理论），并根据诺伯特·埃利亚斯（Norbert Elias）对文明过程的反思来探究法律的起源。其中的一个关键因素是对微观结构和宏观结构这一传统划分的超越，在埃利亚斯看来，这可以通过研究社会发生和心理发生之间的关系来实现，这之中，心理发生的发展是主要的焦点，从一个哲学人类学的角度来看，它也将在它对法律意识的出现的影响中被检验。

On the basis of comparative views on social theories that deal with the normative foundations of modern societies (such as those of Bourdieu, Durkheim and Luhmann), the genesis of law is examined in the light of Norbert Elias’ reflexions on the process of civilization. One crucial element is the surmounting of the traditional division between micro and macro structures, which, in Elias’ thought, can be achieved by taking into account the relation between sociogenesis and psychogenesis. The psychogenetic development serves as main focus, which - with regard also to Philosophical Anthropology - is examined in it’s effects on the emergence of legal awareness.

06

制度、子原则和规范

Institute, Unterprinzipien und Normen

di Carlo, Leonardo

本文将就制度模式进行新的解读。根据这种解读，笔者假定法律由法律制度构成，并且仅在法律规范为制度所包含时，法律规范才具有含义和规范性力量，因此法律规范仅存在于法律制度内部。本文提出的基本思想在于，试图将罗伯特·阿列克西的原则的规范性最佳化概念（normative optimization of principles）与制度理论联系起来：作为原则之最优化的法律规范，塑造了法律制度。

This paper will develop a new reading of the institutional pattern. According to this interpretation, legal norms exist only inside of legal institutions - on the assumption that law consists of legal institutions and that legal norms should have meaning and normative force only inside of them. At this basic idea the thesis, which this paper proposes, tries to connect Robert Alexy’s concept of normative optimization of principles to the institutional theory: legal norms as optimization of principles, which shape a legal institution.

07

黑格尔的战争理论

Hegels Theorie des Krieges

Nahm, Kiho

黑格尔既不是一个战争的崇拜者，也不是一个现实主义者，他在哲学上正确地看到了战争的不可避免性。本文试图用他的历史哲学来解释消灭战争的合理必要性。按照黑格尔的观点，如果战争是不可避免的，那么它只有在脱离公民领域和没有个人仇恨的情况下才是可取的，但它在哲学上具有作为实现国家统一这种理想的伦理重要性。然而，在国际关系中，这种实现还必须建立在普遍世界精神资格的原则的基础上。本文旨在表明，为这种资格而进行的思想斗争导致了对一种抽象的、有限的、没有肉体消灭的战争的寻求。

Hegel is neither a worshiper of the war nor remains a realist who sees right-philosophically in its inescapability. This paper seeks to explain, in the light of his philosophy of history, the reasonable necessity of overcoming the war. According to Hegel, war, if inevitable, is desirable only as separate from the civic spheres and without personal hatred, but it has right-philosophically the significance of being the ethical moment in realizing the ideality of state unity. But this realization must also be based, in international relation, on the principle eligibility of the universal world spirit. This paper intends to show that the intellectual struggle for such eligibility leads to the search for an abstract, limited war without physical annihilation.

08

童兵的尊严、发展与重心

Dignity, Development, and the Gravity of Child Soldiering

Nicole Souris, Renée

本文批判性地检验了对这一观点（即使用童兵罪比其他国际犯罪要轻）的两种构想。第一种构想提出了社会学上的论据，即使用童兵不如其他的涉及强奸或谋杀的国际犯罪那么严重，而第二种构想则依靠道义论上的道德规范，认为使用童兵之所以比诸如谋杀之罪要轻，是因为使用童兵并未侵犯基本的人类价值，例如生命权。在认真研究了这种观点的两种构想之后，我认为使用童兵确实会侵犯成长中的儿童的尊严，从而侵犯了基本的人类价值，在这种情况下，尊严是根据人的道德能力来理解的。

This paper critically examines two formulations of the view that the crime of using child soldiers is less serious than other international crimes. The first formulation presents a sociological argument that using child soldiers is not as serious as other international crimes involving rape or murder, and the second formulation relies on deontological moral norms to argue that using child soldiers is less serious than crimes involving murder because child soldiering does not violate fundamental human values, like the right to life. After critically examining each formulation of this view, I argue that using child soldiers does violate a fundamental human value by attacking the dignity of the developing child, where dignity is understood in terms of a person’s moral agency.

法律思想 | 中国政法大学法理学研究所