权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Theoretical Foundation Building for Philosophy of Law as Public Philosophy

作为公共哲学的法哲学的理论基础构建

基本信息

批准号：
15330002
负责人：
INOUE Tatsuo
金额：
$ 7.3万
依托单位：
The University of Tokyo
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
财政年份：
2003
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2003 至 2005
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

Our research aimed to reconstruct philosophy of law as public philosophy by investigating comprehensively into the philosophical basis and normative implications of the concept of publicness. It was focused on the three tasks : (1)assessing the comparative merits and demerits of the competing conceptions of publicness, and constructing a unifying theory that can adequately accommodate their tensions and turn them into fruitful complementarities ; (2)presenting new approaches to the traditional issues about the concept of law by exploring into the internal connection between the concept of law and that of publicness ; and (3)elucidating the mediating role of positive law and its institutional structure in turning the ideal theory of publicness into reality under non-ideal conditions. Our results are as followsTask (1) : We have found the following conclusions warranted. First, the competing traditional conceptions of publicness can be adequately characterized and contrasted by classifyi … More ng them into the three models : sphere-based theory, agent-based theory and process-based theory. Second, the traditional three models are inadequate to get over the legitimacy-crisis in contemporary pluralistic societies. Third, the new fourth model, reason-based theory that we constructed as an alternative to the traditional models can work as a unifying theory that overcomes their limits and defects and rescues their complementary merits by articulating the underlying principle that they need as their normative ground and constraint.Task (2) : We have shown that the conceptual distinction between the first-order and second-order publicness and the related one between publicness in law and publicness of law implied by reason-based theory give us the best theoretical vantage point from which we can elucidate the internal connections between law and publicness and identify the crucial normative issues neglected in the conceptual analyses and debates about the nature of law. To exemplify this point, we discussed the issues of duty to obey law, revolutionary creation of law, limits of law and othersTask (3) : We have reached the conclusion that positive law can effectively sustain and develop the public order of contemporary societies only if two conditions are met. First, to enhance the publicness in law, both legal interpretation and legislation must be informed and guided by a more principled deliberation on substantive and specific public values (the first-order publicness) than it is now the case. Second, to secure publicness of law, the institutional structure for legal decision making must be designed not just with the view of improving its quality in terms of the first-order publicness but also with full consideration for the second-order publicness. We have realized that legisprudence (the theory of legislation), now emerging in contemporary legal philosophy, can play an indispensable role in finding effective ways to meet these conditions and that we have to organize a new joint research in legisprudence to develop the present onePart of the results of our research was presented in international settings. Inoue published two papers in internationally coauthored books as shown in the References below. Inoue and Takikawa presented their papers at the World Congress of the international association of Legal and Social Philosophy (IVR) held at Granada in 2005. Takikawa's paper was published in the proceedings of this conference, and Inoue's paper is to appear in a new book edited by Luc Wintgens now in preparation for publication. Domestically, a book that is comprised of the contributions by all the investigators and collaborators for our project is forthcoming from Nakanishiya Shuppan Less

我们的研究旨在通过对公共性概念的哲学基础和规范意义的全面考察，重建作为公共哲学的法哲学。本论文的主要任务是：（1）对公共性概念的比较优劣进行评估，并构建一个能够充分容纳它们之间的张力并将它们转化为富有成效的互补性的统一理论;（2）通过探讨法律概念与公共性概念之间的内在联系，为解决法律概念的传统问题提供新的思路;（3）在非理想条件下，实证法及其制度结构对公共性理想理论实现的中介作用。任务（1）：我们发现以下结论是有根据的。首先，相互竞争的传统公共性概念可以通过分类来充分描述和对比， ...更多信息将其归纳为三种模型：基于球体的理论、基于主体的理论和基于过程的理论。第二，传统的三种模式不足以克服当代多元社会的合法性危机。第三，新的第四种模式，即我们作为传统模式的替代而构建的基于理性的理论，可以作为一种统一的理论，克服它们的局限和缺陷，并通过阐明它们需要作为规范基础和约束的基本原则来拯救它们的互补优点。任务（2）：我们已经表明，第一阶和第二阶公共性之间的概念区别，以及法律的公共性和理性所隐含的法律的公共性之间的相关区别，基础理论为我们提供了一个最佳的理论Vantage，从这个视角出发，我们可以阐明法律与公共性之间的内在联系，并找出在关于法律本质的概念分析和争论中被忽视的关键性规范问题。为了证明这一点，我们讨论了遵守法律的义务、法律的革命性创造、法律的限度等问题。任务（3）：我们得出结论，只有满足两个条件，实在法才能有效地维持和发展当代社会的公共秩序。首先，为了加强法律的公共性，法律的解释和立法都必须以比现在更有原则的对实质性和具体的公共价值（一阶公共性）的审议为依据和指导。第二，为确保法律的公共性，法律的决策制度结构的设计不仅要从一阶公共性的角度来提高其质量，而且要充分考虑二阶公共性。我们认识到，在当代法律的哲学中出现的立法学（立法理论）在寻找满足这些条件的有效方法方面可以发挥不可或缺的作用，我们必须组织一次新的立法学联合研究，以发展目前的研究成果。井上在国际合著的书籍中发表了两篇论文，如下面的参考文献所示。井上和泷川在2005年于格拉纳达举行的国际法律的和社会哲学协会（IVR）世界大会上发表了他们的论文。Takikawa的论文发表在这次会议的会议记录上，Inoue的论文将出现在Luc Wintgens编辑的新书中，目前正在准备出版。在国内，一本书，这是由所有的研究人员和合作者为我们的项目的贡献是即将从中西屋Shuppan收起