冲突法的历史逻辑

【作者】 张春良；

【导师】 刘想树；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 国际法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 冲突法的历史逻辑是指冲突法在历史发展进程中呈现出的宏观规律。自13、14世纪以降,冲突法的历史堪称风云激荡的历史,众多名流学说风起云涌,它们汇积而成的磅礴走势勾勒出冲突法的历史逻辑。冲突法历史逻辑的内涵可用许多对立的范畴予以涵盖,其中尤以冲突正义与实质正义的两难与协调为根本。作为大陆法系冲突法理论的集大成者,萨维尼提出了迄今最为恢弘严谨的学说体系以践行冲突正义,该学说体系奠定了当代国际社会法律适用方式的基调。然而,独崇冲突正义的做法使冲突法处于一种抱残守缺的生存状态,人性对完美境界无休止的渴念迫使世人反思萨维尼体系的偏执性,并力图以高贵心灵的不屈血性超越本座学说的片面性以真正实现使冲突法堪称为法的实质正义、以支撑冲突法之为法的高贵头颅、捍卫冲突法之为法的无上华严。正是在这一意义上,美国冲突法革命的爆发与其视作是对萨维尼体系的背叛,不如更准确地视作是本座学说的逻辑延续,它的本然使命理当是通过冲突正义达致实质正义。但是,冲突正义与实质正义之间的契合只能诉诸于天意般的偶然,在整合冲突正义与实质正义不能的情况下,美国冲突法革命的极端做法便是完全抛弃冲突正义的激情举措,如果说冲突正义曾经是冲突法学者心中的偶像和上帝,那么激进如柯里者便发出了“上帝死了”的呐喊,以毅然决绝之姿态投向了法院地法的怀抱。然而,国际社会伦理多元主义和伦理相对主义的格局使沉溺于法院地法的冲突法学说从一个极端陷入了另一个极端,法院地法的适用固然能够给予实质正义以担保,但是它所能提供的实质正义也不过是诸多实质正义之一元,此种以偏概全的做法与独崇冲突正义的传统如出一辙,冲突法学说经历一段激情燃烧的岁月之后又一次轮回般地回到了抱残守缺的起点。后革命时代的冲突法学说在冲突正义与实质正义的逼仄之中彷徨生存,携带着冲突正义与法院地实质正义的痛苦体验,当代冲突法学说提出了重返规则的要求。重返规则的历史摆动无法为冲突法提供安身立命的历史出路,在规则之上,冲突正义与实质正义之间根深蒂固的悖论使二者的协调只能视作是无常天意主宰下的偶然邂逅。真正的出路乃在于拆穿冲突法历史发展的狡计,通过冲突超越冲突。既往的冲突法理论都以形式逻辑作为推理形式,由于形式逻辑只是确保推理过程正确的逻辑,推理结论正确与否必须依赖于推理前提的正确与否。现有冲突法理论在构造法律适用和法律选择的技法时,都设定了自身赖以推理的前提命题,但是所有此类命题无外乎两种类型:或者以冲突正义为追求目标,或者以法院地正义为关怀旨趣。它们共同的特征在于,对于现有多元法律体系的格局毫不触动,而只是在承认且维持既有法律多元格局的基础之上构造自身的命题,并据此作为推理前提逻辑地推导出需要适用的法律。由于命题本身已然包含着矛盾的正义结构,这一矛盾的正义结构通过形式逻辑的推导过程完整无缺地保存并传递到法律选择的结果之中,最终获得的法律选择结果也就要么保持着冲突正义的精神、要么操守着法院地正义的品性,但是无论哪一种结论对于渴求整全的心灵而言都是不堪承受的失重和生命苦楚。而世人要求在毫不触动现有多元法律格局的前提下,通过形式逻辑的如此推理得出的结论能够获得皆大欢喜的实质正义,这无疑是对形式逻辑提出的超越极限的要求。因为形式逻辑的推理形式在性质上乃是一个物理变化过程而非化学变化过程,各冲突法学说理论构造的前提所潜伏的多元法律结构无法通过物理变化得到消除和矫正,相反,形式逻辑反倒如同一个显微镜,它将前提命题之中隐设的多元正义结构通过去蔽和敞开,纤毫毕现地揭示出来了。现有冲突法学说理论的形式推理命定了它们无法摆脱命题构造上的“原罪”,而形式逻辑的推理形式也不是能够涤清这一“原罪”的救赎之途,真正的拯救与解脱乃是了悟到形式逻辑之无能而导致的惨烈冲突之辩证意义,它实是砥砺世人以启蒙其熔铸普世伦理的自觉,进而使冲突法学说理论完成从形式逻辑向辩证逻辑的历史递换。无论是经验历史的证伪还是纯粹逻辑的证实,以冲突正义或法院地正义为目标的学说理论都无法为冲突法建构出斩获整全性实质正义的理据,只有在普世伦理的地平线上,冲突法所希冀的实质正义才能得以成全。然则,普世伦理的成就唯有通过辩证逻辑的机理才能得以生成,与形式逻辑只是单纯守恒地传递命题中所包含的矛盾结构不同,辩证逻辑作为激励生命的逻辑,它致力于对不完善性的完善、致力于对残缺现实的完满化变造、致力于对礼崩乐坏的多元法律格局的整全性构造。它的作用机理在于,通过形式逻辑所展示的惨烈冲突对生命的刺激,激动世人在反思、比较、甄别、对话、交流和移植的基础上催生出共知共守的普世伦理及以之为据的大一统法律制度,通过冲突消除冲突。因此,冲突法的历史进展也就表现为形式逻辑与辩证逻辑的交响,形式逻辑作为显性逻辑将法律冲突的尖锐景状披露和展示到极致,使太平人间呈现为法律冲突视角下的悲惨世界,而真正的精神则潜伏在形式逻辑之后,通过生命的力量和人类生生不息的生命接力,将冲突和歧异的多元法律通过辩证逻辑的力量杠杆性地整合聚变成为普世的伦理。辩证逻辑的整合聚变力量并不是一股魔力,它的支点乃是人类的理性和智慧,作用力臂则是天下苍生前赴后继所汇积而成的人类历史之滚滚洪流,它的作用点在于多元法律体系所造成的法律冲突,它的作用目标则是将破碎河山转变成为以普世伦理为底蕴的礼乐社会。通过伦理的普世化进程限制和消除法律冲突。普世伦理之形成在人类历史文明之中存有三种“金规则”模式,即儒家金规则、基督教金规则和康德律令。康德律令因综合了前两类模式的内涵而最具有构建普世伦理的正当资格,它的冲突法运用导致萨维尼体系的建构,而它的实体法运用则逻辑地导致普世伦理的证成。普世伦理要求举世共享同一伦理标准和价值立场。法律作为伦理的制度化表达,伦理的普世化将导致法律歧异的逐步协调与统一。鉴于法律本身乃是主观成分与客观成分的综合体,辩证逻辑造就的法律冲突图景将因普世伦理的完成而实现主观性法律冲突的统一和客观性法律冲突的持存。冲突法的历史使命则集中限制于客观性法律冲突的消解。至此,冲突法完成了技术论、本体论和生存论上的三个转向:技术论转向分为递进的两个环节,第一环节是冲突法从微积分学转变成为精神货币学,第二环节是冲突法从精神货币学走向自我的自觉毁灭;本体论转向分为递进的三个环节,第一环节是冲突法从技术本体论转向精神本体论,第二环节是冲突法的本体从法理转向伦理,第三环节则从伦理转向宗教;生存论转向则是指冲突法从生命的工具转向成为生命本身,因为冲突不是人类生命必须排斥的、置之死地而后生的现象,恰恰相反,冲突乃是人类生命得以可能的条件。为此,克格尔曾经深刻指出,危机乃是我们的生活方式。冲突法历史逻辑的终极指向为我们期许了一个尽善尽美、臻于极致的生存状态,此种宗教般的灿烂图景彻底终结了人域内的法律冲突,冲突法似乎也因功德圆满而该当功成身退了,但是,旧有冲突法的死亡涅槃了冲突法的新生,因为法律冲突结构将进一步转变和深化为人类的生存冲突,在法律冲突的废墟上一个新的宏观冲突结构开始生长起来,重获新生的冲突法开始因应新的冲突结构而向全新的使命延伸。新的冲突结构不再局限于人域内的法律冲突,而是突破人域边际,在“我—天地人神”之上构建出了崭新的“法律”冲突。转型后的“冲突法”之使命就在于继续协调人与自然、人与天外智慧、人与自我的相互冲突,最终在太平人间的基础之上持续追求道法自然、天人合一与人神和解之纯真、纯善、纯美的生存境界。更多还原

【Abstract】 The historical logic of Conflict of Laws in this thesis refers to the macro tendency that presents itself in the evolution of this discipline. Since the 13^th or 14^th Century, the history of Conflict of Laws has been blossomed with various ingenious doctrines which drew a sketch of its historical logic that can be best interpreted from the perspectives of conflict justice and material justice. As a keynote speaker for the continental conflict-of-laws scholars, Savigny puts forward a most grand conflict justice doctrine the world has ever known which still works as the foundation of the current Private International Law. However, the absence of material justice in this scene has inevitably led Conflict of Laws to a dead end where Savigny’s successors began their rethinking and endeavored to combine them. In this sense the so-called "conflict-of-laws revolution" in the United States is more a logical continuation than a betrayal to Savigny’s seat doctrine. Given the impossibility of harmony between conflict justice and material justice in this context, radical scholars as Currie in the conflict-of-laws revolution jumped into the arms of the latter and resort to lex fori principle which, however, is another dead end for the Conflict of Laws at the background of ethic pluralism and ethic relativism in the international community. It seems that the Conflict of Laws has no other way out of this dilemma after such a long adventurous journey. As a result, "back to rules" again becomes a motto for the post-revolution period, while it is still under doubt whether rules can ever produce a long-wanted justices harmony. Therefore, the ideal outlet for Conflict of Laws is to expose historical contradiction in its evolution and get over conflict through conflict itself.The doctrines of the Conflict of Laws up to now have formal logic as its ratiocination method. But because formal logic just assures there is right logic in the reasoning process, whether the reasoning conclusion is right has to depend on whether the reasoning premise is right. When contemporary doctrines of conflict law constitute the method of application of law and choice of law, it always set a premise for itself. But such premise is classified into two kinds, aiming at conflict justice or aiming at the justice of lex fori, which have the same characteracteristics that do not change the contemporary diverse legal systems and constitute their propositions on the basis of admitting and maintaining the diverse legal systems, and deduce the law applied as a reasoning logic premise. Because the proposition itself has included the contradicting justice structure, this contradicting justice structure was maintained and transited into the result of the choice of law by the process of formal logic reasoning, and the result of the choice of law obtained at last has two possibilities: maintaining the spirit of the conflict justice, or sticking to the character of the justice of lex fori. But as for the wish to complete justice, both of the results are suffering. However, people require that in the premise of no change of contemporary devise legal systems, the material justice should be deduced by reasoning of formal logic, which is, no doubt, a requirement exceeding the ultimate of formal logic. Because in nature, the formal logic reasoning method is a physical change process, not a chemical change process. And the diverse legal systems included in the premise constituted by all kinds of the theory of conflict law cannot be eliminated and corrected by physical change. On the contrary, like a microscope, formal logic discloses the diverse justice structure hidden in the premise. The formal reasoning of the contemporary theory of law preordained that it cannot get rid of the "original sin" of the premise. And the formal logic reasoning is neither the way of redeeming the "original sin". The real retrieval is to understand dialectical significance that the formal logic reasoning is so incapable that cause to the serious conflict. In fact, it can form common value judgment to make the theory of conflict law accomplish the history change from formal logic to dialectical logic.Whether experience history or pure logic, the theory aiming at the conflict justice or lex fori justice cannot obtain the complete material justice for conflict law. Only on the horizon of universal ethic, the material justice of conflict law is complete. However, the achievement of the universal ethic can be created only by the dialectical logic. It is different from the formal logic that impress the contradict structure included in the proposition. As a logic inspiriting life, the dialectical logic commits itself to the imperfect, to change the incomplete reality and to constitute complete diverse legal systems. It stimulated life by the severe conflict of the formal logic, creates unified legal system by inspiring persons thinking, comparing, distinguishing, talking, communicating and transferring and eliminates conflict by conflict. Therefore, the history process of conflict law represented the combination of formal logic and dialectical logic. As an apparent logic, the formal logic disclosed and expressed the legal conflict to the extreme, making the peaceful world show itself as a misery world in the view of conflict laws. But the real spirit hidden behind the formal logic changes the conflict diverse legal systems into universal ethic by the effect of the dialectical logic.The changing strength of the dialectical logic is not magic power, whose pivot is the wisdom and sense of human, arm of force is the human history, action point is the legal conflict of diverse legal systems and action aim is changing incomplete ethics into a universal ethic. Legal conflicts should be restricted and eliminated by the universal process of ethics. There are three "golden rules" in the form of the universal ethic in the human history, which is the golden rule of Confucianism, the golden rule of Christianity and Kant rule. Because the Kant rule integrated the intension of the first two modes, it had the universal ethic qualification. The application to conflict law of Kant rule caused the Savigny system to be constituted, but its application to entity law logically caused the universal ethic to come into being.According the universal ethic, the whole world might share some basic ethical norms and values. Law is the systematic expression of ethics, and the universal ethic will cause laws to be harmonized and unified step by step. Considering that the law itself is the synthesis of the subjective elements and the objective elements, the legal conflict caused by dialectical logic will avoid the subjective legal conflict and maintain the objective legal conflict because of the accomplishment of the universal ethic. The historical mission of the conflict law centralized to limit to clear up the objective legal conflict. Till then, the conflict law completed three changes in technique philosophy, ontology and survival philosophy. There were two procedures in the change of technique philosophy. One is from calculus to spirit numismatics; the other is from spirit numismatics to self-consciously sacrifice itself. One of the two changes of ontology is that the reality of the conflict law changed from legal principle to ethic, the other is from ethic to religion. The change of survival philosophy is that the conflict law changed from the tool of life to the reality of life, because conflicts are not the phenomenon that the life of human has to exclude and on the contrary, conflicts are the conditions that human survive. The ideal of Conflict of Laws is to put an end to legal conflicts so that it may make a descent retreat from the history. But the death of the old conflict law makes the conflict law reborn, because the structure of legal conflict will be transformed into conflict of human in living. A new macroscopic conflict structure began to develop in the ruins of legal conflict. The rebirth of conflict law began to extend to a completely new mission responding to the new conflict law structure. The new conflict structure will no more be localized in human, but will break the boundary of states and create a new "legal" conflict within the harmony between human and nature. The mission of the new "conflict law" is to coordinate the conflicts between human and nature, human and the unusual wisdom, human and selfhood. And finally, conflict law will show us a true, good and beautiful picture of living.更多还原