【作者】 栗峥；

【导师】 卞建林；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 自二十世纪八十年代以来,现代证据理论一直面对着一种颇具影响力的思潮的冲击,垄断证据理论达数百年之久的现代传统证明方法与事实认知模式因此而发生了改变,对证据理论理性主义正统思想颠覆的呼声几乎瓦解了证据理论现代化的进程,甚至有学者宣称,现代证据理论已经寿终正寝。这一思潮正是后现代证据理论。本论文是关于后现代证据理论的专项研究,其基本学术背景是西方后现代、尤其是近期证据学及证明理论的最新进展。全论文将分三大部分,涉及后现代证据理论的多方面内容,在掌握第一手资料的基础上力求与现代各学术流派展开有意义的对话,试图为中国证据法学的学科建设作出一种理论根基上的建构方案。本论文的具体内容大致概括如下:首先,系统论述证据理论中的现代与后现代之分,划分两大流派的分水岭,并进一步阐述后现代证据理论独特的哲理基础;其次,详尽的论述后现代证据理论对现代传统理论的批判,以此形成解构性证据理论的轮廓;再次,在彻底解构的基础上提出对证据理论进行崭新的重新建构,建立全新的理论视角;复次,全面论述了现代与后现代在证据学领域的比较与交锋,以理性与非理性的对抗为主线,中西对比为视角,围绕证据学理论之元——事实展开分析,近而引入现代分析语言哲学与跨学科的方法,提出对审判中事实认定的新思维;最后,对后现代证据理论进行总结性描绘并对它未来的科学化发展予以前瞻性的分析与预测。后现代证据理论的首要贡献是促使我们重新省察证据理论的基本理念。它假定了语言与外部环境之间的断裂,同时,它在更广泛的层面上理解证据与事实的关系,摒弃对证明现代化过于乐观的激进主义,倡导冷静得近乎“悲观”的态度,主张通过“主体间性”和“关系中的自我”来消除主客体之间的对立,用“伙伴关系原则”来重建诉讼证明主体之间的对话与论争。相应地,后现代证据理论打破了传统证据学所建立的有关事实认定上的神话,用一个不确定的、开放的、复杂的、多元的概念体系取代了传统的、给定的、封闭的概念体系,使人们能够直面真实得近乎不可思议的现实世界。这使得证据理论本身需要来一番脱胎换骨的改造。它将面对研究的新问题和新任务。它不再热衷于寻求唯一的永恒真相,不再强求达到普遍的共识。相反,它欢迎对话,欢迎批评,欢迎产生新的争论。它并不把异己的反对和论争看作“无望和衰退”的迹象,因为它知道:只有与更多的问题和难题相遇之后,才能向世人证明自身的活力与生命力。后现代证据理论的第二个贡献主要表现在它对传统理性主义所宣扬的真相作为最终的事实探究目的的否定,并倡导非理性主义。眼下,证据学占据主流地位的是现代理性主义传统,尽管理性主义传统吸收了近代科学革命和思想革命的精髓,引导着人们对于证据学的研究从神学的束缚中剥离出来,对于事实探究进入一个更为广阔的领域,但是我们着实也发现了理性主义的弊端,即它对“非理性”的漠视和全面封杀。后现代证据理论的第三个贡献是从证据学与文学的关系入手,为事实认定带来了自由之风。它否定了传统的“法官皆由事实出发”的观点,将法官的工作赋予了些许文学上的诗意,法官一边接触证据,一边在脑海中形成情节,最后呈现在大众面前的是一个完整的能为人所解读、认同的故事。对于任何一个过去事件,我们可以通过不同的形式予以再现,或小说、或电影、或诗歌、或司法认定,然而无论是哪一种再现方式都摆脱不了故事的范式。认定事实的工作如同剧作者对剧情的构建一般:凭借想象,将雀跃于头脑中的、经证据建构的、各种零散的事实主张通过情节设置进行编排。事实认定者最终确立的故事只要符合日常经验的逻辑,给公众一个说法即可,它游离于日常生活之外,又导源于事实认定者先前真实的生活体验。只是法官与作家的不同之处在于:他必须对这个故事作法律上的考量,不仅要思忖故事的完整性与协调性,同时他也背负着捍卫既有的社会道德标准的重任,他要保证故事必须符合法治的“主旋律”。本论文的撰写力求达到:一是填补理论空白。从全新的多元视角出发,探索证据理论的内在根基与规律,试图达到并超越国外先进的证据理念,在理论上填补空白。二是实现观念创新。以求真务实的态度,在吸收借鉴国外先进理论成果和国内已有论证的基础上,实现若干观念的突破。三是实现理论的系统化建构。通过一系列论证和评述,为健全与丰富证据理论提供新的路径。本论文的行文设计与篇章安排考虑到后现代的上述特点,基于后现代主义历史发展轨迹与理论形态上的考量。第一章将着眼于后现代主义的基本理念、证据学中的现代与后现代的差异性以及后现代证据理论的哲理根基。第二章论述解构性(否定性)的后现代主义与建构性(建设性)的后现代主义,在这一章中,又以后现代主义的内部流派与表现形态作为划分节与节之间的标准,根据后现代中视角主义的观念,采用了多种视角予以诠释。第三章着力于探讨后现代证据论的核心范畴、证据学与其他兄弟学科的关联以及证据理论的科学化之路等问题。本论文采用的研究方法包括:1、实证分析与哲理思辨相结合。对基本理论问题的探讨始终伴随着逻辑推理与矛盾分析两条线索。2、比较与归纳相结合。论文将涉及中国与西方、英美法系与大陆法系、证据学与历史学等多重向度的比较研究,并会归纳成具有规律性的结论。3、理论研究与实际争论相结合。运用相关法学原理并紧密结合我国实际,研究分析我国证据法学存在的实际争论,力图探寻有效解决这些问题的思路和途径。4、继承与创新。理顺证据理论发展的演变脉络又拓展其全新的学术空间,既尊重传统又要敢于挑战主流学说,或许正是本论文的精神方向。可以肯定地说,实现证据理论向未来的任何质的飞跃,后现代证据理论都是一股巨大的原动力。后现代证据理论为我们探讨真相、审视证明过程、研究证据规则等核心问题都提供了一个异常重要的视角。展望未来,后现代证据理论中的一些纯属时尚性的、过于标新立异的杂质注定会随风而逝,然而,它的许多富有生命力的思想却必将伴随我们进入新时代,作为一种别样的思想风格,启发我们开创证据理论的新疆域。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since 1980s the modern evidence theory is subjected to such an influential ideological attack that the traditional modern proof method and fact cognitive model,which hold the monopolistic position in academic circle for hundreds of years,have been changed.The claim that the legitimate traditional rationalism should be subverted almost deconstructs the modernization process of evidence theory and some scholar even argued that the death time of modern evidence theory is coming.Such a powerful ideology impact is the postmodern evidence theory.In this dissertation I sought to provide a specific introduction to postmodern evidence theory whose background is the latest developments of western postmodern theories,esp.in evidence study and proof field. This dissertation includes three parts,involving a multiple respects of postmodern evidence theory.Based on the first hand material it attempts to develop a dialogue platform for each modern academic school and provide for China Evidence study a theory foundation of a constructive plan.The dissertation begins with a systematic elaboration of division between modern and postmodern evidence theory,forming a dividing boundary line between such two big schools.Then the dissertation discusses the critics from the postmodern evidence theory against the modern traditional theory in order to form an outline for deconstructive evidence theory.Next,based on such deconstruction the dissertation reconstructs the evidence theory and sets forth an innovative theoretical perspective.And then the dissertation makes a thorough elaboration of comparison and interaction.The elaboration takes rationality and non-ration resistance as its main clue,proceeds with its analysis facts centered,draws a comparison between western and Eastern thinking style, introduces multi-disciplinary and modern analytical semantic philosophy, and brings forward an innovative view of fact finding in trials.Lastly,the dissertation offers a summary description of postmodern theory and provides analysis and prediction for its future trend-scientific development.The primary contribution of postmodern evidence theory is to motivate us to make a reflection of preliminary notions in evidence theory. It assumes a gap between the languages and outside environment,and at same time it explains the relationship between evidence and law through a more wide aspect.It abandons the over optimistic radical attitude to proof modernization,and instead advocates a calm and even pessimistic attitude. It suggests us eliminate the conflicts between the subjective and objective bodies by the "inter-subjectivity" and "self in relationship",and reconstruct the dialogue and argument between the parities with the burden of proof by "the fellowship".Accordingly it has broken the myth that the traditional evidence study is based on the fact finding and instead makes an uncertain, open,complex and multi-dimensional conception system take place of the traditional,certain and exclusive one so that we can be confronted with the real and almost unbelievable world of reality.It is a fundamental change of evidence theory.What faces the evidence theory is its new problem and new task.The truth is not any more the only goal the evidence theory pursuits,and the common agreement is no longer its purpose.Instead dialogue,criticism,and argument are welcomed.The deviants and disagreements are not the indications of its recession any more.Because the postmodern theory opponents are quite aware that the new theory can prove its vigor and vitality only if it encounters more problems and difficulties.The second contribution of the postmodern evidence theory lies in its denial of the claim made by the traditional rationalist that truth is the ultimate goal of fact finding.Nowadays the main stream of evidence study is rationalism.Though the rationalism absorbed the essence from the modern scientific revolution and Enlightment,led the people to shake off the theological shackles in evidence study,brought the fact-finding into a more wide scope,but there are still some flaws-its indifference and exclusion towards non-rationality.The third contribution of the postmodern evidence theory is its emphasis on the relationship between the evidence study and literature, which brings the wind of freedom into the fact-finding process.It denies the traditional view that the judge should ensure accurate and timely ascertainment of facts and has entrusted the trifles of judge’s daily job some poetic sentiment:When the parties presented the evidence in the trial, the judge is forming some plot in his mind.And finally what we get from this information-process is a coherent and understandable story.We can reconstruct the past events through various forms,including novel,film, poetry and judicial process.Whatever forms we choose it cannot get rid of the story model.Fact-finding is the same as the scriptwriting:you have to rearrange every fact plot,which is evidenced and scattered in your brains, and the whole arrangement process relies on your imagination.The fact finder’s job is only to establish a story,which conforms to daily experience logic and is understandable for the public.This story drifts away the daily experience but at the same time derives from the fact finders’ daily life. The difference between the judge and the scripter is:the former has to take the law elements into consideration.So not only the consistency and coherence should be taken into account but also the social ethics.The judge must guarantee that the approval story conforms to the theme of rule by law.The dissertation purports to achieve the following goals.First fill a theoretical gap.It attempts to explore the inter foundations and rules of evidence theory by a multi-dimensional view.Second realize theory innovation.It sought to realize theory innovation by a practical way of absorption of overseas and domestic advanced theory achievement.Third realize a systematic theory construction.It purports to find a new theoretical approach to evidence study through arguments and comments.With reference to the above goals,the arrangements and pattern design in this dissertation have taken the development track and characteristics of postmodern theory into the consideration.Chapter 1 is intended as a set of introduction to the preliminary notions of postmodern theory,difference between modern and postmodern in evidence study and the philosophical foundation of postmodern evidence theory.Chapter 2 is an elaboration of deconstructive postmodern theory and constructive postmodern theory.In this chapter I use the inter schools of postmodern theory as a standard for section division and based on the perspectives in postmodern theory I offer a multi-perspective interpretation to the problems of evidence study.Chapter 3 approaches the following questions:What is the core scope in postmodern evidence theory? How is the relationship between evidence study and other branches of law study? How about the scientifization of evidence theory?The methodologies in this dissertation included but not limited to: 1.Empirical analysis and philosophical argument.Take the logical reasoning and contradictory analysis as the main clues of the preliminary problems analysis.2.Comparison and induction.The dissertation involves several multi-dimensional comparisons,including between the overseas and domestic,common-law system and continental law system,evidence and history study.Finally it draws some necessary conclusions.3. Theoretical study and practical arguments.Given the law rationale and China’s current situation,it analyzes the actual arguments in Chinese evidence academic circle,and ends with some practical resolutions and approaches to the challenges we met.4.Inheritance and innovation.This dissertation can be interpreted as delivering on a rash promise to construct a map of evidence theory history and create some spaces for innovative ideas to challenge the orthodox ideas.To be sure,for any potential substantial developments in evidence theory,the postmodern evidence theory is a powerful motivation.It offers us a considerably important perspective to analyze truth,trial process and core problems in evidence theory.Some purely fashionable and aberrant ideas would perish and some creative ideas will enter into the new era along with us as a fantastic,insightful filed in evidence study.更多还原