法律东方主义的规范性判断及其回应方式——以孟德斯鸠、韦伯与昂格尔的中国法律研究为中心
|
摘要
孟德斯鸠、韦伯和昂格尔都对古代中国法律进行了专门研究并认为"中国无法治",这是一种法律东方主义的规范性判断。国内学界从政治理想和论证逻辑视角对此作出积极的回应,这两种回应方式能够从西方中心主义观点和二元对立思维角度解释西方学者作出这种判断的原因,但未能解释这种判断所具有的规范性特征。面对这一问题,需借鉴吉尔兹文化诠释的观点,从中国与西方生活方式比较视角出发进行研究,这样既揭示西方学者因忽视中西方生活方式不同而对中国法律作出误判的现实,又揭示西方学者因受限于其自身的文化前提而在作出"中国无法治"判断时体现了顽固的规范性特征的规律。
Montesquieu, Weber and Unger have all made a special study of Chinese law and held that "China does not have the rule of law", which is a normative judgment of legal orientalism. Domestic academia has responded positively from the perspective of political ideal and logic of argument. These responses can explain the reason why western scholars make the judgment; but they fail to explain the normative characteristics of the judgment. Drawing on the viewpoint of Geertz's cultural interpretation,this paper, from the perspective of comparative study, not only reveals the reality that western scholars make a wrong judgment on Chinese laws because they ignore the differences between Chinese and western life styles, but also reveals that western scholars, limited by their own cultural preconditions, show their stubborn normative characteristics when making the judgment that "China has no rule of law".
Montesquieu, Weber and Unger have all made a special study of Chinese law and held that "China does not have the rule of law", which is a normative judgment of legal orientalism. Domestic academia has responded positively from the perspective of political ideal and logic of argument. These responses can explain the reason why western scholars make the judgment; but they fail to explain the normative characteristics of the judgment. Drawing on the viewpoint of Geertz's cultural interpretation,this paper, from the perspective of comparative study, not only reveals the reality that western scholars make a wrong judgment on Chinese laws because they ignore the differences between Chinese and western life styles, but also reveals that western scholars, limited by their own cultural preconditions, show their stubborn normative characteristics when making the judgment that "China has no rule of law".
引文
[1]徐祥民,陈冬.法治——孟德斯鸠政体思想的基本精神[J].中国海洋大学学报:社会科学版,2004,(6):195.
[2][法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].张雁深,译.北京:商务印书馆,1961.
[3]徐爱国.无害的偏见:西方学者论中国法律传统[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2011.
[4][德]马克斯·韦伯.法律社会学[M].康乐,简惠美,译.北京:商务印书馆,2011.
[5][美]络德睦.法律东方主义:中国、美国与现代法[M].魏磊杰,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2016.
[6][美]昂格尔.现代社会中的法律[M].吴玉章,等,译.北京:译林出版社,2001.
[7][英]马若斐.传统中国法的精神[M].陈煜,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2013:序23.
[8]李猛.孟德斯鸠论礼与“东方专制主义”[J].天津社会科学,2013,(1):48.
[9]白彤东.中国是如何成为专制国家的?[J].文史哲,2016,(5):38.
[10]周宁.天朝遥远:西方的中国形象研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006:前言7-9.
[11]黄宗智.清代的法律、社会与文化:民法的表达与实践[M].上海:上海书店出版社,2007:180.
[12]林端.韦伯论中国传统法律:韦伯比较社会学的批判[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2014:104-116.
[13]梁治平.清代习惯法[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2015.
[14]林可济.“天人合一”与“主客二分”——中西哲学比较的重要视角[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010:183.
[15][美]克利福德·吉尔兹.地方性知识:事实与法律的比较透视[M]//邓正来,译.梁治平,编著.法律的文化解释.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1994.
[16][美]许烺光.美国人与中国人:两种生活方式比较[M].北京:华夏出版社,1989.
[17]瞿同祖.中国法律与中国社会[M].北京:中华书局,2003:373-374.
[18]梁漱溟.乡村建设理论[M].上海:世纪出版集团,上海人民出版社,2011:25-30.
[19][美]理查德·尼斯贝特.思维版图[M].李秀霞,译.北京:中信出版社,2010:前言XIII-XIV.
[20] [日]中村元.中国人之思维方法[M].徐复观,译.台北:台湾学生书局,1991:62.
[21][美]安守廉.不可思议的西方?昂格尔运用与误用中国历史的含义[J].高鸿钧,译.比较法研究,1993,(1):82.
[2][法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].张雁深,译.北京:商务印书馆,1961.
[3]徐爱国.无害的偏见:西方学者论中国法律传统[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2011.
[4][德]马克斯·韦伯.法律社会学[M].康乐,简惠美,译.北京:商务印书馆,2011.
[5][美]络德睦.法律东方主义:中国、美国与现代法[M].魏磊杰,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2016.
[6][美]昂格尔.现代社会中的法律[M].吴玉章,等,译.北京:译林出版社,2001.
[7][英]马若斐.传统中国法的精神[M].陈煜,译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2013:序23.
[8]李猛.孟德斯鸠论礼与“东方专制主义”[J].天津社会科学,2013,(1):48.
[9]白彤东.中国是如何成为专制国家的?[J].文史哲,2016,(5):38.
[10]周宁.天朝遥远:西方的中国形象研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006:前言7-9.
[11]黄宗智.清代的法律、社会与文化:民法的表达与实践[M].上海:上海书店出版社,2007:180.
[12]林端.韦伯论中国传统法律:韦伯比较社会学的批判[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2014:104-116.
[13]梁治平.清代习惯法[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2015.
[14]林可济.“天人合一”与“主客二分”——中西哲学比较的重要视角[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010:183.
[15][美]克利福德·吉尔兹.地方性知识:事实与法律的比较透视[M]//邓正来,译.梁治平,编著.法律的文化解释.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1994.
[16][美]许烺光.美国人与中国人:两种生活方式比较[M].北京:华夏出版社,1989.
[17]瞿同祖.中国法律与中国社会[M].北京:中华书局,2003:373-374.
[18]梁漱溟.乡村建设理论[M].上海:世纪出版集团,上海人民出版社,2011:25-30.
[19][美]理查德·尼斯贝特.思维版图[M].李秀霞,译.北京:中信出版社,2010:前言XIII-XIV.
[20] [日]中村元.中国人之思维方法[M].徐复观,译.台北:台湾学生书局,1991:62.
[21][美]安守廉.不可思议的西方?昂格尔运用与误用中国历史的含义[J].高鸿钧,译.比较法研究,1993,(1):82.