威廉·特维宁的一般法理学思想研究
|
摘要
全球化进程给法律理论研究提出了诸多挑战,并敦促我们不断思考如何应对这些挑战,进而寻求法律理论发展的可能方向和路径。威廉·特维宁教授主张复兴一般法理学正是对上述问题的一个直接的理论回应。本文旨在通过考察特维宁的一般法理学思想,揭示全球化背景下复兴一般法理学的意义与限度,为讨论全球化与法律理论问题提供一种理论视角,并期望能够由此推进我们对全球化背景下法律理论发展问题的研究。本文关注的核心问题是,特维宁是如何建构其一般法理学以应对全球化挑战的,全球化背景下复兴一般法理学的意义和限度是什么。围绕这一核心问题,本文将从特维宁的一般法理学在一般法理学传统中的地位、其一般法理学思想本身的发展过程以及其与当代从事同一主题研究的学者之间的对话和比较这三个维度展开研究。通过研究,本文指出,特维宁的一般法理学将法律理论研究同全球化直接联系起来,拓宽了英美法学的研究视野,并对分析法学和一般法理学传统都有所推进,但是其间也隐含着诸多的张力,并遗留下了未予解决的问题。我们既要对特维宁一般法理学思想中的矛盾和张力保持审慎的态度,又要看到他的思想给我们开放出的问题,认真思考如何立基于我们自己的价值观念、理想图景和立场去迎接全球化的挑战。
The accelerating globalization has significant implications on and presents challenges to the discipline of law and jurisprudence as its theoretical part. How should we face these challenges and search for the possible ways to develop our legal theory in the context of globalization? Professor William Twining argues for reviving general jurisprudence, which is the direct response to the question above. This dissertation is mainly concerned with the question how Twining revived general jurisprudence in response to the challenges of the globalization and what are the significance and limits of his enterprise. The purpose of this dissertation is to provide a new perspective and a new thinking line for understanding the general jurisprudence and then to enhance our study on the problems of legal theory development in the context of globalization by studying the process of how the general jurisprudence is constructed and revealing the tension and limits of the enterprise.
In order to achieve the purpose above, this dissertation tries to present Twining’s general jurisprudence in three dimensions as following: Firstly, I will put his general jurisprudence in his theoretical tradition, analyze the ways in which he criticizes, inherits and develops the theoretical tradition, and find out the limits because of subjecting to the tradition. Secondly, I will analyze the development process of his general jurisprudence, the challenges he meets in the process, and how does he treat these challenges. Thirdly, I will compare his general jurisprudence with other scholars’theories whose main concern is the development of legal theory in the context of globalization, by this way it will be easy to reveal the limits in his general jurisprudence, or in a deeper sense the challenges which they are all in the face of when they address themselves to the development of legal theory in the context of globalization.
The whole dissertation consists of six chapters, namely, Introduction, The Historical Background and Theoretical Tradition of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, Theoretical Appeals or Burdens of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, The construction Process of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, Surveying the General Jurisprudence: The Dialogues and Comparisons between Different Approaches, and The Significance and Limits of Reviving General Jurisprudence in the Context of Globalization.
Chapter 1 is the introduction of the dissertation, which concludes the selection and significance of the subject, the previous studies and the approach of the discussion and the structure of this dissertation. The dissertation points out, it is very important to concern with the purpose of Twining’s general jurisprudence, the problems in the process of its construction and the settlements to these problems for us to understand Twining’s general jurisprudence self, explore the questions raised from the construction and its enlightenment.
Chapter 2 discusses the context of global age and the theoretical tradition in which Twining’s general jurisprudence is rooted, aiming at revealing what his theory inherits from and how it surpasses its theoretical tradition and highlighting the significance of introduction of the global factors on Twining’s general jurisprudence. The tradition of general jurisprudence in the Anglo-American legal thoughts provides some intellectual resources for reviving general jurisprudence, but the new context of globalization has some new challenges for us, so in order to response these general jurisprudence the revived general jurisprudence must surpass the tradition in some way. Globalization is the context and impulse of reviving general jurisprudence, and in some senses Twining’s attitude towards the globalization determines his core issue and the approach to it.
Chapter 3 discusses the meaning of reviving general jurisprudence, the ways in which the general jurisprudence responses to the processes of globalization, the basic structure of the general jurisprudence and the central issue which is difficult to settle in his general jurisprudence. By discussing these questions, the dissertation points out that there are several missions lurking in the enterprise of reviving general jurisprudence. Although Twining’s general jurisprudence is rooted in the Anglo-American legal tradition, what he is calling for is not certain general jurisprudence already in existence in this tradition. The revived general jurisprudence broadens the scope of legal theory study at the level of abstraction, it is a flexible concept not confine to a single level at the geographical level, and it eliminates the strongly universal hypothesis as in the nineteenth century. Twining expects the revived general jurisprudence to embody the characters of the global age and to undertake the theoretical missions as following: broadening the scope of legal theory study at the level of geography, broadening the intellectual horizons of the scholars in the Anglo-American tradition, bridging the various fields and study approaches in jurisprudence and making the analytical jurisprudence open to other approaches, and searching for a new way to justify the general jurisprudence in the context of globalization in order to make the study of general jurisprudence break away from the state of self-obsession.
Twining eliminates the strongly universal hypothesis as in the nineteenth century through problematizing approach, reproblematizes the generalization across boundaries and inquires how far it is feasible and desirable to generalize across boundaries as a central issue of a revived general jurisprudence. In this way Twining separates his general jurisprudence from the strongly universal hypothesis and sets aside certain room for researching some levels which can be generalized. Simultaneously, he appeals to a moderate cultural relativism, and shifts his focus from the contradictory between universalism and relativism to the question that to what degree, in what scope and how we can find the frameworks, institutions and procedures that can uphold human beings to coexist and cooperate. Hereby, Twining points out a new direction to make the generalization across boundaries possible, without appealing to the universal hypothesis which is in face of challenges.
Chapter 4 generalizes and summarizes the dimensions and process that Twining constructs his general jurisprudence, and analyzes how Twining accomplishes the theoretical promises set down in his general jurisprudence. This chapter will make preparation for analyzing the significance and limits of his general jurisprudence later. The dissertation points out that the construction process contains a transition from theoretical conception, formal framework to substantial contents. He constructs it in three dimensions, viz. the analytical, normative and empirical dimensions, and he actually adopts three different approaches to justify the desirability and feasibility of his general jurisprudence in the three dimensions, simultaneously he leaves some difficulties in the three dimensions. In the analytical dimension his main work is to construct and refine the metal-language which can across boundaries, viz. to construct a general concept of law, to review the adequacy of the vocabulary for discussing legal phenomena across boundaries and to refine and develop them. In the normative dimension, he wants to justify a moderate universalism, without denying the particularities of cultures or traditions and simultaneously denying the strong version of cultural relativism, and he expects to lay down a foundation for finding some values with universal characters by dialogues between and within cultures. In the empirical dimension, he encourages a scientific attitude and expects jurisprudence to accord with some scientific tests and head towards an empirical science of law.
Chapter 5 introduces Tamanaha and Santos’legal theories and compares Twining’s general jurisprudence with them in the sense of study approach. This will be helpful to highlight the characters of Twining’s theory and make further preparation for revealing his limits on the one hand, and make our horizon out of Twining’s thought framework, survey his thought in a broader context and from a broader perspective and probe into the question of legal theory’s development. The dissertation points out, although Twining and Tamanaha have chosen two different approaches to construct their general jurisprudence, actually they face a difficulty in common, that is how to construct an analytic concept which can across traditions and cultures. Contrasted to Santos’theoretical standpoint with strong political tendency, Twining throws himself into mining the theoretical heritage within the western modern tradition and keeps silence on the essentials of globalization and the oppressive power of the global structure.
Chapter 6 is the conclusion of the dissertation, which summarizes the significance and limits of Twining’s jurisprudence. The health of the discipline of law in the Anglo-American tradition is the theoretical start and final aim, so the most important significance of Twining’s jurisprudence for the discipline of law in the Anglo-American tradition is that it links directly the study of legal theory with the context of globalization, and it is a theoretical response to the challenges of globalization. Twining wants to contain the analytical, normative and empirical dimensions in his general jurisprudence, but he evades probing into the questions of values in different ways in the analytical and empirical dimensions. Behind the problem above is a tension between the advocacy of the western modern values and the claim to get rid of the ethnocentric tendency. Twining obscures the question of making a decision on values through the resultant of the problematizing approach and the standpoint of moderate cultural relativism, and he actually acquiesces in the modern legal prospect which is dominated by the western values. He pays little attention to the global structure and the essentials of globalization, which makes him to emphasize the importance of the tolerance and dialogue between cultures, but can not provide a foundation and a feasible approach. Finally, the dissertation points out that we should be cautious about the tension in his general jurisprudence, realize the questions inspired by his general jurisprudence and deliberate how we response the challenges of globalization basing on the values, ideal picture and standpoint of our own.
The accelerating globalization has significant implications on and presents challenges to the discipline of law and jurisprudence as its theoretical part. How should we face these challenges and search for the possible ways to develop our legal theory in the context of globalization? Professor William Twining argues for reviving general jurisprudence, which is the direct response to the question above. This dissertation is mainly concerned with the question how Twining revived general jurisprudence in response to the challenges of the globalization and what are the significance and limits of his enterprise. The purpose of this dissertation is to provide a new perspective and a new thinking line for understanding the general jurisprudence and then to enhance our study on the problems of legal theory development in the context of globalization by studying the process of how the general jurisprudence is constructed and revealing the tension and limits of the enterprise.
In order to achieve the purpose above, this dissertation tries to present Twining’s general jurisprudence in three dimensions as following: Firstly, I will put his general jurisprudence in his theoretical tradition, analyze the ways in which he criticizes, inherits and develops the theoretical tradition, and find out the limits because of subjecting to the tradition. Secondly, I will analyze the development process of his general jurisprudence, the challenges he meets in the process, and how does he treat these challenges. Thirdly, I will compare his general jurisprudence with other scholars’theories whose main concern is the development of legal theory in the context of globalization, by this way it will be easy to reveal the limits in his general jurisprudence, or in a deeper sense the challenges which they are all in the face of when they address themselves to the development of legal theory in the context of globalization.
The whole dissertation consists of six chapters, namely, Introduction, The Historical Background and Theoretical Tradition of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, Theoretical Appeals or Burdens of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, The construction Process of Twining’s General Jurisprudence, Surveying the General Jurisprudence: The Dialogues and Comparisons between Different Approaches, and The Significance and Limits of Reviving General Jurisprudence in the Context of Globalization.
Chapter 1 is the introduction of the dissertation, which concludes the selection and significance of the subject, the previous studies and the approach of the discussion and the structure of this dissertation. The dissertation points out, it is very important to concern with the purpose of Twining’s general jurisprudence, the problems in the process of its construction and the settlements to these problems for us to understand Twining’s general jurisprudence self, explore the questions raised from the construction and its enlightenment.
Chapter 2 discusses the context of global age and the theoretical tradition in which Twining’s general jurisprudence is rooted, aiming at revealing what his theory inherits from and how it surpasses its theoretical tradition and highlighting the significance of introduction of the global factors on Twining’s general jurisprudence. The tradition of general jurisprudence in the Anglo-American legal thoughts provides some intellectual resources for reviving general jurisprudence, but the new context of globalization has some new challenges for us, so in order to response these general jurisprudence the revived general jurisprudence must surpass the tradition in some way. Globalization is the context and impulse of reviving general jurisprudence, and in some senses Twining’s attitude towards the globalization determines his core issue and the approach to it.
Chapter 3 discusses the meaning of reviving general jurisprudence, the ways in which the general jurisprudence responses to the processes of globalization, the basic structure of the general jurisprudence and the central issue which is difficult to settle in his general jurisprudence. By discussing these questions, the dissertation points out that there are several missions lurking in the enterprise of reviving general jurisprudence. Although Twining’s general jurisprudence is rooted in the Anglo-American legal tradition, what he is calling for is not certain general jurisprudence already in existence in this tradition. The revived general jurisprudence broadens the scope of legal theory study at the level of abstraction, it is a flexible concept not confine to a single level at the geographical level, and it eliminates the strongly universal hypothesis as in the nineteenth century. Twining expects the revived general jurisprudence to embody the characters of the global age and to undertake the theoretical missions as following: broadening the scope of legal theory study at the level of geography, broadening the intellectual horizons of the scholars in the Anglo-American tradition, bridging the various fields and study approaches in jurisprudence and making the analytical jurisprudence open to other approaches, and searching for a new way to justify the general jurisprudence in the context of globalization in order to make the study of general jurisprudence break away from the state of self-obsession.
Twining eliminates the strongly universal hypothesis as in the nineteenth century through problematizing approach, reproblematizes the generalization across boundaries and inquires how far it is feasible and desirable to generalize across boundaries as a central issue of a revived general jurisprudence. In this way Twining separates his general jurisprudence from the strongly universal hypothesis and sets aside certain room for researching some levels which can be generalized. Simultaneously, he appeals to a moderate cultural relativism, and shifts his focus from the contradictory between universalism and relativism to the question that to what degree, in what scope and how we can find the frameworks, institutions and procedures that can uphold human beings to coexist and cooperate. Hereby, Twining points out a new direction to make the generalization across boundaries possible, without appealing to the universal hypothesis which is in face of challenges.
Chapter 4 generalizes and summarizes the dimensions and process that Twining constructs his general jurisprudence, and analyzes how Twining accomplishes the theoretical promises set down in his general jurisprudence. This chapter will make preparation for analyzing the significance and limits of his general jurisprudence later. The dissertation points out that the construction process contains a transition from theoretical conception, formal framework to substantial contents. He constructs it in three dimensions, viz. the analytical, normative and empirical dimensions, and he actually adopts three different approaches to justify the desirability and feasibility of his general jurisprudence in the three dimensions, simultaneously he leaves some difficulties in the three dimensions. In the analytical dimension his main work is to construct and refine the metal-language which can across boundaries, viz. to construct a general concept of law, to review the adequacy of the vocabulary for discussing legal phenomena across boundaries and to refine and develop them. In the normative dimension, he wants to justify a moderate universalism, without denying the particularities of cultures or traditions and simultaneously denying the strong version of cultural relativism, and he expects to lay down a foundation for finding some values with universal characters by dialogues between and within cultures. In the empirical dimension, he encourages a scientific attitude and expects jurisprudence to accord with some scientific tests and head towards an empirical science of law.
Chapter 5 introduces Tamanaha and Santos’legal theories and compares Twining’s general jurisprudence with them in the sense of study approach. This will be helpful to highlight the characters of Twining’s theory and make further preparation for revealing his limits on the one hand, and make our horizon out of Twining’s thought framework, survey his thought in a broader context and from a broader perspective and probe into the question of legal theory’s development. The dissertation points out, although Twining and Tamanaha have chosen two different approaches to construct their general jurisprudence, actually they face a difficulty in common, that is how to construct an analytic concept which can across traditions and cultures. Contrasted to Santos’theoretical standpoint with strong political tendency, Twining throws himself into mining the theoretical heritage within the western modern tradition and keeps silence on the essentials of globalization and the oppressive power of the global structure.
Chapter 6 is the conclusion of the dissertation, which summarizes the significance and limits of Twining’s jurisprudence. The health of the discipline of law in the Anglo-American tradition is the theoretical start and final aim, so the most important significance of Twining’s jurisprudence for the discipline of law in the Anglo-American tradition is that it links directly the study of legal theory with the context of globalization, and it is a theoretical response to the challenges of globalization. Twining wants to contain the analytical, normative and empirical dimensions in his general jurisprudence, but he evades probing into the questions of values in different ways in the analytical and empirical dimensions. Behind the problem above is a tension between the advocacy of the western modern values and the claim to get rid of the ethnocentric tendency. Twining obscures the question of making a decision on values through the resultant of the problematizing approach and the standpoint of moderate cultural relativism, and he actually acquiesces in the modern legal prospect which is dominated by the western values. He pays little attention to the global structure and the essentials of globalization, which makes him to emphasize the importance of the tolerance and dialogue between cultures, but can not provide a foundation and a feasible approach. Finally, the dissertation points out that we should be cautious about the tension in his general jurisprudence, realize the questions inspired by his general jurisprudence and deliberate how we response the challenges of globalization basing on the values, ideal picture and standpoint of our own.
引文
[1]张文显.二十世纪西方法哲学思潮研究[M].北京:法律出版社,1996.
[2]张文显.马克思主义法理学:理论、方法和前沿[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2003.
[3]邓正来.中国法学向何处去——建构“中国法律理想图景”时代的论纲[M].北京:商务印书馆,2006.
[4]邓正来.谁之全球化?何种法哲学?——开放性全球化观与中国法律哲学建构论纲[M].北京:商务印书馆,2009.
[5]刘星.法律是什么——二十世纪英美法理学批判阅读[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[6]徐爱国.分析法学[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[7]黄文艺.全球结构与法律发展[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8]杨雪冬.全球化:西方理论前沿[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[9]张旭东.全球化时代的文化认同:西方普遍主义话语的历史批判(第二版)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[10]季卫东.宪政新论——全球化时代的法与社会变迁[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[11]赵汀阳.天下体系——世界制度哲学导论[M].南京:江苏教育出版社,2005.
[12]许纪霖.全球正义与文明对话[C].南京:江苏人民出版社,2004.
[13]哈佛燕京学社.全球化与文明对话[C].南京:江苏教育出版社,2004.
[14]信春鹰.全球化与多元法律文化[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2007.
[15]俞可平.全球化:全球治理[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[16]俞可平,黄卫平.全球化的悖论[C].北京:中央编译出版社,1998.
[17]中华孔子学会,云南民族学院.经济全球化与民族文化多元发展[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[18]梁治平.法律的文化解释(增订本)[C].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1998.
[1] [英]威廉·退宁.全球化与法律理论[M].钱向阳译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,2009.
[2] [英]博温托·迪·苏萨·桑托斯.迈向新法律常识——法律、全球化和解放(第二版)[M].刘坤轮,叶传星译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009.
[3] [英]边沁.政府片论[M].沈叔平,等译.北京:商务印书馆,1995.
[4] [英]边沁.道德与立法原理导论[M].时殷弘译.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[5] [美]布赖恩·比克斯.法理学:理论与语境[M].邱昭继译.北京:法律出版社,2008.
[6] [英]约翰·奥斯丁.法理学的范围[M].刘星译.北京:中国法制出版社,2002.
[7] [英]韦恩·莫里森.法理学:从古希腊到后现代[M].李桂林,等译.武汉:武汉大学出版社,2003.
[8] [美]希拉里·普特南.事实与价值二分法的崩溃[M].应奇译.北京:东方出版社,2006.
[9] [英]H.L.A.哈特.法律的概念[M].张文显,等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[10] [英]H.L.A.哈特.法理学与哲学论文集[M].支振锋译.北京:法律出版社,2005.
[11] [美]E.博登海默.法理学:法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[12] [美]罗斯科·庞德.法理学(第一卷)[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[13] [爱尔兰]J.M.凯利.西方法律思想简史[M].王笑红译.北京:法律出版社2002.
[14] [英]尼尔·麦考密克,[奥]奥塔·魏因贝格尔.制度法论[M].周叶谦译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[15] [英]约瑟夫·拉兹.法律体系的概念[M].吴玉章译.北京:中国法制出版社,2003.
[16] [美]德沃金.认真对待权利[M].信春鹰,吴玉章译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998.
[17] [法]米海伊尔·戴尔马斯-马蒂.世界法的三个挑战[M].罗结珍,等译.北京:法律出版社,2001.
[18] [美]约翰·罗尔斯.万民法[M].张晓辉,等译.长春:吉林人民出版社,2001.
[19] [美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建[M].周琪,等译.北京:新华出版社,2002.
[20] [英]安东尼·吉登斯.现代性的后果[M].田禾译.南京:译林出版社,2000.
[21] [美]克利福德·吉尔兹.地方性知识——阐释人类学论文集[M].王海龙,张家瑄译.北京:中央编译出版社,2004.
[22] [美]克利福德·格尔茨.文化的解释[M].韩莉译.南京:译林出版社,1999.
[23] [美]杰弗里·亚历山大.社会学二十讲:二战以来的理论发展[M].贾春增,等译.北京:华夏出版社,2000.
[24] [英]雷蒙·威廉斯.关键词:文化与社会的词汇[M].刘建基译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2005.
[25] [英]贾斯廷·罗森伯格.质疑全球化理论[M].洪霞,赵勇译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2002.
[26] [以色列]S.N.艾森斯塔特.反思现代性[M].旷新年,王爱松译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2005.
[27] [英]戴维?赫尔德,等.全球大变革:全球化时代的政治、经济与文化[M].杨雪冬,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2001.
[28] [德]赖纳·特茨拉夫.全球化压力下的世界文化[C].吴志成,韦苏,等译.南昌:江西人民出版社,2001.
[29] [美]迈克尔·沃尔泽.正义诸领域——为多元主义与平等一辩[M].褚松燕译.南京:译林出版社,2002.
[30] [德]安德烈·冈德·弗兰克.依附性积累与不发达[M].高铦,高戈译.南京:译林出版社,1999.
[31] [美]R.M.昂格尔.现代社会中的法律[M].吴玉章,周汉华译.南京:译林出版社,2001.
[32] [美]A.麦金泰尔.追寻美德——伦理理论研究[M].宋继杰译.南京:译林出版社,2003.
[33] [英]约翰·汤姆林森.全球化与文化[M].郭英剑译.南京:南京大学出版社,2002.
[34] [英]尼格尔·多德.社会理论与现代性[M].陶传进译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[35] [日]千叶正士.法律多元——从日本法律文化迈向一般理论[M].强世功,等译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[36] [英]苏珊·哈克.证据与探究——走向认识论的重构[M].陈波,等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[37] [美]弗朗西斯科?洛佩斯?塞格雷拉.全球化与世界体系[C].白凤森,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[38] [英]保罗?赫斯特,格雷厄姆?汤普森.质疑全球化——国际经济与治理的可能性(第二版)[M].张文成,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[39] [英]戴维?赫尔德,安东尼?麦克格鲁.全球化与反全球化[M].陈志刚译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2004.
[40] [古希腊]亚里士多德.尼各马可伦理学[M].廖申白译注.北京:商务印书馆,2003.
[41] [美]布莱恩·比克斯,等.法律实证主义:思想与文本[C].陈锐编译.北京:清华大学出版社,2008.
[42] [英]C.W.沃特森.多元文化主义[M].叶兴艺译.长春:吉林人民出版社,2005.
[1] William Twining. Globalisation and Legal Theory[M].Evanston:Northwestern University Press,2001.
[2] William Twining. The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories[M].Dartmouth: Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002.
[3] William Twining. General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[4] William Twining, David Miers.How to Do Things with Rules[M].London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson Ltd.,1982.
[5] William Twining. Law in Context: Enlarging a Discipline[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1997.
[6] William Twining. Blackstone's Tower: The English Law School[M].London: Stevens & Sons Ltd. /Sweet and Maxwell Ltd.,1994.
[7] William Twining. Karl Llewellyn and the Realist Movement[M].Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1985.
[8] Brian Z.Tamanaha.A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2001.
[9] Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition[M].New York:Routledge, 1995.
[10] Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation(Second edition)[M].London: Butterworths,2002.
[11] H.L.A.Hart.Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1983.
[12] H.L.A.Hart.The Concept of Law[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1961.
[13] Brian Leiter.Naturalizing Jurisprudence:Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2007.
[14] B.Bix (ed.). Analyzing Law:New Essays in Legal Theory[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1998.
[15] Penelope A. Bulloch & Joseph Raz (eds.).The Concept of Law (2nd edition) [M].Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1994.
[1]周国兴.一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究[D].长春:吉林大学法学院,2007.
[2]周国兴.一般法理学如何可能——简评Globalization and Legal Theory[C]//中国社会科学辑刊.上海:复旦大学出版社,2009.
[3]周国兴.认真对待全球化:迈向一般法理学——简评卡利尔对特维宁《全球化与法律理论》一书的评论[C]//西方法律哲学家研究年刊.北京:北京大学出版社,2009.
[4]周晓虹.一般法理学的“乌托邦”——述评《全球化与法律理论》[J].法制与社会发展,2005(6):139-147.
[5]黄文艺.全球化时代的法哲学——第22届IVR世界大会综述[J].法制与社会发展,2005(6):148-152.
[6]张文显.全球化时代的中国法治[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2005(2):5-11.
[7]朱振.全球化进程中的中国法学——访张文显教授[J].学习与探索,2006(1):261-263.
[8]邓正来.全球化时代与中国法学——“主体性中国”的建构理路[J].学习与探索,2006(1):41-49.
[9]张文显.超越法律实证主义和自然法理论:制度法理学的认识:方法论和本体论[J].比较法研究,1995(1):74-88.
[10]刘星.哈特法律概念分析的模式建构及其历史定位[J].比较法研究,1996(4):337-350.
[11]刘星.重读奥斯丁的《法理学范围》[J].环球法律评论,2002(1):122-127.
[12]赵旭东.秩序、过程与文化——西方法律人类学的发展及其问题[J].环球法律评论,2005(5):557-570.
[13]王铭铭.格尔兹的解释人类学[J].教学与研究,1999(4):31-37.
[14] [英]威廉·特维宁.想象边沁:一个纪念[C].周国兴,李燕涛译.//西方法律哲学家研究年刊.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[15] [英]威廉·推宁.全球化和法律理论[EB/OL].朱景文译.(2003-11- 8)[2007-11-1].http://www.jus.cn/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=95.
[1] William Twining.A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law[J].Law and Society Review,2003,37:199-257.
[2] William Twining.Academic Law and Legal Philosophy:The Significance of Herbert Hart[J].Law Quarterly Review,1979,95:565-580.
[3] William Twining.Replying to Frederick Schauer[J].Harvard Law Review, 2006, 119:853.
[4] William Twining. Some Jobs for Jurisprudence[J].British Journal of Law and Society, 1974, 1:149-174.
[5] William Twining. A Cosmopolitan Discipline? Some Implications of "Globalisation" or Legal Education[J].Int. Jo. of the Legal Profession, 2001, 8: 23-36.
[6] William Twining. Diffusion of Law: A Global Perspective[J].Journal of Legal Pluralism, 2004, 49:1-46.
[7] William Twining. Social Science and Diffusion of Law[J].Journal of Law and Society, 2005, 32:203-240.
[8] William Twining. Diffusion and Globalization Discourse[J].Harvard International Law Journal, 2006, 47:507-516.
[9] William Twining.Argumentation, Stories and Generalizations: A Comment[J].Law, Probability & Risk, 2007, 6:169.
[10] William Twining. General Jurisprudence[EB/OL]. (2005-4-25)[2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/.
[11] William Twining. Reviving General Jurisprudence[EB/OL].(2005-4-7) [2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/.
[12] William Twining. Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence[EB/OL]. (2005-4-25) [2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/.
[13] William Twining. The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined[EB/OL]. (2005-4-7) [2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/.
[14] William Twining. Surface Law[EB/OL].(2007-4-25)[2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/global_law/staff.shtml?twining.
[15] William Twining. Law, Justice and Rights: Some Implications of a Global Perspective[EB/OL].(2007-1-7)[2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Law_Justice%20_Rights.pdf.
[16] William Twining. Human Rights: Southern Voices[J/OL]. (2007-12-6)[2008- 1-9].http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/lgd/2007_1.
[17] William Twining. Upendra Baxi - A Tribute[J/OL].(2007-4-7)[2007-10-20]. http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/lgd/2007_1.
[18] William Twining. Implications of“Globalisation”for Law as a Discipline [EB/OL].(2009-1-30)[2009-12-19] . http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Twining_IMPLICATIONS.pdf.
[19] William Twining. Talk about Realism[J].New York University Law Review, 1985, 60:329-384.
[20] William Twining. Schauer on Hart[J].Harvard Law Review, 2006, 119:122-130.
[21] William Twining. Some elusive–isms[EB/OL].(2009-1-16)[2009-12-15]. http:// www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[22] William Twining. Law Teaching as a Vocation [EB/OL]. (2009-1-16)[2009- 12-15]. http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[23] William Twining. Some Basic Concepts [EB/OL].(2009-1-16)[2009-12-15]. http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[24] William Twining. Mapping Law[J].Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 1999, 50:12-49.
[25] William Twining. Other People’s Power: The Bad Man and English Positivism, 1897-1997[J].Brooklyn Law Review, 1997, 63:189-224.
[26] William Twining. Some Scepticism about Some Scepticisms[J].Journal of Law and Society, 1984, 11(2):137-171.
[27] William Twining. Some Scepticism about Some Scepticisms(Continued)[J].Journal of Law and Society, 1984, 11(3):285-316.
[28] William Twining. Cosmopolitan Legal Studies[J].International Journal of the Legal Profession, 2002, 9:99-108.
[29] William Twining. Law and Anthropology:A Case Study in Inter-Discipline Collaboration[J].Law & Society Review, 1973, 7:561-584.
[30] William Twining. The Idea of Juristic Method: A Tribute to Karl Llewellyn[J].University of Miami Law Review, 1993-1994, 48:119-158.
[31] Doron M. Kalir. Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence [J] Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001, 39:785-822.
[32] Brian Z. Tamanaha . Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence [J].University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, 15:69-84.
[33] Susan Haack. Reflections on Relativism: From Momentous Tautology to Seductive Contradiction[J].Philosophical Perspectives, 1996, 30:297-315.
[34] Barry Wright. Book Review: The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories[J].Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2004, 42:533-538.
[35] Rosa Theofanis. Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory[J].Texas International Law Journal, 2001, 36:835.
[36] Caroline Bradley. Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory[J].The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 2000, 31:463-468.
[37] Leslie Green. General Jurisprudence: A 25th Anniversary Essay[J].Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2005, 25:565-580.
[38] H. Lauterpacht. The Nature of International Law and General Jurisprudence[J].Economica, 1932, 37:301-320.
[39] Ian Ward. Universal Jurisprudence and the Case for Legal Humanism[J].Alberta Law Review, 2001, 38:941-959.
[40] Douglas Kellner. Theorizing Globalization[J].Sociological Theory, 2002, 20:285-305.
[41] Oscar Guardiola-Rivera. The Question concerning Law[J].The Modern Law Review, 2003, 66:792-808.
[42] Pauline Kleingeld. Cosmopolitanism[J/OL].(2006-03-15)[2008-5-7] http://plato. stanford .edu/entries/cosmopolitanism/.
[43] Philip Schofield. Jeremy Bentham and Nineteenth-Century English Jurisprudence[J].Journal of Legal History, 1991, 12.
[44] Brian Z. Tamanaha. The Folly of the 'Social Scientific' Concept of Legal Pluralism [J].Journal of Law and Society, 1993, 20:192-217.
[45] Gordon R. Woodman. Legal Pluralism and the Search for Justice[J].Journal of African Law, 1996, 40:152-167.
[46] Chris Fuller. Legal Anthropology: Legal Pluralism and Legal Thought[J]. Anthropology Today, 1994, 10:9-12.
[47] Keebet von Benda-Beckmann. Globalisation and legal pluralism[J].International Law Forum du droit international,2002, 4:19-25.
[48] Brian Bix. Law, Social Science, and Pragmatism: Conceptual Jurisprudence and Socio-legal Studies[J].Rutgers Law Journal, 2000, 32:227-239.
[49] W. J. Waluchow. The Many Faces of Legal Positivism[J].University of Toronto Law Journal, 1998, 48:387-449.
[50] Sally Engle Merry. Legal Pluralism[J].Law and Society Review, 1988, 22:869-896.
[51] Jack Donnelly. Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights[J].Human Rights Quarterly, 1984, 6:400-419.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001.
①William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002.
②例如Barry Wright, Book Review: The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, 42 Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2004; Rosa Theofanis, Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory, 36 Texas International Law Journal, 2001.
③Caroline Bradley, Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory, 31 The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 2000.
④Doron M. Kalir, Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence, 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001.
⑤Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008.
⑥周晓虹:《一般法理学的“乌托邦”——述评〈全球化与法律理论〉》,《法制与社会发展》2005年第6期。
⑦周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究》,吉林大学硕士学位论文,2007年。
⑧周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——简评Globalization and Legal Theory》,载邓正来主编:《中国社会科学辑刊》(2009年3月春季卷),复旦大学出版社2009年第1版;周国兴:《认真对待全球化:迈向一般法理学——简评卡利尔对特维宁<全球化与法律理论>一书的评论》,载邓正来主编:《西方法律哲学家研究年刊》(2008年总第3卷),北京大学出版社2009年第1版。
①邓正来:《谁之全球化?何种法哲学?——开放性全球化观与中国法律哲学建构论纲》,商务印书馆2009年第1版。
①[英]安东尼·吉登斯:《现代性的后果》,田禾译,译林出版社2000年第1版,第56-57页。
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.4.
③See William Twining, Implications of“Globalisation”for Law as a Discipline,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Twining_IMPLICATIONS.pdf,2009-12-19.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.5.
②关于全球化论者和怀疑论者的争论,具体内容请参见[英]戴维·赫尔德、安东尼·麦克格鲁:《全球化与反全球化》,陈志刚译,社会科学文献出版社2004年第1版。
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.51-54.
①黄文艺:《全球结构与法律发展》,法律出版社2006年第1版,第18页。
②[英]安东尼·吉登斯:《现代性的后果》,田禾译,译林出版社2000年第1版,第57页。
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫:《全球化——“第三世界”——前景忧虑与赶超希望之间的文化》,载[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫主编:《全球化压力下的世界文化》,吴志成、韦苏等译,江西人民出版社2001年第1版,第6页。
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.xi-xii.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.5-6.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.6-7.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.445.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.15.
②[加拿大]W. J.瓦卢绍:《法律实证主义的多面性》,载[美]布莱恩·比克斯等:《法律实证主义:思想与文本》,陈锐编译,清华大学出版社2008年第1版,第58页。
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.16.
④Philip Schofield, Jeremy Bentham and Nineteenth-Century English Jurisprudence, 12 Journal of Legal History, 1991.
⑤See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.16-17.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.17-18.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.21-22.
②William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.22.
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.23.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.25-28.
②这包括Frederick Pollock, John Chipman Gray, Albert Kocourek以及Buckland,具体批评观点请参见William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.29-31.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.30-31.
④See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.31-33.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.35.
②See H. L. A. Hart, Postscript, in Penelope A. Bulloch & Joseph Raz (eds.), The Concept of Law (2nd edition), Clarendon Press, 1994, p.240.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.33-47.关于特维宁对哈特的具体评论及对其理论的继承和批判,将在下文予以详细讨论。
④See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.48-49.
① See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence, “UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.111-112.
②See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.112-114.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge UniversityPress, 2009, p.27.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.26-27.
②特维宁认为,研究既往经典思想家的文本主要的智识价值就在于,这有助于解决法律理论中当代的重大问题,任何有价值的文本都旨在提出或解决一个或几个问题,阅读前人的文本意味着在读者和作者之间就这些问题进行的一次对话。关于特维宁对此问题的看法及对话式阅读的具体含义,请参见William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.208-225;在Talk about Realism一文中,特维宁也详细说明了阅读前人文本时历史的、分析的、应用的三个层面及这三个层面之间的关系。See William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, pp.329-384.
①William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.261.
②例如彼得·辛格(Peter Singer)对边沁理论的修正,对这一问题的具体讨论请参见下文4.3.2.2。
③See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.237.
④[英]威廉·特维宁:《想象边沁:一个纪念》,周国兴、李燕涛译,载邓正来主编:《西方法律哲学家研究年刊》(2007年总第2卷),北京大学出版社2008年第1版,第204-205页。
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.104-105.
②See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.103-104.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.37.特维宁在研究中区分了law talk和talk about law:law talk指关于法律规则及法律规则的各种预设本身的话语,如规则、法律体系、权利、主权等等;而talk about law指关于任何法律现象的话语,例如争议、职能、制度、秩序等等。law talk在英美分析传统中与以规则为导向的法律观念相连,law talk被认为是法律所独有的;而talk about law则被认为是属于社会学、经济学、伦理学、政治理论等其他学科的,或至少是法学与其他学科共有的。See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.129.
③H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law, Oxford University Press, 1961, p.v.
④William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.127.
①William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.127.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.254.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④在探讨法理学、法律理论和法律哲学之间的关系时,特维宁将法理学和法律理论视为同义词,并将之理解为法学学科的理论部分,同时将法律哲学理解为法理学最为抽象的那部分。具体讨论请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.xix.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, Law in Context: Enlarging a Discipline, Clarendon Press, 1997, p.139.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.8.
⑦See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.xviii.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.184.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
④See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.365-380.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.449.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
⑤William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
①See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
②See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
④See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
⑤See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”,http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第80页。
③See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.341.
④See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.xiii.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.249.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.128-129.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.129.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.130.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.130.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
⑥此处特维宁引用的是亚里士多德在《尼各马可伦理学》中对公正问题的一段讨论:“有些人认为所有的公正都是约定的,因为凡是自然的都是不可变更的和始终有效的,例如火不论是在这里还是在波斯都燃烧,
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.127.
①See Jack Donnelly, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, 6 Human Rights Quarterly, 1984, pp.400-401.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.18.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.54-55.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.39.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.40.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.40-41.
④例如在讨论法律移植和传播的问题时他所勾画的理想类型、模型;对各种法律层面的比喻;在讨论法律的
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.35.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.43-44.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②关于这个问题将在第6章展开详细讨论。
③William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.337.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, p.82.
①周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究》,吉林大学硕士学位论文,2007年,第35页。关于卡利尔对作为一种语境现象与作为一种抽象的一般性法律概念的基本区分,请参见Doron M. Kalir, Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence, 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.118-119.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.30.
②对此,特维宁以伊斯兰法为例进行了说明。特维宁认为,“伊斯兰法”(Islamic law)一词可以仅指源于神圣的可兰经、默罕默德言行录及其他来源的观念、格言戒律以及学说。或者它也可以既指这些思想观念,也指这些观念实际上是如何通过当地人在伊斯兰教的名义下进行的各种活动这样的社会实践而被制度化的。在纯粹的学说观念的意义上,在伊斯兰思想中法律和道德在很大程度上是难以分辨的。这就是“是”与“应当”的界分被打破的一个重要的情形和语境。(承认这种情形便是特维宁所称的“弱实证主义”的体现)然而,当这些理念体现在社会实践中时,它们通常都会混合进习惯、习俗与适应性,而有些习惯、习俗及适应性在学说中是没有基础的。由此,特维宁要构建一个既涵盖规范性的学说也包含实际的行动的社会实践概念。
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.101.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.124.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.124-126.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.123-124.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.123.
①关于特维宁对边沁的功利主义的解读,请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.133-141; William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.91-107; William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.201-246, 247-283.
②这一点请详见前文2.3.3“全球化语境中‘对话’边沁”中的论述。
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.154.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.157.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.160.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.168.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.147-148.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.148.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.149.
②在这个问题上特维宁指出,从一种全球的视角来看,一个现代的功利主义者可能会主张,对于每个国家领导者来说,其道德关注范围应该是作为整体的人类。但是当今国际社会结构是,除非是在功利主义明确要求做出某些牺牲或调整的情况下,关注人类的利益对于(民主社会的)领导者们一般而言应该是代表和努力增进他们自己政体的利益,况且民主选举的政治结构也会给领导者们以压力。See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.148-149.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.149.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.164-165.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.165.
⑦William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.165.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.166-170.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.171-172.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.176-177.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.181.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.180-181.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.181.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.182.
③特维宁主要列举了以下几类批评:有一种观点认为,人权法律体制的现状和已取得的进展本身并不能作为人权普世化的有力证据,大多数的人权法律体制并没有超越乐观的愿望以及表面上的法的程度;另有一些评论者质疑道德高尚的愿望是否或者应否在人权实践的现实中得以体现,例如原本期望用以作为对抗国家的屏障实际上往往被用来确保和增进国家利益的情形;还有一种关于人权法的有益效果的怀疑主义观点,这种观点担心人权法趋于使某些更适于解决民主政治领域问题的方法形式化和僵化。See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.183-185.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.185.
⑤See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.185.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.186-187.
⑦William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge UniversityPress, 2009, p.200.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.199-201.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.187-199.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.202.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.202-203.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.207.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.209-214.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.217.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.217.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.376.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.377.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.438.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.438-440.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.377.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.226.
③关于特维宁对经验性法律研究范围的界定,以及对为何不使用这些标签原因的详细说明,请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.226-229.
②William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”, http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf, 2009-12-15.
③See William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”,Law Review, 1985.
①See William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”, http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf, 2009-12-15.
②William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.374.
③有关“语境进路”请参见William Twining, Law in Context: Enlarge a Discipline, Clarendon Press, 1997, pp.1-25; William Twining, Some Jobs for Jurisprudence, 1 British Journal of Law and Society, 1974, pp.149-174.
④See William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.375.
①William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.383.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.237.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.260.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.259-260.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.263-264.
①Brian Z.Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002.
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp.xi-xiii.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.xii.
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp.xvi-xvii.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.194.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, pp.202-204.
②William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.223.
③William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.229.
①William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.232.
②See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.241.
③See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, pp.241-242.
④请参见本文4.2.3“一般法理学语境下的法律的概念”中对此问题的详细讨论。
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.26.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.164.
①See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.100.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
①See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.179.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.179.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.180.
④See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.181.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.182.
②See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.173.
③See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.173-174.
④关于桑托斯对这两种解读方式的评价,请参见Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.172-177.
⑤Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvi.认识论的转换发生在现代科学的主导范式和一种新兴的范式之间,桑托斯将这种新兴范式称作关于一种令人满意的生活的审慎知识的范式;而社会政治维度的转变发生在全球资本主义范式和在诸多社会行动领域正以各种各样方式兴起的一种替代性范式之间。这里的全球资本主义在宽泛的意义上被看作一种生产模式、一种规范和制度体系、一种消费模式和生活样式、一种文化体系以及一种主观性的体制。
⑥Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation(second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvi.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
⑤See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.xvi-xviii.
①See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xviii.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.195.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.196.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.19.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.214-215.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.220.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.216.
④See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.206-207.
⑤See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.215.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.210.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.208.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.199.
④See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.335.
⑤See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.199.
⑥William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.在桑托斯的《迈向一种新的法律常识:法律、全球化与解放》一书中,他强调自己是在批判的传统之内进行研究的,但是在两个基本的方式上他偏离了这一传统,第一就是他认为现代批判理论是“附属范式的”,也就是说,它试图在主导的范式本身范围内发展社会解放的潜能。See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
③See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xxi.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
⑤Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.17.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.215.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.17.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.222.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.210.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.101.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
①See Brian Bix, Law, Social Science, and Pragmatism: Conceptual Jurisprudence and Socio-legal Studies, 32 Rutgers Law Journal, 2000, pp.230-233.
①[加拿大]W.J.瓦卢绍:《法律实证主义的多面性》,载[美]布莱恩·比克斯等:《法律实证主义:思想与文本》,陈锐编译,清华大学出版社2008年第1版,第58页。
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, p.81.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/ Twining/, 2009-9-8.
②何包钢:《三种全球正义观:地方正义观对全球正义理论的批判》,载许纪霖主编:《全球正义与文明对话》,江苏人民出版社2004年第1版,第82页。
①[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第105页。
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第88页。
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④于硕:《文明对话需要精神空间》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第216页。
①关于各文明在全球化进程的中不同反应,请参见[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫主编:《全球化压力下的世界文化》,吴志成、韦苏等译,江西人民出版社2001年第1版。
②[英]C.W.沃特森:《多元文化主义》,叶兴艺译,吉林人民出版社2005年第1版,第78页。这段话是沃特森对认为全球化怎样影响价值、文化选择的观点的概括和总结,他本人更倾向于将资本主义传播的过程看作一个伴随着解放的过程。但在我看来,上述观点有力地说明了全球结构下发达国家如何通过商品输出的方式对发展中国家的价值和文化造成影响和制约。
③特维宁关于对话理论弱点的讨论,请参见本文4.3.3.2。
①杨雪冬:《全球化:西方理论前沿》,社会科学文献出版社2002年第1版,第45页。
②See Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami
[2]张文显.马克思主义法理学:理论、方法和前沿[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2003.
[3]邓正来.中国法学向何处去——建构“中国法律理想图景”时代的论纲[M].北京:商务印书馆,2006.
[4]邓正来.谁之全球化?何种法哲学?——开放性全球化观与中国法律哲学建构论纲[M].北京:商务印书馆,2009.
[5]刘星.法律是什么——二十世纪英美法理学批判阅读[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[6]徐爱国.分析法学[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[7]黄文艺.全球结构与法律发展[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[8]杨雪冬.全球化:西方理论前沿[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[9]张旭东.全球化时代的文化认同:西方普遍主义话语的历史批判(第二版)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[10]季卫东.宪政新论——全球化时代的法与社会变迁[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
[11]赵汀阳.天下体系——世界制度哲学导论[M].南京:江苏教育出版社,2005.
[12]许纪霖.全球正义与文明对话[C].南京:江苏人民出版社,2004.
[13]哈佛燕京学社.全球化与文明对话[C].南京:江苏教育出版社,2004.
[14]信春鹰.全球化与多元法律文化[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2007.
[15]俞可平.全球化:全球治理[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[16]俞可平,黄卫平.全球化的悖论[C].北京:中央编译出版社,1998.
[17]中华孔子学会,云南民族学院.经济全球化与民族文化多元发展[C].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[18]梁治平.法律的文化解释(增订本)[C].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1998.
[1] [英]威廉·退宁.全球化与法律理论[M].钱向阳译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,2009.
[2] [英]博温托·迪·苏萨·桑托斯.迈向新法律常识——法律、全球化和解放(第二版)[M].刘坤轮,叶传星译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009.
[3] [英]边沁.政府片论[M].沈叔平,等译.北京:商务印书馆,1995.
[4] [英]边沁.道德与立法原理导论[M].时殷弘译.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[5] [美]布赖恩·比克斯.法理学:理论与语境[M].邱昭继译.北京:法律出版社,2008.
[6] [英]约翰·奥斯丁.法理学的范围[M].刘星译.北京:中国法制出版社,2002.
[7] [英]韦恩·莫里森.法理学:从古希腊到后现代[M].李桂林,等译.武汉:武汉大学出版社,2003.
[8] [美]希拉里·普特南.事实与价值二分法的崩溃[M].应奇译.北京:东方出版社,2006.
[9] [英]H.L.A.哈特.法律的概念[M].张文显,等译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[10] [英]H.L.A.哈特.法理学与哲学论文集[M].支振锋译.北京:法律出版社,2005.
[11] [美]E.博登海默.法理学:法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[12] [美]罗斯科·庞德.法理学(第一卷)[M].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[13] [爱尔兰]J.M.凯利.西方法律思想简史[M].王笑红译.北京:法律出版社2002.
[14] [英]尼尔·麦考密克,[奥]奥塔·魏因贝格尔.制度法论[M].周叶谦译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[15] [英]约瑟夫·拉兹.法律体系的概念[M].吴玉章译.北京:中国法制出版社,2003.
[16] [美]德沃金.认真对待权利[M].信春鹰,吴玉章译.北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1998.
[17] [法]米海伊尔·戴尔马斯-马蒂.世界法的三个挑战[M].罗结珍,等译.北京:法律出版社,2001.
[18] [美]约翰·罗尔斯.万民法[M].张晓辉,等译.长春:吉林人民出版社,2001.
[19] [美]塞缪尔·亨廷顿.文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建[M].周琪,等译.北京:新华出版社,2002.
[20] [英]安东尼·吉登斯.现代性的后果[M].田禾译.南京:译林出版社,2000.
[21] [美]克利福德·吉尔兹.地方性知识——阐释人类学论文集[M].王海龙,张家瑄译.北京:中央编译出版社,2004.
[22] [美]克利福德·格尔茨.文化的解释[M].韩莉译.南京:译林出版社,1999.
[23] [美]杰弗里·亚历山大.社会学二十讲:二战以来的理论发展[M].贾春增,等译.北京:华夏出版社,2000.
[24] [英]雷蒙·威廉斯.关键词:文化与社会的词汇[M].刘建基译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2005.
[25] [英]贾斯廷·罗森伯格.质疑全球化理论[M].洪霞,赵勇译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2002.
[26] [以色列]S.N.艾森斯塔特.反思现代性[M].旷新年,王爱松译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2005.
[27] [英]戴维?赫尔德,等.全球大变革:全球化时代的政治、经济与文化[M].杨雪冬,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2001.
[28] [德]赖纳·特茨拉夫.全球化压力下的世界文化[C].吴志成,韦苏,等译.南昌:江西人民出版社,2001.
[29] [美]迈克尔·沃尔泽.正义诸领域——为多元主义与平等一辩[M].褚松燕译.南京:译林出版社,2002.
[30] [德]安德烈·冈德·弗兰克.依附性积累与不发达[M].高铦,高戈译.南京:译林出版社,1999.
[31] [美]R.M.昂格尔.现代社会中的法律[M].吴玉章,周汉华译.南京:译林出版社,2001.
[32] [美]A.麦金泰尔.追寻美德——伦理理论研究[M].宋继杰译.南京:译林出版社,2003.
[33] [英]约翰·汤姆林森.全球化与文化[M].郭英剑译.南京:南京大学出版社,2002.
[34] [英]尼格尔·多德.社会理论与现代性[M].陶传进译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[35] [日]千叶正士.法律多元——从日本法律文化迈向一般理论[M].强世功,等译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[36] [英]苏珊·哈克.证据与探究——走向认识论的重构[M].陈波,等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004.
[37] [美]弗朗西斯科?洛佩斯?塞格雷拉.全球化与世界体系[C].白凤森,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[38] [英]保罗?赫斯特,格雷厄姆?汤普森.质疑全球化——国际经济与治理的可能性(第二版)[M].张文成,等译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[39] [英]戴维?赫尔德,安东尼?麦克格鲁.全球化与反全球化[M].陈志刚译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2004.
[40] [古希腊]亚里士多德.尼各马可伦理学[M].廖申白译注.北京:商务印书馆,2003.
[41] [美]布莱恩·比克斯,等.法律实证主义:思想与文本[C].陈锐编译.北京:清华大学出版社,2008.
[42] [英]C.W.沃特森.多元文化主义[M].叶兴艺译.长春:吉林人民出版社,2005.
[1] William Twining. Globalisation and Legal Theory[M].Evanston:Northwestern University Press,2001.
[2] William Twining. The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories[M].Dartmouth: Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002.
[3] William Twining. General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[4] William Twining, David Miers.How to Do Things with Rules[M].London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson Ltd.,1982.
[5] William Twining. Law in Context: Enlarging a Discipline[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1997.
[6] William Twining. Blackstone's Tower: The English Law School[M].London: Stevens & Sons Ltd. /Sweet and Maxwell Ltd.,1994.
[7] William Twining. Karl Llewellyn and the Realist Movement[M].Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1985.
[8] Brian Z.Tamanaha.A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2001.
[9] Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition[M].New York:Routledge, 1995.
[10] Boaventura de Sousa Santos. Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation(Second edition)[M].London: Butterworths,2002.
[11] H.L.A.Hart.Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1983.
[12] H.L.A.Hart.The Concept of Law[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1961.
[13] Brian Leiter.Naturalizing Jurisprudence:Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2007.
[14] B.Bix (ed.). Analyzing Law:New Essays in Legal Theory[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1998.
[15] Penelope A. Bulloch & Joseph Raz (eds.).The Concept of Law (2nd edition) [M].Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1994.
[1]周国兴.一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究[D].长春:吉林大学法学院,2007.
[2]周国兴.一般法理学如何可能——简评Globalization and Legal Theory[C]//中国社会科学辑刊.上海:复旦大学出版社,2009.
[3]周国兴.认真对待全球化:迈向一般法理学——简评卡利尔对特维宁《全球化与法律理论》一书的评论[C]//西方法律哲学家研究年刊.北京:北京大学出版社,2009.
[4]周晓虹.一般法理学的“乌托邦”——述评《全球化与法律理论》[J].法制与社会发展,2005(6):139-147.
[5]黄文艺.全球化时代的法哲学——第22届IVR世界大会综述[J].法制与社会发展,2005(6):148-152.
[6]张文显.全球化时代的中国法治[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2005(2):5-11.
[7]朱振.全球化进程中的中国法学——访张文显教授[J].学习与探索,2006(1):261-263.
[8]邓正来.全球化时代与中国法学——“主体性中国”的建构理路[J].学习与探索,2006(1):41-49.
[9]张文显.超越法律实证主义和自然法理论:制度法理学的认识:方法论和本体论[J].比较法研究,1995(1):74-88.
[10]刘星.哈特法律概念分析的模式建构及其历史定位[J].比较法研究,1996(4):337-350.
[11]刘星.重读奥斯丁的《法理学范围》[J].环球法律评论,2002(1):122-127.
[12]赵旭东.秩序、过程与文化——西方法律人类学的发展及其问题[J].环球法律评论,2005(5):557-570.
[13]王铭铭.格尔兹的解释人类学[J].教学与研究,1999(4):31-37.
[14] [英]威廉·特维宁.想象边沁:一个纪念[C].周国兴,李燕涛译.//西方法律哲学家研究年刊.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[15] [英]威廉·推宁.全球化和法律理论[EB/OL].朱景文译.(2003-11- 8)[2007-11-1].http://www.jus.cn/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=95.
[1] William Twining.A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law[J].Law and Society Review,2003,37:199-257.
[2] William Twining.Academic Law and Legal Philosophy:The Significance of Herbert Hart[J].Law Quarterly Review,1979,95:565-580.
[3] William Twining.Replying to Frederick Schauer[J].Harvard Law Review, 2006, 119:853.
[4] William Twining. Some Jobs for Jurisprudence[J].British Journal of Law and Society, 1974, 1:149-174.
[5] William Twining. A Cosmopolitan Discipline? Some Implications of "Globalisation" or Legal Education[J].Int. Jo. of the Legal Profession, 2001, 8: 23-36.
[6] William Twining. Diffusion of Law: A Global Perspective[J].Journal of Legal Pluralism, 2004, 49:1-46.
[7] William Twining. Social Science and Diffusion of Law[J].Journal of Law and Society, 2005, 32:203-240.
[8] William Twining. Diffusion and Globalization Discourse[J].Harvard International Law Journal, 2006, 47:507-516.
[9] William Twining.Argumentation, Stories and Generalizations: A Comment[J].Law, Probability & Risk, 2007, 6:169.
[10] William Twining. General Jurisprudence[EB/OL]. (2005-4-25)[2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/.
[11] William Twining. Reviving General Jurisprudence[EB/OL].(2005-4-7) [2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/.
[12] William Twining. Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence[EB/OL]. (2005-4-25) [2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/.
[13] William Twining. The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined[EB/OL]. (2005-4-7) [2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/.
[14] William Twining. Surface Law[EB/OL].(2007-4-25)[2007-10-20]. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/global_law/staff.shtml?twining.
[15] William Twining. Law, Justice and Rights: Some Implications of a Global Perspective[EB/OL].(2007-1-7)[2007-10-20].http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Law_Justice%20_Rights.pdf.
[16] William Twining. Human Rights: Southern Voices[J/OL]. (2007-12-6)[2008- 1-9].http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/lgd/2007_1.
[17] William Twining. Upendra Baxi - A Tribute[J/OL].(2007-4-7)[2007-10-20]. http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/lgd/2007_1.
[18] William Twining. Implications of“Globalisation”for Law as a Discipline [EB/OL].(2009-1-30)[2009-12-19] . http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Twining_IMPLICATIONS.pdf.
[19] William Twining. Talk about Realism[J].New York University Law Review, 1985, 60:329-384.
[20] William Twining. Schauer on Hart[J].Harvard Law Review, 2006, 119:122-130.
[21] William Twining. Some elusive–isms[EB/OL].(2009-1-16)[2009-12-15]. http:// www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[22] William Twining. Law Teaching as a Vocation [EB/OL]. (2009-1-16)[2009- 12-15]. http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[23] William Twining. Some Basic Concepts [EB/OL].(2009-1-16)[2009-12-15]. http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf.
[24] William Twining. Mapping Law[J].Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 1999, 50:12-49.
[25] William Twining. Other People’s Power: The Bad Man and English Positivism, 1897-1997[J].Brooklyn Law Review, 1997, 63:189-224.
[26] William Twining. Some Scepticism about Some Scepticisms[J].Journal of Law and Society, 1984, 11(2):137-171.
[27] William Twining. Some Scepticism about Some Scepticisms(Continued)[J].Journal of Law and Society, 1984, 11(3):285-316.
[28] William Twining. Cosmopolitan Legal Studies[J].International Journal of the Legal Profession, 2002, 9:99-108.
[29] William Twining. Law and Anthropology:A Case Study in Inter-Discipline Collaboration[J].Law & Society Review, 1973, 7:561-584.
[30] William Twining. The Idea of Juristic Method: A Tribute to Karl Llewellyn[J].University of Miami Law Review, 1993-1994, 48:119-158.
[31] Doron M. Kalir. Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence [J] Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001, 39:785-822.
[32] Brian Z. Tamanaha . Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence [J].University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, 15:69-84.
[33] Susan Haack. Reflections on Relativism: From Momentous Tautology to Seductive Contradiction[J].Philosophical Perspectives, 1996, 30:297-315.
[34] Barry Wright. Book Review: The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories[J].Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2004, 42:533-538.
[35] Rosa Theofanis. Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory[J].Texas International Law Journal, 2001, 36:835.
[36] Caroline Bradley. Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory[J].The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 2000, 31:463-468.
[37] Leslie Green. General Jurisprudence: A 25th Anniversary Essay[J].Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2005, 25:565-580.
[38] H. Lauterpacht. The Nature of International Law and General Jurisprudence[J].Economica, 1932, 37:301-320.
[39] Ian Ward. Universal Jurisprudence and the Case for Legal Humanism[J].Alberta Law Review, 2001, 38:941-959.
[40] Douglas Kellner. Theorizing Globalization[J].Sociological Theory, 2002, 20:285-305.
[41] Oscar Guardiola-Rivera. The Question concerning Law[J].The Modern Law Review, 2003, 66:792-808.
[42] Pauline Kleingeld. Cosmopolitanism[J/OL].(2006-03-15)[2008-5-7] http://plato. stanford .edu/entries/cosmopolitanism/.
[43] Philip Schofield. Jeremy Bentham and Nineteenth-Century English Jurisprudence[J].Journal of Legal History, 1991, 12.
[44] Brian Z. Tamanaha. The Folly of the 'Social Scientific' Concept of Legal Pluralism [J].Journal of Law and Society, 1993, 20:192-217.
[45] Gordon R. Woodman. Legal Pluralism and the Search for Justice[J].Journal of African Law, 1996, 40:152-167.
[46] Chris Fuller. Legal Anthropology: Legal Pluralism and Legal Thought[J]. Anthropology Today, 1994, 10:9-12.
[47] Keebet von Benda-Beckmann. Globalisation and legal pluralism[J].International Law Forum du droit international,2002, 4:19-25.
[48] Brian Bix. Law, Social Science, and Pragmatism: Conceptual Jurisprudence and Socio-legal Studies[J].Rutgers Law Journal, 2000, 32:227-239.
[49] W. J. Waluchow. The Many Faces of Legal Positivism[J].University of Toronto Law Journal, 1998, 48:387-449.
[50] Sally Engle Merry. Legal Pluralism[J].Law and Society Review, 1988, 22:869-896.
[51] Jack Donnelly. Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights[J].Human Rights Quarterly, 1984, 6:400-419.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001.
①William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002.
②例如Barry Wright, Book Review: The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, 42 Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2004; Rosa Theofanis, Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory, 36 Texas International Law Journal, 2001.
③Caroline Bradley, Book Review: Globalisation and Legal Theory, 31 The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 2000.
④Doron M. Kalir, Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence, 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001.
⑤Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008.
⑥周晓虹:《一般法理学的“乌托邦”——述评〈全球化与法律理论〉》,《法制与社会发展》2005年第6期。
⑦周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究》,吉林大学硕士学位论文,2007年。
⑧周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——简评Globalization and Legal Theory》,载邓正来主编:《中国社会科学辑刊》(2009年3月春季卷),复旦大学出版社2009年第1版;周国兴:《认真对待全球化:迈向一般法理学——简评卡利尔对特维宁<全球化与法律理论>一书的评论》,载邓正来主编:《西方法律哲学家研究年刊》(2008年总第3卷),北京大学出版社2009年第1版。
①邓正来:《谁之全球化?何种法哲学?——开放性全球化观与中国法律哲学建构论纲》,商务印书馆2009年第1版。
①[英]安东尼·吉登斯:《现代性的后果》,田禾译,译林出版社2000年第1版,第56-57页。
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.4.
③See William Twining, Implications of“Globalisation”for Law as a Discipline,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/Twining_IMPLICATIONS.pdf,2009-12-19.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.5.
②关于全球化论者和怀疑论者的争论,具体内容请参见[英]戴维·赫尔德、安东尼·麦克格鲁:《全球化与反全球化》,陈志刚译,社会科学文献出版社2004年第1版。
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.51-54.
①黄文艺:《全球结构与法律发展》,法律出版社2006年第1版,第18页。
②[英]安东尼·吉登斯:《现代性的后果》,田禾译,译林出版社2000年第1版,第57页。
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫:《全球化——“第三世界”——前景忧虑与赶超希望之间的文化》,载[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫主编:《全球化压力下的世界文化》,吴志成、韦苏等译,江西人民出版社2001年第1版,第6页。
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.xi-xii.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.5-6.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.6-7.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.445.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.15.
②[加拿大]W. J.瓦卢绍:《法律实证主义的多面性》,载[美]布莱恩·比克斯等:《法律实证主义:思想与文本》,陈锐编译,清华大学出版社2008年第1版,第58页。
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.16.
④Philip Schofield, Jeremy Bentham and Nineteenth-Century English Jurisprudence, 12 Journal of Legal History, 1991.
⑤See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.16-17.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.17-18.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.21-22.
②William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.22.
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.23.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.25-28.
②这包括Frederick Pollock, John Chipman Gray, Albert Kocourek以及Buckland,具体批评观点请参见William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.29-31.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.30-31.
④See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.31-33.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.35.
②See H. L. A. Hart, Postscript, in Penelope A. Bulloch & Joseph Raz (eds.), The Concept of Law (2nd edition), Clarendon Press, 1994, p.240.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.33-47.关于特维宁对哈特的具体评论及对其理论的继承和批判,将在下文予以详细讨论。
④See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.48-49.
① See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence, “UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.111-112.
②See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.112-114.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge UniversityPress, 2009, p.27.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective,Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.26-27.
②特维宁认为,研究既往经典思想家的文本主要的智识价值就在于,这有助于解决法律理论中当代的重大问题,任何有价值的文本都旨在提出或解决一个或几个问题,阅读前人的文本意味着在读者和作者之间就这些问题进行的一次对话。关于特维宁对此问题的看法及对话式阅读的具体含义,请参见William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.208-225;在Talk about Realism一文中,特维宁也详细说明了阅读前人文本时历史的、分析的、应用的三个层面及这三个层面之间的关系。See William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, pp.329-384.
①William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.261.
②例如彼得·辛格(Peter Singer)对边沁理论的修正,对这一问题的具体讨论请参见下文4.3.2.2。
③See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.237.
④[英]威廉·特维宁:《想象边沁:一个纪念》,周国兴、李燕涛译,载邓正来主编:《西方法律哲学家研究年刊》(2007年总第2卷),北京大学出版社2008年第1版,第204-205页。
①See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.104-105.
②See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.103-104.
③See William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.37.特维宁在研究中区分了law talk和talk about law:law talk指关于法律规则及法律规则的各种预设本身的话语,如规则、法律体系、权利、主权等等;而talk about law指关于任何法律现象的话语,例如争议、职能、制度、秩序等等。law talk在英美分析传统中与以规则为导向的法律观念相连,law talk被认为是法律所独有的;而talk about law则被认为是属于社会学、经济学、伦理学、政治理论等其他学科的,或至少是法学与其他学科共有的。See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.129.
③H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law, Oxford University Press, 1961, p.v.
④William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.127.
①William Twining, Schauer on Hart, 119 Harvard Law Review, 2006, p.127.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8
③William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.254.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④在探讨法理学、法律理论和法律哲学之间的关系时,特维宁将法理学和法律理论视为同义词,并将之理解为法学学科的理论部分,同时将法律哲学理解为法理学最为抽象的那部分。具体讨论请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.xix.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, Law in Context: Enlarging a Discipline, Clarendon Press, 1997, p.139.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.8.
⑦See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.xviii.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.184.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
④See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.365-380.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.449.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
⑤William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
①See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
②See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
④See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
⑤See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”,http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, The Province of Jurisprudence Re-examined: Problems of Generalization in a Global Context,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/docs/, 2009-11-5.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第80页。
③See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.341.
④See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.xiii.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Global and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.249.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.128-129.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.129.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.130.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.130.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
⑥此处特维宁引用的是亚里士多德在《尼各马可伦理学》中对公正问题的一段讨论:“有些人认为所有的公正都是约定的,因为凡是自然的都是不可变更的和始终有效的,例如火不论是在这里还是在波斯都燃烧,
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.127.
①See Jack Donnelly, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, 6 Human Rights Quarterly, 1984, pp.400-401.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.18.
①William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.54-55.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.39.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.40.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.40-41.
④例如在讨论法律移植和传播的问题时他所勾画的理想类型、模型;对各种法律层面的比喻;在讨论法律的
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.35.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.43-44.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②关于这个问题将在第6章展开详细讨论。
③William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.337.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, p.82.
①周国兴:《一般法理学如何可能——特维宁的一般法理学思想研究》,吉林大学硕士学位论文,2007年,第35页。关于卡利尔对作为一种语境现象与作为一种抽象的一般性法律概念的基本区分,请参见Doron M. Kalir, Taking Globalization Seriously: Towards General Jurisprudence, 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2001.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.118-119.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.117.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.30.
②对此,特维宁以伊斯兰法为例进行了说明。特维宁认为,“伊斯兰法”(Islamic law)一词可以仅指源于神圣的可兰经、默罕默德言行录及其他来源的观念、格言戒律以及学说。或者它也可以既指这些思想观念,也指这些观念实际上是如何通过当地人在伊斯兰教的名义下进行的各种活动这样的社会实践而被制度化的。在纯粹的学说观念的意义上,在伊斯兰思想中法律和道德在很大程度上是难以分辨的。这就是“是”与“应当”的界分被打破的一个重要的情形和语境。(承认这种情形便是特维宁所称的“弱实证主义”的体现)然而,当这些理念体现在社会实践中时,它们通常都会混合进习惯、习俗与适应性,而有些习惯、习俗及适应性在学说中是没有基础的。由此,特维宁要构建一个既涵盖规范性的学说也包含实际的行动的社会实践概念。
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.101.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.124.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.124-126.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.123-124.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.123.
①关于特维宁对边沁的功利主义的解读,请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.133-141; William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.91-107; William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, pp.201-246, 247-283.
②这一点请详见前文2.3.3“全球化语境中‘对话’边沁”中的论述。
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.154.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.157.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.160.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.168.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.145.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.147-148.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2009, p.148.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.149.
②在这个问题上特维宁指出,从一种全球的视角来看,一个现代的功利主义者可能会主张,对于每个国家领导者来说,其道德关注范围应该是作为整体的人类。但是当今国际社会结构是,除非是在功利主义明确要求做出某些牺牲或调整的情况下,关注人类的利益对于(民主社会的)领导者们一般而言应该是代表和努力增进他们自己政体的利益,况且民主选举的政治结构也会给领导者们以压力。See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.148-149.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.149.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.164-165.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.165.
⑦William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.165.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.166-170.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.171-172.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.176-177.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.181.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.180-181.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.181.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.182.
③特维宁主要列举了以下几类批评:有一种观点认为,人权法律体制的现状和已取得的进展本身并不能作为人权普世化的有力证据,大多数的人权法律体制并没有超越乐观的愿望以及表面上的法的程度;另有一些评论者质疑道德高尚的愿望是否或者应否在人权实践的现实中得以体现,例如原本期望用以作为对抗国家的屏障实际上往往被用来确保和增进国家利益的情形;还有一种关于人权法的有益效果的怀疑主义观点,这种观点担心人权法趋于使某些更适于解决民主政治领域问题的方法形式化和僵化。See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.183-185.
④William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.185.
⑤See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.185.
⑥See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.186-187.
⑦William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge UniversityPress, 2009, p.200.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.199-201.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.187-199.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.202.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.202-203.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.207.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.209-214.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.217.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.217.
⑤William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.376.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.377.
④See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.438.
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.438-440.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.377.
①See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
②See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.226.
③关于特维宁对经验性法律研究范围的界定,以及对为何不使用这些标签原因的详细说明,请参见William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.226-229.
②William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”, http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf, 2009-12-15.
③See William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”,Law Review, 1985.
①See William Twining, Some elusive–isms,“cambridge.org/twining”, http://www.cambridge.org/resources/0521505933/6903_16_Some%20elusive%20-isms.pdf, 2009-12-15.
②William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.374.
③有关“语境进路”请参见William Twining, Law in Context: Enlarge a Discipline, Clarendon Press, 1997, pp.1-25; William Twining, Some Jobs for Jurisprudence, 1 British Journal of Law and Society, 1974, pp.149-174.
④See William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.375.
①William Twining, Talk about Realism, 60 New York University Law Review, 1985, p.383.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.237.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.260.
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.259-260.
③See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp.263-264.
①Brian Z.Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002.
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp.xi-xiii.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.xii.
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp.xvi-xvii.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.194.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, pp.202-204.
②William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.223.
③William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.229.
①William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.232.
②See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.241.
③See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, pp.241-242.
④请参见本文4.2.3“一般法理学语境下的法律的概念”中对此问题的详细讨论。
①See William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.26.
②Brian Z. Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society, Oxford University Press, 2001, p.164.
①See William Twining, A Post-Westphalian Conception of Law, 37 Law & Society Review, 2003, p.100.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.178.
①See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.179.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.179.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.180.
④See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.181.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.182.
②See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.173.
③See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.173-174.
④关于桑托斯对这两种解读方式的评价,请参见Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.172-177.
⑤Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvi.认识论的转换发生在现代科学的主导范式和一种新兴的范式之间,桑托斯将这种新兴范式称作关于一种令人满意的生活的审慎知识的范式;而社会政治维度的转变发生在全球资本主义范式和在诸多社会行动领域正以各种各样方式兴起的一种替代性范式之间。这里的全球资本主义在宽泛的意义上被看作一种生产模式、一种规范和制度体系、一种消费模式和生活样式、一种文化体系以及一种主观性的体制。
⑥Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation(second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvi.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
⑤See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, pp.xvi-xviii.
①See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xviii.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.195.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.196.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.19.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.214-215.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.220.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.216.
④See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, pp.206-207.
⑤See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.215.
①See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.210.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.208.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.199.
④See William Twining, The Great Juristic Bazaar: Jurists’Texts and Lawyers’Stories, Ashgate Publishing Co., 2002, p.335.
⑤See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.199.
⑥William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.在桑托斯的《迈向一种新的法律常识:法律、全球化与解放》一书中,他强调自己是在批判的传统之内进行研究的,但是在两个基本的方式上他偏离了这一传统,第一就是他认为现代批判理论是“附属范式的”,也就是说,它试图在主导的范式本身范围内发展社会解放的潜能。See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xvii.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
②William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
③See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.xxi.
④Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
⑤Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
①Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.17.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.215.
③Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.17.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/twining/, 2009-9-8.
②See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.222.
③See William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.210.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.101.
①William Twining, Globalisation and Legal Theory, Northwestern University Press, 2001, p.198.
②Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation (second edition), Butterworths, 2002, p.16.
①See Brian Bix, Law, Social Science, and Pragmatism: Conceptual Jurisprudence and Socio-legal Studies, 32 Rutgers Law Journal, 2000, pp.230-233.
①[加拿大]W.J.瓦卢绍:《法律实证主义的多面性》,载[美]布莱恩·比克斯等:《法律实证主义:思想与文本》,陈锐编译,清华大学出版社2008年第1版,第58页。
①See Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 2007-2008, p.81.
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①William Twining, General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/academics/profiles/ Twining/, 2009-9-8.
②何包钢:《三种全球正义观:地方正义观对全球正义理论的批判》,载许纪霖主编:《全球正义与文明对话》,江苏人民出版社2004年第1版,第82页。
①[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第105页。
②William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.223.
③William Twining, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.131.
④See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
①[美]杜维明:《全球化与多样性》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第88页。
②See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
③See William Twining, Tilburg Lectures on General Jurisprudence,“UCL Laws: Institute of Global Law”, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/jurisprudence/doc/, 2009-10-23.
④于硕:《文明对话需要精神空间》,载哈佛燕京学社编:《全球化与文明对话》,江苏教育出版社2004年第1版,第216页。
①关于各文明在全球化进程的中不同反应,请参见[德]赖纳·特茨拉夫主编:《全球化压力下的世界文化》,吴志成、韦苏等译,江西人民出版社2001年第1版。
②[英]C.W.沃特森:《多元文化主义》,叶兴艺译,吉林人民出版社2005年第1版,第78页。这段话是沃特森对认为全球化怎样影响价值、文化选择的观点的概括和总结,他本人更倾向于将资本主义传播的过程看作一个伴随着解放的过程。但在我看来,上述观点有力地说明了全球结构下发达国家如何通过商品输出的方式对发展中国家的价值和文化造成影响和制约。
③特维宁关于对话理论弱点的讨论,请参见本文4.3.3.2。
①杨雪冬:《全球化:西方理论前沿》,社会科学文献出版社2002年第1版,第45页。
②See Brian Z. Tamanaha, Enhancing the Prospects for General Jurisprudence, 15 University of Miami