波斯納是不是後現代法學者？波斯納批判學院派道德主義者所隱含的後現代性探討

Is Posner a Postmodern Legal Scholar? A Study of Postmodernity through Posner's Critiques on Academic Moralists

徐振雄(Chen-Hsiung Hsu)

《東海大學法學研究》 44期 (2014/12) Pp. 1-63

摘要

本文旨在探討波斯納的新實用主義法學中所隱含的後現代性傾向，而以波斯納討論道德和法律理論的關係為闡釋核心。波斯納的法理學「三部曲」，即《法理學的問題》、《超越法律》以及《道德和法律理論的疑問》主要是以實用主義為基礎，最終目的是要消除法律的神秘，特別是要將法律從道德理論，這個重大的神秘製造者中，去神秘化。因此，波斯納批判羅爾斯、菲尼斯的理論，認為他們欲使立憲者、立法者與法官有遵守正義、真理、美德的道德哲學義務是非理性的；批判德沃金期望法官能夠在美國政治道德的傳統與現在，保持判決前後的一致性，以求得「唯一正解」是謬誤的。誠然，波斯納並非完全拒絕道德，但他堅稱這種普遍性、一致性的道德哲學進入法律和審判，就不是實用主義，就此或可詮釋波斯納反對現代合法大敘事的立場，而隱含「後現代傾向」。本文從三個面向進行探討：1、闡述後現代法學與波斯納新實用主義法學的關係，及其基本論述；2、檢視波斯納批判學院派道德主義者的理由，追找德沃金、羅爾斯和菲尼斯的理論轉向，並提出筆者的觀點；3、剖析波斯納的告白，得到他隱含著後現代性格的理由，思索現代／後現代法學的論辯議題空間。最後，理出波斯納雖隱含著「後現代」傾向，但他不至於像極端的批判法學或後現代法學，對現代法學只有「破」，而無「立」，波斯納在此反倒促成了法學更深刻的反省。

關鍵字

波斯納 ； 實用主義法學 ； 後現代法學 ； 道德理論 ； 法律推論 ； 學院派道德主義者

並列摘要

Centered on Posner's discussions on the relation between morality and legal theories, this study aims to discuss the postmodern approach in his neo-pragmatism. In his nomological trilogy, namely ＂The Problems of Jurisprudence＂, ＂Overcoming Law＂, and ＂The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theories＂, Posner grounds his discussions mainly on pragmatism with a view to removing the mystery of law, particularly to demystify the great maker of legal mystery, which happens to be legal moralism. Posner criticizes Rawls and Finnis in that he thinks that it is irrational to obligate constitution-makers, law-makers and judges to abide by the values of justice, truth and morality. Posner also criticizes that Dworkin is not right in expecting a judge to remain coherent between the traditional and the current American political morality before and after a verdict is made so that 'a right answer' is maintained thereupon. Posner does not completely denounce morality though. Yet he suggests that involving the generality and uniformity of moral philosophy in jurisprudence and judgment is not pragmatism at all. This may explain Posner's stance against the modern grand narrative, hence it seems he takes a postmodern approach here. The study falls into three sections: 1) a general statement of the relation between the postmodern legal theory and Posner's pragmatism, 2) the discussion on how Posner criticizes the academic moralists, an analysis of the postmodern anxiety in Dworkin, Rawls and Finnis, and an exposition of my own opinions, and 3) an analysis of Posner's confession, how his postmodernity is obtained, and a speculation on the debating grounds between modern and postmodern legal issues. Although Posner's discourses take on a touch of postmodern approach, he never acts like critical legal extremists or postmodernists who tend to 'destruct' rather than 'construct' the modern jurisprudence. Posner contributes greatly to deeper reflection on legal theories.

並列關鍵字

Posner ； Pragmatism ； Postmodern Jurisprudence ； Moral Theory ； Legal Inference ； Academic Moralist

參考文獻

米健譯Kaufmann, A.(2002)。後現代法哲學—告別演講。元照=Angle Publishing Co., Ltd。

陳懷恩譯Robinson, Dave(2002)。尼采與後現代主義。城邦=Cite Publishing Co., Ltd。

蘇亦工譯Luban, David(2004)。法律現代主義。中國政法大學=China University of Political Science and Law Press。

李誠予譯、岳林譯Ward, Ian(2011)。法律批判理論導引。上海三聯書店=Sdxjoint Publishing Company。

張志銘譯Nonet, P.、Selznick, P.(1994)。轉變中的法律與社會。中國政法大學出版社=China University of Political Science and Law Press。