Dissertation > Excellent graduate degree dissertation topics show

An Analysis on the Non-absurdity of Law Judgment

Author: HeYongXiang
Tutor: ZhuangXiaoHua
School: Southwest University of Political Science
Course: Legal Theory
Keywords: Relative right Discretion Context Tolerant Social consensus Non-absurdity answer
CLC: D90
Type: Master's thesis
Year: 2012
Downloads: 6
Quote: 0
Read: Download Dissertation

Abstract

Generally speaking legal verdict that load justice, measurement results after fairprocedures and finding is symbolic scales of justice, the verdict generally regarded as thebasis for the Enforcement of Judgments, in the justice in text transformed into the actualsensory experience of the results of justice according to quasi-ruling justice sacred and crucialstep, the judgment has been given a sacred and inscrutable veil, the theory of divergent views,what is the judgment of the stick to righteousness. And the correct decision, seemingly loftyideals and the actual bottom line guardian of legal verdict.People living in the more complex and ever-changing society, the desire to identify andcorrect concept will be more intense, because the modern complex society is a society full ofunknown risks, coupled with a mindset long since formed, making it more and more suited tothe transformation of the community, people began to get anxious and doubt, whichmagnified the uncertainty of the community or the blind to look for social change "nochange" in order to reach the extreme uncertainty. Blind optimism and depression despairwill not help people to integrate into the social life; social changes will be difficult, the onlyfeasible way is to change the way people think. Like "a person wants to go out in the room donot know how to do, he tried to go out the window, but the window is too high, he tried to goout from the chimney, but the chimney is too narrow, however, as long as he turned around,he will find that the door has been open.Like the people inside of the room, their right to integrate into a society has been outthere, just we have been back to it, blindly optimistic uncertainty "window is too high,depression and despair, uncertainty," the chimney was too narrow, is that we have longformed the mindset; relatively certain "door open". Social life was filled with such innovativeconcepts, and often exists as part of social life and is an important part of the legal ruling.Pursuit of the perfect belief in support of the rule of law system,"the only solution" awardand judge the initiative of the unlimited amplification of the "random solution" awards helpless, especially in the handling of difficult cases; scholars only criticism of the concept ofPositive Solutions "a lot of" random solution "is more critical attitude. The purpose of thisarticle is to explore the justification for the verdict of the difficult cases. This in the criticalanalysis of these two extremes thinking, in particular, was to overthrow the legal concept of"random solution" to meet the legal rulings of tolerance acceptable results, a correct answer.The article is divided into several parts: the first part, a brief description of the uniquepositive solution "point of view Dworkin, and in comparison with the legal concept of Hartleads the theme of this article. The second part, from the perspective of discretion analysis,criticism of the two opposing legal form of an award, to find a middle way, a way to achievea relatively correct solution that is, Non-absurdity decision. The third part is mainly borrowedthe theory of Wittgenstein’s later philosophy to look at the rule of law, legal concepts, such asthe words of Wittgenstein’s later philosophy to understand the various different in the lateWittgenstein a brief introduction to philosophy as the support of some of the points in thisarticle text. The fourth part is talking about talking about the virtues of tolerance and socialconsensus from a diversity of risk society. Although part of the third and the fourth part of thetopic has a certain similarity, but one from the point of view of the philosophy of language,one is from the historical and social point of view, this question is two part of the logicalstructure of the elements necessary. Finally, the conclusion is generated from the specificdecisions to the rule of law to the social forms, at various points of a tolerant, a relative of theproblem, one I call the Non-absurdity ruling support.

An Analysis on the Non-absurdity of Law Judgment

Abstract

Related Dissertations