Analogous Inference In Ancient China And Its Exercise In Justice

Analogous inference, as the chief inference type of ancient China, Originated in “ZhouYi” earliest, and after the dynasty of Chun Qiu, Monist doctrine made it the special inferencetype of ancient Chinese logic. Hoi Shih said:” Speaking is making a metaphor between whatis known and what is not known, and the purpose is making listeners known.” It is a veryaccurate generalization of analogous inference. The ancients made such inference----from theone to the other, from the known to the unknown by analogous inference, and this came downin one continuous line with modern analogy. Also because of such feature, analogousinference was deeply researched and extensively applied in Chinese history.In ancient times, people were highly keen in argument. Analogous inference, as a specialway of thinking, can illustrate complicated problem by facile example, so it often became thetool of seeking knowledge and debating. Although the ancients extremely valued the guidingrole of analogous inference at many field, they didn’t pay enough attention on its function inthe judicial process. Drawing analogous inference in justice can effectively improve theflexibility of law, and speed up the trial of cases. All of these can assure the achievement ofjudicial justice.The article mainly concerns on two aspects----detailed explaining the theory ofanalogous inference and specific exploring how apply analogous inference to justice. Themost important and meaningful part is researching the special pattern of analogous inferenceaffecting justice. Specifically, the article contains four parts:The first part is a summarization of ancient analogous inference. From exploring thehistorical root of analogous inference, to systematically discussing its emerging andperfecting in different period and different thinking system, and at last by comparing it withAristotelian logic, summarizing analogous inference is a chief and special inference type ofancient China.The second part is the specific elaboration of analogous inference, including the rule of“the same category can inference and the different category can’t inference”, the four mainmethod----“pi,mou, yuan, tui”, and trying define the character of analogous inference on thebasis of such result as “analogy can lead to some conclusion, but the conclusion is notcertainly correct”. The third part starts connecting analogous inference with justice. Through analyzing theprocess of ancient justice, the article attempts to search for the guiding thinking----analogousinference. In ancient justice, the premise of using analogous inference is “There is no law tojudge by”, and the way of using analogous inference is analogy and quote. Analogy and quotemoreover contains “listing the light to show the serious, and listing the serious to show thelight” when declaring crime, and quoting recapitulative forbidden law、judicial precedentwhen measuring penalty.The forth part is innovation, mainly thinking ancient analogous inference can bring whatenlightenment to modern justice. Though ancient analogous inference and modern analogycome down in one continuous line, they aren’t completely same. Some features of analogousinference, which are different from modern analogy, may help perfecting modern justiceprocess. Investigation follows the two rules of analogous inference. Investigation testemphasizes “the same category can inference”, and putting cases together concerns “thedifferent category can’t inference”. In court debate, because of the humanity in analogousinference, reasoning further concerns people’s feeling. At last, through comparing the value ofanalogous inference with the principle of conviction and penalty according to law, besides,and considering current situation of legal precedent law and cases guiding system,the articletry to deal with the conflict between them.