Critique On The Premise Of Social Sciences Of Law In China

The problem consciousness in this paper is due to the academic debate caused by the development of the social sciences of law in China.The war in the field of knowledge of legal methods and legal thinking spreads to the social sciences of law and the legal dogmatics.The second phase is the emergence of natural law that begins to intervene in the dispute between the social sciences of law and the legal dogmatics.In the third stage,the social sciences of law hastily ends the debate with the social sciences of law and goes into the next battlefield with “a misunderstanding”.Following the discussion on the death of Chinese jurisprudence and the rebirth of Chinese jurisprudence,some scholars put forward the academic mission of the social sciences of law is to reconstruct Chinese jurisprudence.Therefore,this paper focuses on three issues: the possible premise of the social sciences of law and its borders,theory defects of the social sciences of law and its development and the paradigm summary of the social sciences of law and its reflection.In view of the first question,this paper argues that the social sciences of law can be used as the auxiliary force of the legal dogmatics in terms of judicial adjudication.As a law of normative science,it is an understanding of knowledge.The social sciences of law can be a necessary constitution in facing with the law.However,in view of the normative and factual philosophical principles and the legal system and the social system as two sociological principles of two independent systems,the social sciences of law must abide by its own theoretical boundary,that is within the framework of the legal dogmatics.In view of the second question,this paper argues that the social sciences of law is lost in the “jungle” of social sciences,ignoring the “homeland” of laws.More precisely,the social sciences of law has been subject to the scientific domination and cannot go home.How can the social sciences of law get scientific domination? The conclusion of this paper is to pay attention to the dimension of humanities and towards cultural research.How can the social sciences of law return to the homelandof law? The theoretical hypothesis of this paper is to return to the tradition of natural law and face to legislation.In the third part,the theoretical problem that this paper tries to solve is that whether the social sciences of law reconstructs Chinese jurisprudence is necessary or not and how is it possible.This paper first analyzes that the Chinese jurisprudence between politicization and westernization,the seeking of the ideology and the scientific nature of legal knowledge and the demand for the localization of Chinese problem consciousness and legal knowledge are the externalities of the rise of Chinese social sciences of law movement.After the legal basis of the social sciences of law,this paper tries to solve the possibility of the reconstruction of the social sciences of law in the existing legal philosophical category system with the existing right-based paradigm as the theoretical reference.This paper puts forward two core concepts of normative paradigm and factual paradigm and analyzes their opposition and unity.In order to realize the integration of normative and factual paradigm,this paper chooses the concept of “legal relationship” as the starting point and the research focus faced with the legal relationship is called the factual paradigm that is corresponding to the normative paradigm.Between the normative and factual paradigm,it needs to complete the new theoretical reconstruction.At the end of this paper,this paper argues that the greatest academic significance of the proposition of the construction of socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics is that the athletics platform of rule of law in China has been formed.Since then,law abiding,law enforcement,justice and legislation(especially the alteration of the law)become equally important.The implementation of the law and the perfection of the law begin to be evenly divided.Under the background of formal rule of law and substantive rule of law,this paper puts forward the two legal enforcement fields of legal development and law enforcement,as well as the separation of two open and closed legal research fields,which can only eliminate the tension between the “eradication of the law immortality” and the “scientific nature of science and the independence of the discipline of law”.