On The Logical Structure Model Of The Fact-Finding At Trial From A Multi-disciplinary Perspective

What are the facts? This is an unsolved riddle which has troubled philosophers. The fact-finding at trial is a puzzled yet pressing problem in judicial theory and practice. Guided by constructionism, structuralism of social epistemology and practical philosophy holism, this paper focuses on the logical structure model of the fact-finding at tial from the aspects of the theory of philosophical cognition, and then creates an integrated logical structure model of the fact-finding at trial under the main line of legal logic and multidisciplinary perspectives of logic, rhetoric, narratology. negotiation theory and philosophy of scienceThe process of the fact-finding at tial is essentially a process of logical reasoning, including several complex process of reasoning models, like deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning and abduction. At present, the main trend of legal logic is non-formal logic, which is determined by the nature of legal reasoning. In terms of the fact-finding at tial in the judicial practice, it is proposed to adopt methods of the non-formal logic, integrate multidisciplinary perspective. and take into accounts various factors that affect the process of the fact-finding at tial, in order to fully reveal the non-formal aspects in the reasoning process of the fact-finding at tial, demonstrate the philosophical multidisciplinary cognitive processes and provide a fact-finding model of case that can meet the actual needs in the judicial practice.According to the above theories, this paper is written to aim at constructing the comprehensive logical structure model of the fact-finding from a multidisciplinary perspective. It is organized as following:Firstly, introducing the basic theories such as the model of the fact-finding, the facts, the evidence and their relations, constructivism and structuralism philosophy. Secondly,we present the process of fact construction on the basis of various fact-finding, that is, the process from collecting evidences to constructing the facts of case. Thirdly, analyzing the case of Deng Yujiao with the aid of these models and pointing out the limitations of each theoretical model, in which the followings are specifically discussed:On the general logical structure model of fact-finding, the paper deals with deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning and abductive reasoning involved in the process of fact construction, analyzes model diagram of logical reasoning structure. On the hermeneutic model of fact-finding, it discusses the relevant theory of hermeneutic philosophy, and analyzes the merging process of fact construction illustrated by hermeneutic philosophy and the method of hermeneutic circle. On the model of the fact-finding based on IBE, it focuses on IBE in philosophy of science and its application in the field of justice, in which the logical structure model and the hermeneutic model are well combined with IBE. On the Rhetorical narrative model of fact-finding, it mainly explores the important models such as purpose-oriented thinking in rhetoric, etc. On the dialogue and argument model of fact-finding, it studies legal negotiation, dialogue theory and the rules and procedures that must be followed in the process of fact-finding.Based on the above analysis of the model of the fact-finding, this paper presents an integrated logical structure model, including two phases of logic structure. At the first phase, both parties create and tell the stories subject to the evidence and find faults on the other’s story and evidence. At the second phase, the person of the fact-finding of the court chooses the most acceptable stories or creates new ones from these opposing stories developed by the parties. The logical construction and logical proof practices can ensure the objectivity, scientificity and authority of the fact-finding. According to this model, the court creates the facts in the way of telling stories, the substance being rhetoric and explanation. The explanation of language and narrative mechanism turn the court into a stage. The historical facts of the case become different plays and the stories are a flexible puzzle game of evidence. In their argument, both parties can mix the implicit knowledge about judicial "foresight", life experience and common sense with the evidence, and create vivid stories through logical reasoning. In the stage of court-theater, the process of argument provides guarantee for the evidence identification, creating facts, reflecting the holiness, justice and authority of justice. We will further discuss argument rules, explanation methods, narration of the plots, examination standards and so on. At last, we contemplate the practice in the j udicial reform on the experience of the two main legal families, compare the model of the fact-finding at tial developed in this paper with the latest model of fact-finding, and make the forecast to improve the integrated model of fact-finding.This paper regards the process of logical reasoning of the fact-finding at tial as a specific practical process, establishes the model that can really explain the process of the fact-finding at tial in the judicial practice from a multidisciplinary perspective. This theoretical model can provide favorable or critical basis for the fact-finding at tial, and offer philosophical support for the practice of reform in China’s judicial system. This theory which is consistent with the judicial practice has better using value.