Research On Value Logic In Judicial Decision

Value judgment is the soul of legal reasoning.Value orientation affects the determination of case facts,the choice of legal norms,and the use of specific legal methods.The value appeals,political values,value orientation behind legal rules,the spirit of the rule of law,the mainstream value demands of society and the individual judges value standards in litigant participating parties litter the process of judicial ruling.Judicial ruling is the result of judges value selection.However,value is subjective,mostly hidden and opaque,and we have no way of knowing how judges conduct value evaluation,value reasoning,and value decision-making.Value decision-making in judicial practice often encounters the problems of value imbalance,value confusion,lack of effective constraints,and difficulty in reflecting the mainstream value consensus of society.Therefore,in-depth study of the logic of value operation in judicial rulings and the intention of restricting judges value decisions are the top priorities for improving the legality and rationality of judicial rulings.The value decision process in judicial decisions contains value analysis,value reasoning,and value demonstration.The judge must first screen out many different values related to the case,and then analyze and reason between value propositions to prove the value decision,but often,as value The premise of propositional reasoning is itself controversial,and judges need to demonstrate their preferences and choices among competing values.Value judgment,value reasoning,and value argumentation constitute the systematic content of the value logic research paradigm.Therefore,this article aims to use the value logic method to prove the value decision in the judicial decision,to prevent the value evaluation and value balance from being reduced to the judges will and arbitrary To improve the rationality and acceptability of judicial decisions and achieve judicial justice.Following this idea,the chapters of this article are arranged as follows.The first chapter is the basic theory of value logic,explaining the research scope and necessity of value logic.This chapter is divided into four parts.The first three parts explain value and present the definition,characteristics,and evaluation of value in comparison with fact judgment.This also determines the fundamental difference between value logic and formal logic.Based on this,the fourth part defines value logic.Specifically,the definition of the first part of value,the existing value theory often defines value with three elements: the value subject,the value object,and the satisfaction of the object to the subjects needs,and then the value is defined as a judgment with authenticity.This argument is not controversial about simple functional value,but when it comes to the value of social resource allocation and coordinating interpersonal communication,there is no so-called "true" standard that provides answers to value decisions.This article includes the "evaluation subject" in the value analysis category and puts value judgment in verbal communication,which means that to truly understand the meaning of value,to make appropriate value evaluation and value decision,it needs to be interpreted in a specific context.The second part presents the characteristics of value.As the subjects verbal expression,value judgment has both subjectivity and objectivity,and is different from the description function of fact judgment.The core semantics of value judgment is evaluation.Value has both relativity and a certain degree of consensus,purpose,and regularity.This judgment lays the foundation for the full text.The third part is about the evaluation of value propositions.Truth coincidence theory is not enough to solve the problem of evaluation of value.The evaluation of value must be conducted in a dialogue between subjects.In addition to relevant experience verification,it must also conform to subjective sincerity The appropriateness of the selection of social norms,so that the value judgments have reasonable support in the objective world,subjective world,and normative world.After repeated criticism,questioning,and response,appropriate,reasonable,and acceptable value judgments are formed.The fourth part defines the value logic from the perspective of the analysis of generalized logic,and distinguishes the shape,semantic logic and pragmatic logic of value propositions.The second chapter explains the value judgment in judicial decision,its location,type and practical dilemma.The first part is the evaluation of values,facts and legal norms.The article will demonstrate that the application of law is essentially an evaluation.It does not reveal the inherent attributes or laws of things or behaviors,but explores the meaning relationship between them and the subject.At the same time,legal norm evaluation is not the same as general value evaluation.Legal norm evaluation is based on law,mandatory,judicial justice as the highest goal,and legal / illegal binary evaluation.Legal norm evaluation Integrate fact judgment and value evaluation.In the second part of the value field of the judicial ruling,the article will demonstrate that the value orientation affects the determination of the facts of the case,the choice of legal norms,and the choice of legal interpretation of legal methods and loopholes.The third part shows the applicable types of value,including the classification and judgment of the "quality" of the value,the appraisal of the appropriateness of the "quantity" of the value,and the balancing of multiple values.The fourth part presents the value dilemma in the practice of judicial rulings,including value imbalances,opaque "black boxes" of value operation,lack of effective constraints on the subjectivity of value evaluation,and rigid value decision methods.The third chapter,value inference in judicial ruling,explains the analytical reasoning between value propositions at the morphological and semantic level,and presents the static reasoning rules between value propositions.The full text is divided into five parts.The first part is the deductive reasoning of value.It discusses the inevitable reasoning mode of value proposition.This article will present value proposition reasoning and its special rules through comparison with traditional propositional logic.The second part is value inductive reasoning.The generation of value propositions is inseparable from value inductive reasoning.In the face of new and emerging situations in judicial practice,value inductive reasoning is also an important method to supplement loopholes.Judges inductive reasoning is not a rigid,mechanical process,but rather a choice of relevant experience based on specific contexts,and this choice should be in line with the mainstream consensus of society.The third part of value analogy reasoning is to solve the two behavior facts,what kind of conditions are met can be attributed to the same type and then given the same value evaluation,its significance lies in the realization of the same case and judgment.The article combines China's case guidance system and believes that the same value evaluation can only be given on the basis of similar comparison points.The fourth part,value tradeoff reasoning,establishes the value tradeoff reasoning formula based on the ratio between the abstract gravity of different values,the degree of damage,and the degree of certainty associated with it.The fifth part is the formal analysis of value reasoning.Value reasoning cannot establish a inevitably formal deduction system like mathematical logic,because the formal,fixed,and static modes and systems cannot describe dynamic,open,and revocable value reasoning.In practice,value reasoning always stops at the judgment of the priority of value,and this is the pragmatic and practical judgment of the subject.The formal construction of value reasoning only solves the problem of the regularity of value proposition analysis,but it cannot solve the problem of whether the premise is reasonable in deductive reasoning,the choice of value experience in value inductive reasoning,and the choice of comparison points in value analogy reasoning.2.The assignment of value preference in value trade-off reasoning.Value logic also needs to absorb the pragmatic dimension of defense methods,embody the subject and contextual elements,solve the problem of the rationality of value evaluation,and the issue of priority selection in the context of multiple values.Solving these problems is the task of the logic of value argumentation in the next chapter.Chapter ? explains the logic of value argumentation in judicial decisions,and provides a justification for the substantive rationality of judicial decisions with a dynamic,contextdependent,and reasonably supported argumentation method.The first part explains the task and characteristics of the logic of value argumentation in judicial decisions.Its task is to ensure the adequacy of adjudication.Its characteristics include subjectivity,inter-subjectivity,contextual dependence,and abolition.The second part is the research on the method of value argumentation in judicial decisions,including the value argumentation based on consensus and the value argumentation of seeking consensus.The former can be divided into the purpose argumentation method and the obligation argumentation method.Among the unconsensual value arguments,there is no “good” value doctrine that can absolutely exclude the application space of other theories.In practice,more emphasis is placed on reasonable arguments in specific contexts.There are reasons relative to the subject,and the transition from a single subject to an interactive reason.The basic principles to be followed in the evaluation of value in judicial decisions include taking judicial justice as the highest goal,respecting human rights as the basis,legality,reasonableness,and judicial restraint.The third part of the justification of the judges value decision is essentially a choice based on reason.As an active choice,value decisions require justification.The formal structure of the justification for value decision can be based on the Turmin model,but what remains unsolved in this figure is the rationality of the transition from B to W,which will be discussed in the next chapter.The validity analysis of the reason solves the problem of "qualification" of the reason.The reason to support the judicial decision must be acceptable,relevant,and sufficient on the one hand,and stronger in explanation and persuasiveness than other reasons..The fourth part of the practice path of judges value decision presents the process and requirements of value decision,including value analysis and screening,measuring the degree of value protection,specific operation methods of value decision,and discourse requirements for argumentation.The fifth chapter is the analysis of the justification path of the value argument.The first part interprets the issue of the legitimacy of the value argument.The goal of legitimation is to give judges the discretion to make value judgments and value measurements,while at the same time maximally restricting the judges "ones opinion",so that judicial decisions can withstand the criticism of the general audience.,Recognition and acceptance,and fundamentally improve the rationality and acceptability of judicial decisions,which presupposes a perspective of public evaluation of legitimacy.The criteria for judging legitimacy are legality and reasonableness.The second,third,and fourth parts analyze the legitimacy path from three aspects.The second part is the coherence restriction under the legal framework.The value decision must be coherent.This coherence is on the pragmatic dimension.The substantive coherence is also coherence under the legal framework.It must conform to the factual elements stipulated by the law and also meet the restrictions of the legal system in a broad sense,including the concept of the rule of law,the spirit of the constitution,international practices,and so on.Limits the unlimited openness of value evaluation.The third part can be universally verified.First,it includes the semantic definition of the concept.Second,when there is a difference in the semantic interpretation of the concept,it should resort to the pragmatic interpretation between the interactive subjects.Content.The universal filtering principle combined with the negotiation principle reconstructed Tuermins argument model,and it played a bridge role in the transition from B to W,similar to the inductive principle in fact judgment reasoning.The fourth part is procedural guarantee.The procedure refers to interactive,debate,and responsive procedures.The system of guaranteeing the participation,debate,and response of relevant subjects limits the intention of adjudication and forms an acceptable value decision.The program itself has a justification function and has the power to integrate certainty and correctness.