Comparative Research Of Formal Legal Reasoning And Substantive Legal Reasoning

Legal reasoning is one of the core problems that modern jurisprudence researches , It has decisive position in legal practice. The article concentrates efforts on the union between logic and law, analyses the legal reasoning and the elementary theory, divides legal reasoning into formal legal reasoning and substantive legal reasoning as traditional form does. The article carries on the unification of two kinds of reasoning forms finally, has manifested two kinds of reasoning forms are mutually connected, inseparable in concrete judicial practice.Logic was knowledge that researches form of thought and rule of thought, legal logic can be considered as one discipline law and logical overlap, it is one kind of tool or one intellectual method that the officer in court uses general legal rules or standard in concrete case and proves his decided conclusion if right or not. Logic is foundation of legal logic, but legal logic is not simple application of logic in a judicial practice. The central content that legal logic researches is legal reasoning, Legal reasoning refers to thinking activity that legal being considers legal norm suitable for case fact as the major premise, considers the case fact as the minor premise , draws decided conclusion according to certain form of reasoning finally. According to inevitable validity of legal reasoning is whether directly correlated with form of reasoning, legal reasoning can be divided into two broad headings: formal legal reasoning and substantive legal reasoning. Formal legal reasoning refers to one kind of reasoning legal being cites the related legal norm directly on basis of case fact, draws his decided conclusion according to rule of formal logic reasoning. Validity of formal legal reasoning is directly related to form and structure of legal reasoning, What manifests is one kind of valuable idea of"legitimacy". Substantive legal reasoning refers to one kind of reasoning that main body of reasoning draws his decided conclusion through analysis of substantive content of the case fact and the legal norm, and according to certain value judgment. Therefore, the conclusion has subjectivity and instability, but has manifested one kind of valuable idea of"rationality".In the process of legal practice, two kinds reasoning forms penetrate mutually, mingle each other. In other words, Any reasoning which is used in judicial practice is dialectical union of two kinds of reasoning forms. First, elementary logical form must be followed in the process of reasoning, so that its conclusion has the persuasive power, and process of reasoning have character of logic; Next, related value judgment must be considered in the reasoning, so that its conclusion conform to the basic social values, and its conclusion has"rationality". both from a view of theoretical point or from the view of practical point, Dialectical unity of two forms of legal reasoning is of great significance.