The Dilemma And Solutions About Comparative Studies On Crime Constitution Theories

In recent years, the crime constitution theory and its relevant issues have been considering a hot and difficult topic in the field of criminal law. Among these, to maintain or to abolish the present four elements crime constitution theory in China is the cross of dispute. Some scholars insist that our traditional theory is reasonable, thus, its reconstruction cannot be accepted. Some believe that the traditional four elements theory needs to be revised. The rest of them claim that our knowledge about criminal law must get rid of the influence of the Soviet Union, and the German-Japan crime constitution theory should be adopted by our country in a direct way. Most of the points of view are based on comparative studies. If the comparative study is a necessary method to research on crime constitution theories, then how to compare must be the key part. However, this methodology problem has not been solved properly by now and thus, leads to many disputes about crime constitution theories. Therefore, focusing on the comparative study itself is a probable way to get out of the dilemma.At present, the dilemma about crime constitution theory can be concluded in two aspects:numerous ideas and disputes and three main different points of view in a balanced condition. In addition to the idea of maintaining the traditional four elements crime constitution theory, there are many thoughts about constructing it. And these different thoughts have been concluded into three balanced points:maintaining, reforming and reconstructing. The dilemma is originated from abusing the method of comparative studies. To be specific, it attributes to the differences of academic inclinations and the defiance of the objective standard through comparison. As to the former one, the standard of logistics and the standard of application about the crime constitution theory cannot be compared directly to each other due to different academic inclinations. The solution is to combine logistics and application together as the standards to evaluate crime constitution theories. The latter one refers to the object scale should be cleared in the process of logistics comparison and application comparison. In order to solve this problem, we have to give up comparing the logic framework of different crime constitution theories as we get used to it in the past, and compare the elements of different crime constitution theories to find out those overlapped ones, taking them as the object scale through logistics comparison; in application comparison, we should adopt the method of analyzing criminal cases, using different crime constitution theories to analyze the same and specialized case and observe the similes and differences of the results.