Abductive Reasoning In The Administration Of Justice

China’s judicial decisions appear to results-oriented trend.It’s because theinfluence of traditional Chinese culture and Western Legal Realism genre.In this trend,the legal reasoning as a tool for the administration of justice formed, also inevitablybe affected.Stage of China’s legal reasoning is mostly limited to the form of reasoning suchas deductive syllogism build. The reality is that the majority of judges in the judicialpractice is not strictly in accordance with the route of the formal logic of judicialdecisions. Instead, more reasoning is showing a "reverse" form：Judges come intocontact with the case, according to “sense of law "or" value judgments "on thepreliminary facts of the case, and so establish a preliminary conclusions, then look forthe corresponding premise of preliminary conclusions.If consistent the conclusionsestablished; If you do not conform, then back to the facts of the case initially re aconclusion default. Such a "new" inverse reasoning in fact, have a professionalresearch community in the Western legal method nouns, that is abductive reasoning.Abductive reasoning play an identified role in legal discovery, the formation ofthe administration of justice, investigation and evidence. But this article is mainly tostart from the point of th referee of Justice,just for more complete understanding ofthe abductive reasoning by the most representative in the field of judicial.The articleis divided into six parts:Introduction by criticism of the narrow concept of the traditional concept of law and describes abductive reasoning is the status quo of China’s judicial practice, leadsto the necessity and urgency of the abductive reasoning.The first chapter is the introduction of the two concepts, namely what is theabductive reasoning and the administration of justice.Analysis of the abductivereasoning and other reasoning in order to discern the meaning of the adbuctivereasoning,according to detailed description of the process of the administration ofjustice to clarify reasoning.The second chapter is the basis of the understanding of the concept, in-depthanalysis of abductive reasoning why it is widely applied in the administration ofjustice in our country. It’s probably because of the judge’s subjective awareness andsocial justice ethos. Next, further to sort out the abductive reasoning for set on thefeasibility of the securities and reasoning logic.It is divided into four steps on the pathof thinking, is the key reason why the establishment of adbuctive reasoning.The third Chapter is essentially the basic qualitative adbuctive reasoning,combadbuctive reasoning positive and negative role. On the one hand, the recognition doeshave a guide and role in the formation process of the administration of justice; On theother hand, should also be rational understanding to adbuctive reasoning logic orprobability, the verdict will likely result in a negative impact of bias and arbitrariness.The fourth chapter described in the previous chapter,the integration of thenegative impact of the certificate reasoning above,leads to the correspondingcountermeasures how to avoid the negative impact of adbuctive reasoning. From thetwo dimensions of subjective and objective analysis to break the shackles of adbuctivereasoning it will be better for the administration of justice and judicial practice.The fifth chapter is the conclusion, the overall framework of this article, as wellas the conclusions are summarized.