The Research Of Chinese Ancient Legal Reasoning

Aristotelian logic with China and India Hetuvidya Mohist Logic Logic Logic said theworld’s three major traditions, but with the development of the times, only the Aristotelianlogic has been tremendous progress in the development along with the times. But not becauseAristotle logic in the current dominance, we must use it as the only measure of other culturaltraditions has logical characteristics. There are many scholars insisted that the standard usedto examine the history of ancient Chinese thought, come to the ancient Chinese did not logicalconclusion. Indeed, the word " logic" is Borrowed words, but it is not only used to refer toWestern logic, it is after all just a sign code, can be used to refer to any of the general logicof truth has pursued ideas. Ancient China, especially in the Spring and Autumn Period Moismdeveloped, it contains a wealth of insights on the universal logic of truth, it is a proof of theexistence of ancient Chinese logic. The author below it intends to participate in the first "Chinese logic exists wheel " already exists in this debate were to go.Legal reasoning of judges in the judicial process, according to the facts and the lawrecognized, draw conclusions sentenced thinking activity specific cases, nothing so ancient.Any thinking activities, including legal reasoning, its body can not live in an era from itsenvironment, are subject to environmental constraints in which he was. This is obvious. Butnow, some scholars, but because with the current theory of legal reasoning to interpret theancient Chinese judicial practice, so as to arrive in ancient China and has no legal reasoningconclusion. Hereinafter, the author will also be the actual case in ancient China, for example,combining logic to interpret Thought in Ancient China, rather than the idea now, so theintention to explore the ancient Chinese judge whether they are conscious of the use of legalreasoning, their content.This article from the introduction, body and conclusion of three parts.In which the author discusses the topic introduction of reasons.Text can be broadly divided into three parts, its contents described as follows: The firstpart describes why the author is a firm supporter of China logical ontology, and Westernlogic to make the necessary comparative analysis; second part of the current legal reasoningto sort out the basic content of which shall be set aside part of the dispute, the use ofrelatively mature determine argument, as foreshadowing below; third part, to the ancient Chinese text based slips to logical thought in ancient China as a guide, the interpretation ofwhich contains ancient Chinese judge ’s legal reasoning thinking and trying to find this idea ofcontemporary Chinese Are there certain reference value.The conclusion of this article is the opinion of one sort of argumentation, to makereiterated views.