Thinking Like A Lawyer:Academic Controversy And Reflection In Chinese Judicial Context

China is moving toward a society with rule of law. In this context, a fierce dispute over thinking like a lawyer has arisen in the jurisprudential circle, especially between Su Li and Sun Xiaoxia whose tit-for-tat opinions lead to two different schools of study. In recent years, Chinese jurisprudential circle has done some researches on thinking like a lawyer. But these researches are still lack of systematicness and theoretical depth. Therefore, it is of great research significance to analyze and review the dispute over the thinking of legal practitioners in a systemic way.In the academic research, thinking like a lawyer is similar to that of law, that of judge and that of rule of law. Therefore, first the paper identifies these concepts and defines the concepts adopted in the paper, which provides the necessary theory support for the incoming study.Second, the paper introduces the development of Chinese dispute over thinking like a lawyer. Based on the relevant academic researches, the paper tries to discuss the following questions:Does thinking like a lawyer really exist? Is t thinking like a lawyer unique compared with other thinking? Is there a universal thinking of legal practitioners? By this way, the paper demonstrates the representative research outcome and academic opinion.Third, the paper gives a deep analysis of the academic background behind the dispute, the theory and resources behind the different opinions, and the great significance that the dispute will have. The dispute occurred in the jurisprudential circle leads to scholars’reflection on thinking like a lawyer, and furthermore promotes the construction of Chinese society of rule of law and the development of Chinese jurisprudence.The deconstructivism representing western postmodern jurisprudence does not meet the requirement of building Chinese society of rule of law and developing Chinese jurisprudence. It has obvious defect and usually partially exaggerates the use of measuring consequences. Finally the paper clarifies the reason why building Chinese society of rule of law need the constructivism. The constructivism reflects the historical experience of western countries developing the rule of law. More importantly, building Chinese society of the rule of law needs the constructivism of thinking like a lawyer, which will meet the requirement of Chinese contemporary juridical practice. And the paper concludes that, the constructivism is the only option for China to develop jurisprudence.