The Function And Structure Of The Conditions Theory

As for causality,criminal jurists divide causality into two forms: factual causality and legal causality.According to the argument in this paper,it is impossible to realize the distinction between attribution and imputation.On the one hand,the attribution problem seems to be a purely descriptive problem,but the concepts of "cause" and "result" have their own normative implications.On the other hand,the construction of an imputation theory inevitably needs a procedural theory,which can guarantee the stable "attribution" of results to causes.However,only the causal "relationship" theory can provide such a procedural theory,so the causal theory itself is a constructive part of the imputation theory,and it is wrong to try to split them up.Therefore,it is necessary for us to shift from the mode of "attribution +imputation" to the mode of "action + sufficiency + result".There are many theories about the relationship between cause and effect,such as traditional conditional theory,INUS conditional theory and law conditional theory.However,each of them has different defects.It is obvious that the theory of necessary conditions and the theory of sufficient and necessary conditions have been abandoned by various major contemporary theories of cause and effect either because they are too broad or too narrow,thus most people tend to describe causality in terms of a sufficient condition.INUS conditional theory is mainly a conceptual theory about causation under sufficient conditions,but it lacks a specific rule to judge causation,and its core discussion uses the thinking of the hypothetical causation,which should be rejected.The condition theory in accordance of law not only provides a conceptual theory about sufficient condition causality,but also gives the specific rules for judging causality,so it is a relatively consistent theory.However,because it misplaces the relationship between causal explanation and scientific explanation,and misplaces the law before the explanation,it puts forward overly strict requirements for causality.Through the further modification of the conditional theory,we can find that the conditional theory not only provides an explanation theory,but also is more fundamental than the law conditional theory.This involves a revision of the conditional theory.With the help of the three kinds of different statements,we can find counterfactual conditionals logically differs from that of material implication and strict implication sentences,and only the counterfactual conditions can establish contact with causal relationships: the fact condition for causation caught us a fundamental intuition–counterfactual dependence,which different reasons can lead to different results.However,the conditional theory is incomplete because it only provides a rough technical rule and lacks a complete conceptual theory.With the introduction of the new theory,the conditional theory can provide a conceptual theory.Through this kind of conceptual theory,we can rethink the conditional judgment rules.The new theory introduced is the "interventionist causal theory",which is to re-understand the conditional theory from a practical point of view within the framework of counterfact,and to provide a theoretical explanation of the judgment formula of the conditional theory,that is,inevitability in the practical sense.Thus,the revised counterfactual condition holds the following formula: if there is A,there is B,and if there is no A,there is no B,then A is B.Whether this modified counterfactual condition theory can be applied to the normative proposition of value load in criminal law needs to be fully explained.Compared with intervention,in criminal law,the occasion where the actor dominates is almost bound to have a causal relationship,which is different from the event causal relationship,because it is the causal relationship between the rational and active actor and other actors,which is controlled by the actor voluntarily and not necessarily.We call this causation "actor causation".Compared with event causality,the characteristic of actor causality lies in its uncertainty.By reinterpreting the concept of inevitability,however,we are not without theoretical resources to coordinate the uncertainty: the sense of inevitability is a kind of practical significance,rather than a physical sense,therefore,as long as the offender is freely and voluntarily decided to take a certain behavior,he will be responsible for their own behavior.The revised conditional theory rejects all previous criticisms of the conditional theory.Against the defect that conditional theory can draw wrong conclusions,we can find that the conditional theory and the hypothetical causation are not only logically but conceptually distinct.The case for alternative causation involves only a mixture of circumstances:it is either the hypothetical causation,cumulative causation,or a application of the principle that doubt benefits the accused.Against the defect that the conditional theory has no practical use,we can find this kind of counterfactual thinking is more fundamental than law thinking,for it precedes the law conditional theory in origin,and does not presuppose the requirement of the law in judgment.Against the defect of conditional theory that leads to loose conclusions,we can find that the counterfactual dependence thought of the modified conditional theory can provide important support for the sufficient interpretation of the result of the behavior.Therefore,as long as there is a sufficient connection between the behavior and the result of the infringement of legal interest,the attribution of responsibility can be completed.