摘要
合法则性条件说是以取代条件说为宗旨的、独立的刑法因果关系学说,而非某个既有的刑法因果关系学说的翻版或变体。合法则性条件说尽管能够在一定程度上避免条件说的困境,但自身存在难以克服的缺陷,因而无法取代条件说。首先,在自然科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,关于能否以主流意见或学术代表人物的意见认定自然法则的问题,合法则性条件说无法给出令人满意的答案。其次,在社会科学领域一般因果关系的认定上,合法则性条件说面临着难以找到普遍性法则的难题。最后,在具体因果关系层面,合法则性条件说由于采用了力学、物理学的判断标准,不仅会在逻辑上陷入自相矛盾,而且还会在不作为犯的场合不可避免地得出错误的结论。此外,合法则性条件说不具备与条件说共存兼容的前提性条件,无法成为条件说的有益补充。因此,合法则性条件说是一个失败的刑法因果关系理论学说,不值得提倡。
The theory of conditions in accordance with the law is a new and independ- ent causal theory, rather than a variant of another doctrine. Although it can avoid the predica- ments of the condition theory to a certain extent, it is faced with its own insurmountable difficul- ties. Firstly, it cannot give a satisfactory answer to the question of how to identify causal rela- tions in the field of natural science. Secondly, it is also faced with difficulties in identifying u- niversal taws in the field of social sciences. Finally, it uses mechanical and physical criteria to dealing with specific causation problems, which not only logically contradict itself, but also leads to erroneous conclusions in the case of omission. The theory of conditions in accordance with the law can neither replace the condition theory, nor become a useful supplement to the condition theory. Therefore, it is not a successful doctrine.
出处
《环球法律评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第3期54-71,共18页
Global Law Review
基金
2016年度中国法学会部级法学研究课题"刑事指导性案例的法教义学研究"(CLS2016D45)的研究成果
