|
总而言之，我们需要跳出历史决定论的窠臼，采取多元主义的、关系可变的、功能等价的观点来研究法与社会变迁的有关课题并在这样思想基础上推动改革的事业。如果说在二十世纪法与社会变革的思想立足点是因果关系和普遍法则，那么在进入二十一世纪之后，必须对过去的社会系统工程论进行修正和补充，把从个人之间相互作用的偶然性和不确定性中形成新秩序的机制也作为重要的理论前提。这意味着在中国必须把建设法治国家的纲领与包括市场原理、利益集团的协商政治以及文化多样性在内的民主化结合在一起才能建立起适应全球化时代要求的管理体制。
【注释】 M. Galanter, “The Modernization of Law”, in Myron Meiner (ed.) Modernization: The Dynamics of Growth (Basic Books, Inc., 1966) p.170.
W. Friedman, Law in a Changing Society (2nd ed., Columbia University Press, 1972) p.11.
参阅帕舒卡尼斯《法的一般理论和马克思主义（复刊版）》（稻子恒夫日译本，日本评论社，１９８６年）。
见卡尔·伦纳《私法制度的社会功能（改订版）》（加藤正男日译本，法律文化社，１９７７年）１５６－１５７页。
E.g., J. W. Hurst, The Growth of American Law: The Lawmakers (Little Brown & Co., 1950), L. M. Friedman, A History of American Law (Simon and Schuster, 1973).
See L. M. Friedman, The Legal System; A Social Science Perspective (Russell Sage Foundation, 1975) pp.269-270.
参阅上山安敏《法社会史》（米斯兹书房，１９６６年）４１４－４１８页。
Cf. Erwin C. Surrency, “The Lawyer and the Revolution”, in Sara Robbins (ed.) Law: A Treasury of Art and Literature (Hugh Lauter Levin Associates, Inc., 1990) pp.166-171.
这个公式是Ｍ·瑞宾达（Manfred Rehbinder）教授在综合梅因（Henry S. Maine）的“从身分到契约”命题以及斯通（Julius Stone）的“从归属指向的身分到功绩指向的身分”命题的基础上提出来的。详见Ｍ·瑞宾达《法社会学》（吉野正三郎监译，晃洋书房，１９９０年）８８－１０４页。
Ｎ·卢曼《法社会学》（村上淳一、六本佳平日译本，岩波书店，１９８６年）１５３页。
Cf. Alan Watson, The Evolution of Law (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985) p.4.
E.g., Yehezkel Dror, “Law and Social Change”, Tulane Law Review Vol.33 (1959) pp.787-802, Joel B. Grossman & Mary H. Grossman (eds.) Law and Social Change in Modern America (Goodyear, 1971).
E.g., David M. Trubek, “Toward a Social Theory of Law: An Essay on the Study of Law and Development” The Yale Law Journal Vol.82 No.1 (1972) pp.1-50, Frank Munger, “Law, Change, and Litigation: A Critical Examination of an Empirical Research Tradition” Law & Society Review Vol.22 No.1 (1988) pp.57-101.
参阅Ｌ·弗里德曼《法与社会》（石村善助日译本，至诚堂，１９８０年）２２０－２２１页。
卢曼《法社会学》（注１０已引）３３９页。
According to L. Berkson, The Supreme Courts and Its Publics (Lexington Books, 1978) pp.2-3.
Cf. Anthony Carty (ed.) Law and Development (Dartmouth, 1992), Carol G. Jones, “Capitalism, Globalism, and the Rule of Law: An Alternative Trajectory of Legal Change in China” Social & Legal Studies Vol.3 (1994) pp.195-221, David M. Trubek, et al., “Law and Development Then and Now” presented to American Society of International Law, Washington, DC, April 9, 1996, Amy Chua, “Markets, Democracy, and Ethnicity: Toward a New Paradigm for Law and Development” Yale Law Journal Vol.108 (1998) pp.1-107, Michael C. Davis, “The Price of Rights: Constitutionalism and East Asian Economic Development”, Human Rights Quarterly Vol.20 (1998) pp.303-337, Carol Rose, “The ‘New’ Law and Development Movement in the Post-Cold War Era: A Vietnam Case Study” Law & Society Review Vol.32 No.1 (1998) pp.93-140.
|
