论文部分内容阅读
诉诸真权威,是我们理智地做出的良好选择与决定。有知识或掌握特殊技能的人是一种意见的最好来源。法庭论辩中的诉诸权威是一种典型的法律修辞手段,权威具有知识或技能,他们能够从事实推出结论。各类诉讼案件中越来越需要“有专门知识的人”来就有关案件的问题进行对质或对鉴定人员出具的鉴定意见提出意见。法庭论辩中的诉诸权威能够起到有效监督、制约和解释的作用,有助于提升司法鉴定公信力,节约诉讼资源。法庭论辩中诉诸权威的论证可描述为一种假设性论证型式,对该型式的评估取决于相关的恰当性条件或批判性问题是否被满足。“有专门知识的人”是协助当事人进行质证的人,其法庭论辩语境中的意见仅仅是质证意见,并不能作为定案依据;“有专门知识的人”在论辩语境中有诉讼中的倾向性,但应保持职业上的中立性,要保障“有专门知识的人”在法庭上发表言论不受法律追究的权利。
The resort to genuine authority is a good choice and decision that we make wisely. A person who has knowledge or mastery of special skills is the best source of opinion. The appeal of authority in the court’s defense is a typical means of legal rhetoric, the authority has the knowledge or skills, they can draw conclusions from the facts. Various types of litigation cases are increasingly in need of “people with specialized knowledge” to come forward with opinions on issues related to the case or on the appraisal opinions issued by the appraisers. The authority to appeal in the court’s defense can play an effective role of supervision, restriction and explanation, which helps enhance the credibility of forensic appraisal and save litigation resources. Arguments that the authority is asserted in court debates can be described as a hypothetical argument that the assessment of that type depends on whether the relevant appropriateness conditions or critical questions are being met. “People with specialized knowledge ” are those assisting the parties in conducting the cross-examination and the opinions in the court debate context are merely the cross-examination opinions and can not be used as the basis for the verdict; “people with specialized knowledge ” in the context of argument There are tendencies in litigation, but should remain professional neutrality, to protect “people with specialized knowledge ” in court to express their opinions not legally the right.