论文部分内容阅读
长期以来,比较法形成了三种主要研究路径。其一是规则比较,其二是文化比较,其三是功能比较。规则比较将不同的法律规则进行对比;文化比较则将法律视为文化的一部分,在一个更广阔的视角内进行比较;功能比较是一种在确定目的的前提下探讨手段的比较方法。这三种比较方法各有其优缺点,应当在运用当中综合使用。然而,必须首先明确这三者之间的关系。这三者之间是目的与手段的关系。功能比较是一种目的,而规则比较和文化比较则主要是手段。比较法的研究需要做到目的与手段相结合,“求同”与“求异”相结合。
For a long time, comparative law has formed three main research routes. One is rule comparison, the other is culture comparison, the third is function comparison. Comparison of rules compares different rules of law; cultural comparison treats law as part of culture and compares within a broader perspective; and functional comparison is a comparative method of exploring instruments in determining the purpose. Each of these three comparative methods has its advantages and disadvantages, which should be used in combination. However, we must first clarify the relationship between the three. The relationship between these three is the purpose and means. Functional comparison is a purpose, and rules comparison and cultural comparison are the main means. The research of comparative law needs to combine the purpose and means, “seek the same ” and “seek the difference ” combine.