洞穴奇案的十四種判決

萨伯(Peter suber，1951- )，影响甚广的“开放近用运动”(open Access Movement，提倡在科研文献发表的同时，将电子文本在网上公布，以便读者免费取阅)的发起人。1973年毕业于美国叶尔汉姆学院，1978年获西北大学哲学博士学位。长期担任叶尔汉姆学院哲学教授，也讲授法律、计算机等其他课程。萨伯从事很多领域的社会活动，兼任SPARC(“学者出版与学术资源联盟”)高级研究员和耶鲁大学法学院信息社会项目访问学者等多项职务，还是两家网站(openaccessnews和ODenaccessletters)的博客作者。1991年出版专著《自我修正的悖论》。

出版者:商務印書館(香港)有限公司

作者:薩伯(Peter Suber)

页数:0

译者:陳福勇

出版时间:2006

价格:0

isbn号码:9789620763601

图书标签:法律法学哲學法理學道德法理洞穴奇案的十四種判決美国

Lon Fuller?s Case of the Speluncean Exp/ ~rers is the greatest fictitious legal case of all

time. That is saying a lot, for it has some stiff competition. While its competitors

may outdo it in courtroom drama, character development, or investigative

suspense, none matches it in legal depth or dialectical agility It shows not what

makes some lawyer?s caseload interesting, but what makes law itself interesting. It

would not make a good movie; it is all ?talking heads.? In fact, the parts that

would make a good movie - the events within the cave - are over and done with

by the time Fuller begins his piece. Moreover, these events are not depicted with

cinematic vivacity, but described after the fact with judicial precision and bland-

ness.

Fuller?s live Supreme Court justices tranquilly but rigorously show the

complexity of the facts and the flexibility of legal reasoning. The live opinions

focus on different factual details and legal precedents, and lit them into different

background structures of legal and political principle. By these means Fuller

crystallizes important conflicts of principle and illustrates the major schools of

legal philosophy in his day. Fuller?s case has been called ?a classic in jurispru-

dence,? ? a microcosm of this century?s debates,? and a ?breathtaking intellectual

accomplishment.?*

Although only half a century separates us from the date of Fuller?s essay, the

legal landscape has changed profoundly. I have written nine new judicial opin-

ions on his case, with roughly Fuller?s own objectives in view, hoping to explore

important issues of principle and in the process to bring the depiction of legal

philosophy up to date.

While I would like to depict the major schools of legal philosophy today,

giving each its due, there are a few obstacles that subtly constrain the project.

Suber, Peter. Case of the Speluncean Explorers: Nine New Opinions.

Florence, KY, USA: Routledge, 1998. p ix.

http://site.ebrary.com/lib/cityu/Doc?id=2003075&ppg=9

Copyright ? 1998. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Preface

Introduction 1

Pt. I Lon Fuller's Case of the Speluncean Explorers 5

Opinion of Chief Justice Truepenny 7

Opinion of Justice Foster 10

Opinion of Justice Tatting 15

Opinion of Justice Keen 20

Opinion of Justice Handy 25

Opinion of Justice Tatting 31

Postscript 32

Pt. II Nine New Opinions 33

Opinion of Chief Justice Burnham 35

Opinion of Justice Springham 45

Opinion of Justice Tally 57

Opinion of Justice Hellen 64

Opinion of Justice Trumpet 73

Opinion of Justice Goad 79

Opinion of Justice Frank 89

Opinion of Justice Reckon 91

Opinion of Justice Bond 99

Index 108

读后感

本书从法理学角度分析了有罪和无罪，这是英美法系的特点，我一直想将其嫁接现实中，以刑法观点具体判断本案。以前学四要件未深入，或者四要件本身就是不完备的理论，现刚接触二阶层体系，体系之美让人流连忘返，本案适用更是别开新途，最终会发现法理学观点将被嵌入到二阶层体...  

因为最近考虑刑法正当化事由里的被害人同意 因此很有必有把洞穴奇案细读一遍 也有了些新的想法。 最基本的立场对持无疑是绝对道德主义vs相对道德主义的分野 我的立场是站在功利主义这一方 当然决定这个立场除了道德层面的取向 也有实在法层面上的问题 例如避免饥饿到底算...  

对于法律，我是一个间歇性业余爱好者。爱好者前加上两个限定词是为了避免万一有人要和我讨论学术。我略懂法律常识，偶尔读几本法学书，主要还是喜欢法律的逻辑和思维方式。现在我打算复述几个老掉牙的案例。 第一个： 从前有一天，两个猎人去打猎，他们可能是邻居，也可能许素...  

用户评价

頗好讀, 但沒想像中精辟,結論顯而易見---- 大概因為我太偏激.

案件不算新奇了，探讨的法理学问题倒是不错

刑法21條的緊急避險很實用啊，法不責人所不能，至于該案不公平的問題，民法領域貌似有一條『契約自由』原則，但畢竟有罪與否還是得取决于那些前提假設條件的，當然，道德幷非構成殺人罪名的依據，同理，民衆意向亦非無罪的理由

頗好讀, 但沒想像中精辟,結論顯而易見---- 大概因為我太偏激.

引一段书友评论——如果有一天我犯了什么罪……这么讲不恰当，换个说法，如果有一天我成为某件刑事案的嫌疑人或被告人，我希望我的动机不是“试图以激烈手段为自己或他人寻求公正”，我宁愿作为一个职业罪犯被审判。如果我不幸被杀，我希望凶手是个体的人，而非公器，平等或意外地丧生于个人之手，我接