民法學如何講道理？——以物權變動模式的立法選擇為例

中國民法學歷經「公理」年代和「真理」年代後，迎來了「道理」年代。欲講好道理，首先需要明確講的是什麼問題的道理，問題不同，不僅道理不同，道理的道理也不同。其次需要確定是為著什麼樣的目的來講道理，目的不同，道理就不同，道理的道理也不同。這是民法學講道理的兩個前提性問題，對應著最低限度的學術共識。從立法論角度出發討論我國民事立法應否認可債權合同與物權合同的區分，屬￿民法問題中的解釋選擇問題，討論者的前見不同，結論就會不同。從解釋論角度出發討論我國民事立法是否認可債權合同與物權合同的區分，也屬￿民法問題中的解釋選擇問題，討論者在法律解釋過程中必須尊重法典，尊重歷史。

Chinese civil law academia has gone through the ages of “axiom” and “truth”, and has come to the age of“reasoning”. A prerequisite of a good reasoning is to clarify the subject-matter of reasoning; different subject-matters require different reasonings, and different reasonings of reasonings. Another prerequisite of a good reasoning is to clarify the purpose of reasoning; different purposes require different reasonings, and different reasonings of reasonings. The aforementioned two prerequisites of civil law reasoning reflect the minimum consensus among academics. Whether Chinese civil law should recognize the distinction between obligatory contracts and dispository contracts from a legislative standpoint is a question of interpretive choice among various types of civil law questions. Discussants̓different pre-existing understandings lead to different conclusions. Whether Chinese civil law does recognize the distinction between obligatory contracts and dispository contracts from an interpretive standpoint is also a question of interpretive choice among various types of civil law questions. Discussants must respect the code and the history.