各歸其位：“社會—法律研究”方法的展開

Do What Should Do: Expanding the Method of “Sociolegal Studies”

如果嚴格按照庫恩對“範式”的界定，那麽很難說當下中國法學研究的“法教義學”“社科法學”路徑就是兩種不同的“範式”。在各自都缺少更多更有代表性的研究成果之前，如果不作細致的學術積累，而過早地落入意義並不大的爭論之中，並不會對中國法學的發展產生更積極的影響。在社科法學的一面，還是很有必要將視野放寬，盡量能在國際學術的視野下講好中國的個案。另外，也要警醒社科法學研究進路所可能產生的一些後果。

If based on the definition of “paradigm” of T. Kuhn strictly, it is difficult to say that the approaches of “legal doctrine” and “social science of law” are two different paradigms in Chinas legal research at present. Because neither the study of “legal doctrine” nor the “social science of law” has enough representative research achievements, so whats the right thing to do is to continue to do further research. And if it is fall into the insignificance debate prematurely, which would cause negatively effect on the development of law research in China. In the aspect of research of “social science of law”, it is still necessary to broaden the vision and try to make contributions to the world academic field. In addition, we should also wake up some of the possible consequences of the study of “social science of law”.