英文摘要 |
"Not only the technical and institutional - dogmatical aspects of judicial decisions are challenged in era of big data, but also, and what more important, there arises a latent risk embodied in the level of adjudicative thinking. Judicial decision is an activity of normative argumentation and reasoning pursuing correctness in nature, which presents a thought pattern of reason, correctness and normativity. The core of big data technology lies in the historical data based on judicial action, and predication of the future adjudication through calculation (algorithm), which will probably bring about dangers in three aspects: (1) digital solutionism, i. e. , substitution of data calculation for argumentation and reasoning, (2) judicial positivism, i. e. , substitution of an unified adjudication for a correct decision, (3) legal pragmatism, i. e. , substitution of result predication for rule practice. However, as long as the moral subject status and autonomy of persons (judges) are still the value foundation of judicial decisions, the above dangers do not constitute a fundamental challenge yet. But they do bring a reverse challenge, that is, along with the coming ''Algorithm Society'', how to make persons (judges) think more like a human rather than like a machine." |