論反面解釋的有效形式、邏輯根據及其位階

On Valid Forms, Logical Basises and Ranking of Interpretation E CONTRARIO

反面解釋是一種常見的法律解釋方法。所謂“反面”，特指與現有法律規定中的條件與後果相矛盾的概念或命題；所謂反面解釋，就是從法律明確規定的正面條件與正面結果，根據邏輯推理規則，推導出與其等值(或蘊含)的反面條件與反面結果。反面解釋的正、反面好比一枚硬幣的兩面，其解釋過程不過是將原先遮蔽著的反面揭示出來，而非引入新的東西。從這一意義上講，反面解釋是一種在位階上僅次於文義解釋的法律解釋方法。一般而言，反面解釋的典型圖式有兩種:一是條件式規範命題的否定前件式，即將條件規範“p→q”反面解釋成“¬p→¬q”，二是全稱規範命題SAP轉換為“¬SA¬P”，這兩種典型圖式只有在特定情況下才有效。除典型圖式外，還有一些非典型圖式，其成立同樣依賴於相應的邏輯推理規則。反面解釋的主要根據是邏輯，經驗在其中只起次要的作用。

Interpretation e contrario is an universal legal method. So-called “e contrario” refers to the concepts or propositions which are contradictory to the present legal provisions, so interpretation e contrario refers to that we follow logical inference rules, and deduce the negative conditions and negative effects from the positive conditions and effects, and these two kinds of conditions and effects are equivalent or entailed each other. Because the positive and negative sides of interpretation e contrario are similar to the two sides of a coin, so the process of interpretation e contrario is nothing more than disclosing the positive side which had been shielded, and have not introduced any new meaning. From the viewpoint of this meaning, interpretation e contrario is an important legal interpretation method which is only second to semantic interpretation in ranking. Generally, it is believed that only the hypothetical norm of necessary and sufficient necessary conditions can be interpreted e contrario, but in fact, there are two typical schemata of interpretation e contrario that people often use: one is denying antecedent schemata of sufficient conditional hypothetical reasoning, and the other is transforming universal norm SAP into “¬ SA¬ P”. These two typical schemata are valid only in very special cases. These two typical schemata are valid only in very special cases. In addition to typical schemata, there are also some atypical schemata whose establishment also depends on corresponding logical reasoning rules, so among the basises of interpretation e contrario, logic is primary, and experience is secondary.