论文部分内容阅读
政治宪法学与规范宪法学之间的论辩一直在方法论领域展开,后者对于前者的批评主要集中在:政治宪法学混淆了实然与应然之间的界限,试图从现实政治权力的运行中推出具有规范力的命题。然而,政治宪法学从根本上拒斥这种二元论的方法论,在它那里,政治意志因其实存而具有了正当性。因此,有必要深入到政治宪法学的方法论表象背后,探寻潜藏于其下的政治观并与之进行辩驳。事实上,当前政治宪法学对于规范主义的批评,反映了其试图在现代语境下恢复共和主义宪政观的雄心。然而,这种共和主义的宪政观过度强调历史中共同体的内在特殊性,因此其对于政治和宪法的理解均缺乏普遍性维度,而这与现代立宪主义的宪法理想与政治实践有着根本冲突。
The debate between the political constitutional law and the normative constitutional law has always been carried out in the field of methodology. The latter’s criticism of the former focuses mainly on the fact that the political constitutional law confounds the real and the demarcation between reality and reality, Launched a proposition with normative power. However, political constitutionalism fundamentally rejects this dualism methodology, where political will has legitimacy for its existence. Therefore, it is necessary to go deep into the methodology behind political constitutionalism and explore the underlying political concepts hidden behind it and rebut it. In fact, the current criticism of normative doctrine in political constitutionalism reflects its ambition to try to restore the republican constitutional outlook in a modern context. However, this kind of republican constitutionalism has overemphasized the intrinsic peculiarity of the community in history. Therefore, its understanding of politics and constitution lacks the universality dimension, which has a fundamental conflict with the constitutional ideals and political practice of modern constitutionalism.