| 平等：正当性交通赔偿制度之内核 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 汤烈琴.平等：正当性交通赔偿制度之内核[J].四川理工学院学报(社会科学版),2008,23(2):77-79. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 汤烈琴 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 四川交通职业技术学院,成都,611130 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 由交通赔偿引发的“好望角问题”争议，其实质乃是现行交通赔偿制度设置遵循了实证主义法学之规则。现行交通赔偿机制忽视了价值标度，并不具备制度的正当性。建构正当性的交通赔偿制度，必须遵循新自然法学派富勒所主张的，从确立正当的价值标准入手，并以正当的价值作为制度的内涵。正当性的交通赔偿制度就是以平等为标度，平等为内核。
|
| 关 键 词： | “好望角”问题 实证主义法学 新自然法学 正当性制度 平等 |
| 文章编号： | 1672-8580(2008)02-0077-03 |
| 修稿时间： | 2008年1月23日 |
Equality: the Core of Legitimate Traffic Compensation System |
| |
| TANG Lie-qin.Equality: the Core of Legitimate Traffic Compensation System[J].Journal of Sichuau University of Science & Engineering:Social Sciences Edition,2008,23(2):77-79. |
| |
| Authors: | TANG Lie-qin |
| |
| Institution: | TANG Lie-qin (Sichuan Vocational and Technical College of Communications, Chengdu 611130, China) |
| |
| Abstract: | The essence of the ＂Cap of Good Hope Question＂ dispute caused by traffic compensation is that the setting of the current traffic Compensation system has followed the rule of positivism law. The current traffic compensation system has ignored value scale, so it has no system legitimacy. We must begin with legitimate value standard and take legitimate value as the connotation of the system protested by L. L. Fuller of Neo-natural School of Law to construct the legitimate transportation compensation system, which takes equality as the standard and the core. |
| |
| Keywords: | ＂Cap of Good Hope Question＂ positivism law neo-natural law legitimate system equality |
| 本文献已被 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
