| Summary: | 我國法學界向來重視抽象的原理原則，對於「先驗規則」（學者所提出之原理原則）的存在，甚少透過實際狀況加以驗證。法學知識的累積，固然可以來自於不同學說的論辯，然而如果缺乏充分與客觀的證據加以支持，學說理論的討論，就會變成各說各話的爭辯。再加上繼受自外國法律制度的影響，本土的法學論述與依據尚未建立，那麼台灣法學不僅無法在國際上與各國學說及實證相提並論，深耕本土法律的理想，更是難以達成。法律作為一種社會規範，其終極目的在於影響人類行為趨向公平正義，對於社會現象的觀察，自應根據特定社會與人類行為所發生的實際結果而為判斷，換言之，法律規定是否妥適，學說理論是否完備，只有經由實際證據與資料的蒐集及分析才能有效判斷，只有通過科學方法驗證的先驗學說或規則，才能確立其知識價值與社會接受性。
基於上述的體會與觀察，本文認為法學研究的發展方向，除了向來的法律邏輯演繹以及法律文字譯註之外，亦應嘗試跨領域的學科整合，進而探究法律的真實與擴展法學的研究，其中實證研究更是帶領法學走向嶄新領域不可或缺的觀念與研究方法。因此，本文說明法學實證研究的必要性及其內涵，亦提出法學實證研究的主要研究方法，以及如何建構法學實證研究的環境，亦即如何藉由法學教育的改革，培養法律人具備實證研究的思考與研究技巧，進而深耕本土法學議題，真正達到台灣法學國際化的目的，讓台灣法學建立自我的論述，進而與國際接軌，在本土生根。
Legal scholars are much more used to statue interpretation than empirical analysis of law in Taiwan. Although legal knowledge may be accumulated by counterarguments that are based on different doctrines, there is a lack of common platform for scholars to discuss the legal issues with objective data and evidences. Moreover, the legal theories and codes of Taiwan were primarily inherited from Germany and Japan in the last century, and the infrastructure and culture of our legal system which characterize the domestic judiciary are undergoing the changes gradually without distinguishing the features of this jurisdiction.
As the law is never independent from the social constructs, the main purpose of the legal rules is to set up a social model of justice that guides the people to the rule of law. The consequences of legal regulations can be practically evaluated by
collecting and analyzing the data or evidences from our observation and surveys. In other words, whether the legal regulations meet the needs of a society and serve the purposes of rule-making should be verified by empirical examination.
The empirical legal study is one of the most eminent legal scholarships, which is not only employed as a research methodology but also a practical approach of discovering the realities of our society under the law. This article points
out the difficulties and the connotations of empirical legal study and highlights this research approach. It contends that reformation of current legal education, redefinition of our local needs of empirical study, establishment of research centers,
etc., will assist us to overcome the perplexity of empirical study. As a result, the legal experience gained from Taiwan can stand out for the review and knowledge sharing of international legal community.
|
|---|
