Jurisprudence (General Legal Science)

Author: Yao Jianzong (Compiler)
Publisher:
Publishing Time: Not Available
Features: Since graduating as a master's student and staying at the university to teach in 1992, I have served as the instructor for the "Jurisprudence" course for first-year undergraduate students in the legal major for over a decade. From the various doubts and questions raised by my students—of course, including those who were not officially enrolled but frequently appeared in my classroom, both from within and outside the university, and from various undergraduate levels, whether majoring in law or not—I have clearly felt their dissatisfaction with the uniform "Jurisprudence" textbooks currently used in China. At the same time, I have also experienced the shared sentiment of students toward our "Jurisprudence" textbook, just as I, as a teacher of jurisprudence theory, do. That is: First, the "Jurisprudence" we study is essentially a rigid, didactic preaching, forcing us to memorize propositions formed through strong "assertions" rather than genuine "arguments," which are labeled as "truthful" and "knowledge-based." Second, the "Jurisprudence" we study appears extremely tyrannical, domineering, and arbitrary. It stands high above, and its aloof attitude makes it seem cold and worldly—far removed from the real lives of ordinary people. Third, the "Jurisprudence" we study is one-size-fits-all, lacking independent and autonomous academic positions, and rarely possesses genuine theoretical interpretive power. In many cases, it is merely a theoretical legal discourse commentary or transformation of real-world policies. It talks a lot but includes many empty and hegemonic phrases, making it quite boring.
Therefore, at a discussion session in Changchun during the mid-1990s, where I proposed the complete reform of the content and teaching focus of our "Jurisprudence" textbook, organized by Professor Zheng Chengliang of the Law School at Jilin University under the commission of the Higher Education Department of the Ministry of Education at the time, I suggested changing the "Jurisprudence" that primarily emphasizes "transmitting legal knowledge" into one that focuses on cultivating students' "legal spirit," "rule of law awareness," and "legal thinking." However, unfortunately, my proposal was not well-received by most of the experts at the conference. They believed that my idea was too idealistic and technically impractical. I do not agree with this assessment and have always maintained my view on the fundamental function of "Jurisprudence." As a core foundational course for law majors, the role of "Jurisprudence" in their professional studies does not primarily lie in providing them with "legal knowledge," but rather in instilling "basic rule of law concepts," "spreading the spirit of modern law," "cultivating professional legal thinking," and "shaping ideal legal professional personalities," thereby enabling them to develop "excellent legal minds."
As a result, in my actual teaching practice, I have attempted to "personalize" the "Jurisprudence" textbook by reforming its content and structural system. This book is a preliminary summary of such teaching reform. I call it a "summary" of my "Jurisprudence" teaching reform for the following reasons: First, this book aims to weaken the "dogmatic" and "didactic" tone of "Jurisprudence," bringing it back to "reason" and "reasoning." Generally speaking, this book reflects my personal views on "Jurisprudence" as a textbook, as well as the general principles of the ideal "Jurisprudence" textbook I envision—emphasizing the cultivation of students' "legal spirit," "rule of law awareness," and "legal thinking," while placing "legal knowledge transmission" in a secondary position (primarily to be handled by various departments of law). As a result, the purely formal content of "Jurisprudence" is highly compressed in this book, and its length is significantly reduced, making the formal content of the "Jurisprudence" textbook "thicker" to "thinner." This design is also intended to leave more room for teachers to teach "Jurisprudence" personally and for students to study it independently. Second, this book aims to change the "rigid" face of "Jurisprudence," making it "lively," "kind," and "interesting." In the "Reading and Thinking Materials" sections at the end of some chapters, I have compiled academic essays, [1] excerpts from academic papers and books (in both Chinese and English), news reports, judicial interpretations, and English cases (judgments or judges' opinions and dissenting opinions). This content is not only intended to broaden students' reading horizons and inspire their enthusiasm and interest in learning "Jurisprudence," but more importantly, it is believed that as students read these "extra-curricular materials," they will subconsciously receive some degree of "legal spirit cultivation," "rule of law awareness," and training in "legal thinking." Third, although this is only an extremely preliminary attempt, the main purpose of the current structure and content arrangement of this book is indeed to bring "Jurisprudence" back to the real lives of ordinary people, making it "life-oriented." I hope to help students gradually understand that the foundation of "Jurisprudence" lies in our ordinary, authentic, and vivid daily lives, that the theoretical issues of "Jurisprudence" are problems in our daily lives, and that they are very close to us. Those so-called "Jurisprudence" that are distant from our real lives are merely "dead" things, lacking both genuine "theoretical" substance and practical significance. Learning "Jurisprudence" requires us to gradually experience, reflect on, and understand these "life principles" and "legal principles" in the context of our own life experiences and real lives. This process of experiencing, reflecting on, and understanding "life principles" and "legal principles" is not just the learning of the "Jurisprudence" course, but also includes the study of various departments of law, as well as other humanities, social sciences, and even natural sciences. More importantly, it must also include learning through experience in life itself. In this way, those who study law can not only discern "life principles," but also understand the "art of law" in legal application, and deeply master "jurisprudence." Thus, we can say that those who study law possess a "legal mind" and the ability to think legally.
I call this book a "preliminary" summary of my "Jurisprudence" teaching reform because there are still some tasks that this book has not yet completed or done well: First, although I am not entirely satisfied with the current "Jurisprudence" textbooks and teaching arrangements in China, writing a satisfactory "Jurisprudence" textbook is indeed very difficult—much more challenging and complex than writing a personal monograph. I am also not entirely satisfied with my own "Jurisprudence" textbook—not just in terms of its structure but also its specific content. For example, the original design of this book included a chapter on "Legal Culture," but due to various considerations, it was decided to temporarily exclude this chapter during the writing process and add it later when the time is ripe. Second, due to my insufficient research on contemporary Chinese judicial cases, I had to temporarily abandon the plan to select some contemporary Chinese judicial cases as the content of the "Reading and Thinking Materials" at the end of some chapters. This work can only be improved gradually in the future. Third, although the overall structure of this book also considers the relevance of the "Reading and Thinking Materials" to the content of each chapter to some extent, this aspect is still not done well enough—it is only a preliminary arrangement, and more refined thinking and arrangements can only be improved gradually in the future. It is particularly important to note that the personal essays included in the "Reading and Thinking Materials" may have changed in terms of the social facts they describe, but to maintain the authenticity of my writing at that time and preserve the historical truth of these words, I made no changes when including them.
Lastly, this book does not include a dedicated chapter introducing the main schools of Western jurisprudence—mainly because at Jilin University, we have a separate course, "Contemporary Western Legal Philosophy," to cover this task. This is a deficiency in this book. Personally, I tend to avoid dedicating a separate chapter to Western jurisprudence in future revisions, instead integrating the main views of the main schools of Western jurisprudence into relevant chapters for introduction and analysis. However, the conditions for completing this work are not yet mature and require further reflection.
Proposing these ideas is also an attempt to express my sincere hope as the compiler: I hope readers and colleagues will provide their criticism and suggestions for this book. Your feedback is truly crucial and important for further revising this book.