案件侦查中的合情推理模式

Plausible Reasoning Pattern of Detection

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

作者:

刘帆

导师:

卢景德

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

合情推理;侦查推理;推理;侦查;推理模式

摘要:

侦查推理一直是案件侦查中一个重要而又有些神秘的问题。对于案件的侦破来说,如何从各种纷繁糅杂的线索中寻找出一条通往真相的思维之路,关键就在于侦查人员能否进行正确的逻辑推理。而目前对于侦查推理的研究而言,无论是刑事侦查专家还是逻辑学家都还停留在一个较为粗糙的阶段。本文旨在通过对合情推理理论的研究和拓展,以期推动侦查推理理论研究的进一步前行,并对侦查实践提供些许有益的帮助。 合情推理理论应用于侦查推理实践的研究具有非常重要的理论意义和实践意义。目前国内合情推理的相关研究几乎仍囿于数学领域,而将其与案件侦查结合起来的研究更是凤毛麟角。因此,这种跨学科的研究不仅具有理论借鉴意义,也更加具有重要的理论创新意义。而对案件侦查工作实践而言,合情推理的研究不仅有助于我们正确的认识侦查思维的推理过程,而且对于提高侦查人员的逻辑推理水平也具有十分重要的理论指导作用。 简单的说,合情推理是一种综合了逻辑知识和日常生活经验的推理方式。它与普通逻辑推理的主要区别正在于其对推理背景知识的紧密依存性。这也正是“合情”二字的必然要求。当然这些背景知识本身并不一定是绝对正确的。因此,正确的进行合情推理首先要求我们在推理的过程中能够坚持事实求是的思维态度。这种态度在实践过程中的体现就是实用主义哲学所遵从的“大胆的假设,小心的求证”。 本文一共分为三个部分 第一部分:侦查推理的传统模式。主要介绍了目前侦查逻辑学中对侦查推理的认识内容。通过对传统侦查推理模式体系的介绍以及对其局限和不足的说明来指出进行合情推理相关研究的必要性。 第二部分:合情推理的一般理论。主要对合情推理的基本概念和特征进行了尝试性的归纳和说明。力求勾勒出其大致的轮廓。同时通过将合情推理与形式逻辑相关概念进行比较进一步明确其含义。 第三部分:侦查思维中的合情推理模式。主要通过从合情推理的理论出发来对侦查思维的推理过程的归纳和说明。并通过对侦查思维中合情推理模式的系统化整理力图从合情推理的视角出发构建出一个能够基本涵盖侦查推理方法的逻辑推理体系。 鉴于本文篇幅和笔者认识深度的限制。本文对侦查思维中合情推理问题的研究深度还是比较有限的。比如,合情推理中所合之“情”的内涵和外延,合情推理中直觉、灵感等非逻辑思维的地位和作用,以及如何才能合理把握合情推理的分量要求等等,这些都是可以进一步延伸下去的问题,有待于人们进一步的探讨和深入下去。

学科:

诉讼法学

提交日期

2018-01-11

引用参考

刘帆. 案件侦查中的合情推理模式[D]. 西南政法大学,2010.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 案件侦查中的合情推理模式
  • dc.title
  • Plausible Reasoning Pattern of Detection
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 200703012100761
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 刘帆
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2010
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 卢景德
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 合情推理;;侦查推理;;推理;;侦查;;推理模式
  • dc.subject
  • Plausible Reasoning;; Investigative Reasoning;; Reasoning;; Detection;; Reasoning Pattern
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 侦查推理一直是案件侦查中一个重要而又有些神秘的问题。对于案件的侦破来说,如何从各种纷繁糅杂的线索中寻找出一条通往真相的思维之路,关键就在于侦查人员能否进行正确的逻辑推理。而目前对于侦查推理的研究而言,无论是刑事侦查专家还是逻辑学家都还停留在一个较为粗糙的阶段。本文旨在通过对合情推理理论的研究和拓展,以期推动侦查推理理论研究的进一步前行,并对侦查实践提供些许有益的帮助。 合情推理理论应用于侦查推理实践的研究具有非常重要的理论意义和实践意义。目前国内合情推理的相关研究几乎仍囿于数学领域,而将其与案件侦查结合起来的研究更是凤毛麟角。因此,这种跨学科的研究不仅具有理论借鉴意义,也更加具有重要的理论创新意义。而对案件侦查工作实践而言,合情推理的研究不仅有助于我们正确的认识侦查思维的推理过程,而且对于提高侦查人员的逻辑推理水平也具有十分重要的理论指导作用。 简单的说,合情推理是一种综合了逻辑知识和日常生活经验的推理方式。它与普通逻辑推理的主要区别正在于其对推理背景知识的紧密依存性。这也正是“合情”二字的必然要求。当然这些背景知识本身并不一定是绝对正确的。因此,正确的进行合情推理首先要求我们在推理的过程中能够坚持事实求是的思维态度。这种态度在实践过程中的体现就是实用主义哲学所遵从的“大胆的假设,小心的求证”。 本文一共分为三个部分 第一部分:侦查推理的传统模式。主要介绍了目前侦查逻辑学中对侦查推理的认识内容。通过对传统侦查推理模式体系的介绍以及对其局限和不足的说明来指出进行合情推理相关研究的必要性。 第二部分:合情推理的一般理论。主要对合情推理的基本概念和特征进行了尝试性的归纳和说明。力求勾勒出其大致的轮廓。同时通过将合情推理与形式逻辑相关概念进行比较进一步明确其含义。 第三部分:侦查思维中的合情推理模式。主要通过从合情推理的理论出发来对侦查思维的推理过程的归纳和说明。并通过对侦查思维中合情推理模式的系统化整理力图从合情推理的视角出发构建出一个能够基本涵盖侦查推理方法的逻辑推理体系。 鉴于本文篇幅和笔者认识深度的限制。本文对侦查思维中合情推理问题的研究深度还是比较有限的。比如,合情推理中所合之“情”的内涵和外延,合情推理中直觉、灵感等非逻辑思维的地位和作用,以及如何才能合理把握合情推理的分量要求等等,这些都是可以进一步延伸下去的问题,有待于人们进一步的探讨和深入下去。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Investigative Reasoning in criminal investigation has always been an important and somewhat mysterious issue. For the detection of cases, whether an investigator can find a way toward breaking the case from a variety of miscellaneous and numerous clues heavily depends on whether he or she can apply investigative reasoning correctly and efficiently. At present, the research for the detection of reasoning, be it for criminal detection experts or logicians, are still at a relatively preliminary stage. This dissertation aims to study the theory of Plausible Reasoning and development so as to contribute to the detection of reasoning, the further development of the theory and to provide the practice of detection with some useful help. Application of the Theory of Plausible Reasoning practice to research and detection has a very important theoretical and practical significance. Currently almost all relevant studies on Plausible Reasoning are still limited within the field of mathematics, even scarcer are research works that combine it with the detection of the case. Therefore, this interdisciplinary study is not only of theoretical significance, but also of great significance for theatrical innovatation. For detection on the case in practice, the sensible reasoning of research will not only help us to detect a correct understanding of the process of thinking, reasoning, but also boost investigators’level of reasoning as an important theoretical guide. Simply put, fair and logical reasoning is a comprehensive approach to reasoning that factors in the knowledge and experience of everyday life. Its main difference from ordinary logical reasoning lies in its heavy reliance on the background knowledge, which is a "common sense" necessity. Of course, these background knowledge itself may not be absolutely correct. Therefore, the correct application of sensible reasoning requires us first to adhere to the attitude of“seeking truth from facts”in the process of reasoning. This attitude as reflected in practice in the process of application is the philosophy of pragmatism, "bold assumption, be careful to double-check." This dissertation consists of the following three parts: Part I: traditional approach to investigative reasoning. this part focuses on the current logic reasoning to offer an understanding on the contents of the detection. By pointing out the limitations and deficiencies in traditional investigative reasoning, the author come to the conclusion that it is necessary for us to further study and research Plausible Reasoning Part II: General theory on Plausible Reasoning. This part mainly summarizes tentatively the basic concepts and features of Plausible Reasoning, thus outlining Plausible Reasoning’s sketchy profile. At the same time by comparing fair reasoning to formal logic, the author further clarifies its the exact meaning of Plausible Reasoning. Part III: Patterns for Plausible Reasoning in criminal investigation thinking. This part mainly summarizes and details the process of reasoning in criminal investigation thinking from and through the standpoint of Plausible Reasoning. Through the prospective of Plausible Reasoning, this part also endeavors to establish and construct a logical reasoning system that covers all basic investigative reasoning approaches by systemically consolidating all patterns for Plausible Reasoning in criminal investigation thinking. In light of this length and the limitations on the author’s depth of knowledge, this dissertation’s research on Plausible Reasoning is still somewhat limited in terms of its depth and width. For example, the author believe the following topics deserve our further study and research: the sensible definition and connotation of all the "human factors" in Plausible Reasoning, what roles do gut feeling, inspiration and other non-logical thinking play in Plausible Reasoning, and how can we truly grasp the fair and reasonable inference of the Plausible Reasoning in investigation, etc.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D918
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2010-03-18
回到顶部