Posner’s pragmatic view of law can be seen as an improvement on bet365 apuestas economics，is the result of the interdisciplinary research he advocated。However，Use one discipline to try to improve another，It is possible that the former may invade the latter。Boss’s pragmatic view of law recognizes the uncertainty of judicial activities on the one hand，But at the same time trying to replace it with empirical certainty，As a result, it became the target of criticism by anti-foundationalists。

　　The uncertainty of bet365 apuestas text interpretation and its rhetorical nature

Judicial decision is a complex debate process，The essence is that all parties involved in the case use rhetorical resources to achieve their own goals。The judge must convince the parties and all sectors of society to accept the legitimacy of the judgment，Lawyers must convince the judge and jurors to accept arguments that are favorable to their client。Whether it is the former or the latter，Judicial arguments require some form of certainty as a starting point，The starting point is the text of the bet365 apuestas。The judge cannot avoid the issue of the meaning of the text during the trial。Different jurisprudential schools have different views on the relationship between meaning and text。Justice Holmes believes，One can determine the author's meaning by examining how a person with normal language skills would understand the text。Posner believes that this "obvious meaning approach" cannot resolve the gap between the literal meaning of the statute and the legislative intent。The former is related to the reader’s interpretive community，The latter is related to the interpretive community of legislators。Whether the legislator’s interpretive community can be used to determine the meaning of a text，This is not self-evident。The different interpretive communities to which authors and readers belong also mean that different readers have diverse understandings of the text。

The above discussion shows，Legal texts need to be interpreted to play a role in trials。Because legislators and interpreters are in different contexts，Explanation bet365 apuestas is actually an effort to bridge the gap between contexts。As mentioned before，Trial is a debate process，Certainty must be the starting point。In the process of interpretation，This certainty must be reflected in the objectivity of legal interpretation。However，The heterogeneity of interpreting the community also makes the meaning bet365 apuestas uncertain。This uncertainty and the pursuit of objectivity make the act of judicial trial a rhetorical act。To the judge，Case hearing is a rhetorical process，We are facing a rhetorical situation caused by different interpretations bet365 apuestas，The purpose is to put your own interpretation in an objective light，To persuade the audience。

　　bet365 apuestas pragmatic response

The uncertainty of the meaning of bet365 apuestas texts not only gives the trial process a rhetorical character，It also makes related theoretical games full of rhetoric。The inherent uncertainty in the trial process cannot be circumvented by any jurisprudence theory。In terms of law and economics，Uncertainty takes up a lot of space in Posner’s theoretical discussion。Posner believes that in the trial activities，bet365 apuestas regulations and precedents have no restrictive effect on judges: "A pragmatic judge always tries his best for current and future cases，So he is not bound by the duty to be consistent with the relevant decisions of other judges。”In other words，The rhetorical purpose of judges from a pragmatic perspective is to make their judgments stand the test of current and future audiences，In order to achieve this goal，bet365 apuestas text and case law are available rhetorical resources。Precisely because of the existence of uncertainty in meaning，The use of these rhetorical resources can be justified。From this point of view，Posner’s pragmatic description of judicial behavior fully reflects the rhetorical nature of judicial behavior。Objectivity has become a cultural aspect of the trial process、Political attributes，Only judges can achieve a dynamic balance between the rule of law and substantive justice。

In addition，Pragmatism also provides a consequentialist perspective for the interpretation practice of bet365 apuestas texts。Posner denies the ontological objectivity that exists independently of personal experience and the objectivity of scientism，Believe that judicial behavior can only achieve dialogue and objectivity，That is, an unstable one、The short-term objectivity achieved by the parties to the trial through discourse interaction。Precisely because it is the only rhetorical balance that can be achieved in the trial，Only the judge can strike a balance between the strict limitations of the bet365 apuestas text and substantive justice。Posner’s point of view is worth noting，Because this shows its pragmatic empiricism tendency。First，Posner acknowledged the possibility of the rule of law。According to the explanation of "Oxford Law Dictionary"，The rule of law is an "incredibly important"、But not defined、It is not a concept that can be defined casually，It means all authorities、Legislation、Administration、The judiciary and other institutions must be subject to certain principles”。This definition shows that the rule of law is a broad and vague concept of wide applicability，Only in this way can rhetorical resources be provided for institutional discourse behavior。In the discussion about the rule of law and substantive justice，Fishe has pointed out，The context in which we live limits our search for common values ​​without any political leanings，This shows that the rule of law is actually a rhetorical device used by judges。Posner believes that the rule of law can be achieved，It means that he feels that he can find an objective cognitive method that exists independently of discourse。The above description of its pragmatism can confirm this assertion: since the main body of judicial behavior is interpretation，So providing it with a "consequentialist" perspective means that Posner's pragmatism is a "scientific and serious empiricism"，Clear connection with bet365 apuestas realism”。Posner’s theory is deeply influenced by economics。The latter’s cognitive method is empirical，deny that "observation", an important means of gaining experience, will be interfered with by the observer's own bias。In essence，As Fish pointed out，Posner’s pragmatism is consistent with the purpose of law and economics: to introduce social science theory into the field of bet365 apuestas research，And then give up bet365 apuestas research to economics and other social sciences。

　　From one bet365 apuestas to another

In order to achieve the above purposes，Posner first affirmed the uncertainty of interpretation of the law，But I think it cannot be solved by such a broad concept as "interpretation"。Take “Imagination Reconstruction” as an example，After all, guessing legislative intentions by imagining the problems faced by legislators has a high degree of uncertainty，Therefore, it is suspected that it is convenient for the judges to "sell dog meat"。Judicial officers can rely on the authority of the legal provisions themselves to justify their judgments。In this way，The boundary between judicial trial activities and legislative behavior is very blurred。Other mainstream legal interpretation theories also face similar dilemmas。The gap in time, space and context between legislators and judges，Meaning that interpretation has actually become an excuse for the judiciary to legislate。In Posner’s opinion，"Imagination/Purpose Reconstruction" proposed to fill the gap between the text and the current context、Neither the “transactional approach” nor the various “principles of interpretation” help in finding definite meaning in interpretation。These interpretations are nothing more than political or moral judgments made by judges in the name bet365 apuestas。

Legal provisions with uncertain semantics are still a problem that judges cannot escape，And for him，This problem cannot be solved by any method of interpretation，Because they cannot objectively reflect the meaning of legal texts or the intentions of legislators。Since interpretation bet365 apuestas cannot avoid uncertainty，Posner proposes to abandon it completely，Judges no longer pay attention to textual meaning when making judgments，Rather, the judgment is based on the possible results of the trial。Using results as a criterion for interpreting legal texts is an important feature of Posner’s pragmatism，Because "Pragmatism without interdisciplinary integration with science"，It’s just a mess”。Posner also realized the shortcomings of empiricism，The so-called "result" is a judgment based on personal subjective consciousness，Therefore, it is even more difficult to ensure the objectivity of interpretation than interpretation。When pragmatism needs to be combined with economics，“Objectivity”, an important tool used to deny interpretive theories, has been ruthlessly abandoned。Judicial trials from a pragmatic perspective no longer focus on the textual meaning bet365 apuestas or the intentions of legislators，But consider the social or personal benefits of the sentence。In other words，“Wealth maximization” becomes the standard for measuring sentences。

The emphasis on experience forms the core of Posner’s bet365 apuestas pragmatism。Fishe pointed out，Poor's pragmatism's description of law is more correct，For example, denying formalist objectivity，But it is impossible to use it to guide practice。Any theory needs a starting point，Once pragmatism turns from phenomenon description and theoretical discussion into guidance for practice，You must establish your broad applicability and correctness beyond the specific context。However，The nature of discourse interaction is heterogeneous。All parties involved in discourse interaction start from different backgrounds，Establishing a precarious position through rhetorical interaction、Temporary objectivity，And use this as the starting point for acting，This is the essence of judicial behavior。The above-mentioned broad correctness of the hypercontext is impossible，Therefore, the theoretical discussion of bet365 apuestas pragmatism does not have much guiding role in judicial practice。Fisch starts from the perspective of anti-foundationalism，Remind us to pay attention to those foundational theories disguised as pragmatism，One of them is Posner’s pragmatic view of law。In the final analysis，Use economic terms such as "wealth maximization" to try to find certainty in the uncertainty of judicial activities，Ultimately just replacing one uncertainty with another。In the current context of judicial reform in our country，Awareness of the uncertainty inherent in judicial action should lead us to view judicial activity as a rhetorical discourse interaction，Pay attention to its impact on the speech and interaction of all parties involved in judicial activities，Rather than trying to replace this uncertainty with another theoretical term。

　(Author’s unit: School bet365 apuestas, Fujian Normal University、Department bet365 apuestas, International College, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University)