objective truth造句
例句與造句
- Scopes of objective truth in procedural proof
訴訟證明中客觀真實的生存空間 - If there is no objective truth , my opinion may reign supreme and i may try to have everything my way
如果真理不存在或不可知，那末我?有堅持我的真理，實行我的計劃。 - The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question
人的思維是否具有客觀的真理性不是一個理論問題而實一個實踐問題。 - Witness not appearing in court influences judicial justice seriously and impedes the pursuit of proceedings value of objective truth
證人不出庭作證嚴(yán)重影響了司法公正，阻礙對客觀真實的訴訟價值追求。 - The points about the certificate standard contain objective truth , proof on a balance of probabilities , many levels of structures theory and negation theory , but these theories deserve the study
目前有關(guān)民事訴訟證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的學(xué)說主要有客觀真實說、或然性權(quán)衡說、多層次說和否定說，但這些學(xué)說都值得商榷。 - It's difficult to find objective truth in a sentence. 用objective truth造句挺難的
- As the view on the standard of judicial proof and as the view on the criterion of evaluating judicial proof , the theory of objective truth is neither tenable in procedural jurisprudence nor has reality in procedure
“客觀真實說”關(guān)于證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的觀點和關(guān)于證明評價標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的觀點在訴訟法理上都是不成立的，不具有現(xiàn)實的程序意義。 - On the other hand , the aim of fact trial should be " sure truth " , not " objective truth " or " legal truth " . then rules of collecting documentary evidence should balance both substantial benefit and procedural benefit
另外，現(xiàn)代民事訴訟的事實審理目的，不應(yīng)以“客觀真實說”或“法律真實說”為指導(dǎo)，而應(yīng)以“確信真實說” (或“信賴真實說” )為指導(dǎo)。 - If you spend much of your life arguing that language is incapable of expressing objective truth and challenging the basis of the western rationalist tradition , i suppose you must expect a barbed comment or two when you expire
如果你把一生大部分時間都花在以下兩件事上：一是聲稱語言無法表達(dá)客觀真理，二是挑戰(zhàn)西方理性主義傳統(tǒng)的基礎(chǔ)，那么我猜想，到你過世時，你必然會遭到一兩句尖刻的評價。 - Dence regulations . . amending judgment or remanding for a new trial for the reason of " fact being not clear and evidence being not enough " pursues objective truth , which is not scientific in civil litigation , not in accordance with evidence regulations
以“事實不清，證據(jù)不足”為由改判或發(fā)回重審追求的是客觀真實，這種追求客觀真實的民事案件證明要求顯然不科學(xué)，不符合證據(jù)規(guī)則的要求。 - Because of having gotten new knowledge for some theories of civil lawsuit , the ripeness of the knowledge of scope to the appeal , the breakthrough in " objective truth theory " , our country lead into collateral appeal system have feasibility
由于對民事訴訟的有關(guān)理論取得了新的認(rèn)識、對上訴請求范圍的認(rèn)識已經(jīng)成熟、對“客觀真理論”的認(rèn)識取得突破，使我國引入附帶上訴制度存在著可行性。 - Actually , the objective truth doctrine and the legal truth doctrine are n ' t mutually antagonistic on the same question about the adjudicative fact theory , because the matching between the adjudicative facts and the objective facts points to the question of the truth or falsehood about the adjudicative facts , meanwhile the matching between the adjudicative facts and normative facts points to the question of the legitimacy of the adjudicative facts ; in the final analysis , the question of the truth or false about adjudicative facts is a question of factual judgment about what it is , at the same time , the question of the legitimacy of the adjudicative facts is a question of value judgment about - what it ought to be
其實， “客觀真實說”和“法律真實說”不是針對同一問題產(chǎn)生的兩種對立的裁判事實理論，因為裁判事實與客觀事實的關(guān)系問題需要解決的是裁判事實的真?zhèn)螁栴}，而裁判事實與規(guī)范事實的關(guān)系問題需要解決的則是裁判事實的正當(dāng)性或合法性問題；裁判事實的真?zhèn)螁栴}歸根結(jié)底是實然領(lǐng)域中的事實判斷問題，而裁判事實的正當(dāng)性或合法性問題歸根結(jié)底是應(yīng)然領(lǐng)域中的價值判斷問題。 - Part one : the objectivity of traditional legal reasoning in the traditional theorys , the objectivity of legal reasoning is considered as a pure and noumonon objectivity . lt seeks to correspond with the objective truth . at the same time it completely depends on the syllogism in the method
本文主要從以下幾個方面進(jìn)行討論：一、傳統(tǒng)法律推理的客觀性在傳統(tǒng)的法律推理理論中，法律推理客觀性被認(rèn)為是一種純粹的、本體上的客觀性，追求的是與客觀事實完全相符，在方法上是完全依賴于三段論。 - Based on the analysis of their respective historical origins , this paper compares the historical views of the two theories and reveals their essential distinction : marxism searches objective truth , while hermeneutics studies texts meaning , and even dissolves meaning , therefore banishing truth finally
本文通過分析兩者的歷史淵源，比較兩者的歷史觀，揭示了兩者的本質(zhì)區(qū)別：馬克思哲學(xué)追尋的是客觀真理，而解釋學(xué)則是在文本中進(jìn)行意義的考古，甚至消解意義，驅(qū)逐真理。 - In the law circle , some scholars who uphold the objective truth doctrine unilaterally emphasize the complete matching between the adjudicative facts and the objective facts , meanwhile some others who insist the legal truth doctrine unilaterally emphasize the matching between the adjudicative facts and the normative facts
理論界一些主張裁判事實“客觀真實說”的學(xué)者往往片面強調(diào)裁判事實與客觀事實的完全競合，而一些主張“法律真實說”的學(xué)者則往往片面強調(diào)裁判事實與規(guī)范事實的競合。 - An issue heatedly debated around the academic sphere is the one that what can we find out through proceedings . however broad is the gap between objective truth and legal truth , they share a common standpoint , the case ruled embraces substantial contents which really took place in society . and those empirical things are beyond every observer , including the judge
但是無論是“客觀真實”論者，還是“法律真實”論者之間的對立有多么大，他們都肯認(rèn)一個共同的前提：被提交審理的案件是在社會中實實在在的發(fā)生了的，這個對象是超越了任何包括法官在內(nèi)的觀察者。