From philosophy to law

 Guizhou People's Publishing House in the This is why it is written well, or our reading tastes and habits have a problem?
have a great understanding of differences, what is more, many violations of justice, violation of rights, deprivation of liberty of action, but also made under the guise of their name. Therefore, conceptual, recognizing a need to clarify the confusion; when these abstract concept to practical implementation in life, people need the same ruling the judge, not the philosopher unrestrained style general comments. This book is exactly the skill and merit, it is a legal perspective, it is analyzed It tells readers, .
only like the ultimate and metaphysical thinking of the number of people certainly are not interested in this routine, but it works. try to compare the long-term habit of saying it, Hegel's famous saying: Freedom is the recognition of necessity. According to such a said that an innocent person to jail, let him out of the fetters of earthly life, realize some truth, but added that he was free. can be seen on the so thinking there should be a transition from philosophy to law, or the precise definition of its meaning.
not just display analysis of skills, but by this technique to solve some important theoretical issues. For example, the famous thought historian, master of Berlin made liberalism the two concepts of freedom: positive and negative liberty and freedom positive freedom and negative freedom translated, and of the fact that the two are interlinked: There is an inherent and passive constraints, no need to go on talking about the freedom of two distinct, because one of them with nothing bound hh So, if there is nothing to prevent me to do X, then I am free to to do X; the contrary, if I'm free to do X, then there is nothing to stop me from doing Xl l is out of the freedom and the freedom of rFreedomto rFreedomfrom is such logically linked. can not exist independently of a particular l r from the positive freedom, but also the freedom to not get rid of some l r. This need to understand the constraints of his classification and come for the four match types the right to life and other human rights in parallel up to, people think it is a kind of special rights. The author believes that everyone has the right to exist and to recognize those rights did not say what is best to understand them Ideal for the relevant instructions. Now people often debate the death penalty should not be abolished to allow euthanasia, abortion, etc., in favor of or against the answers are compatible with survival. Therefore, it is only an issue for the legislature wishes instructions on the ideal , and does not contain specific content, the legislators on the trial or the edge of the complex issues clear whether the first 102 to 103.
I think the author of this view and other views are not necessarily correct , but its legal perspective and analysis is to be learn and use. if we are to put forward different views, ideas should be the same for the argument to. speak Yunshanwuzhao to explain the habits of far-fetched, it should be eradicated as soon as possible.