2. 职称英语
  3. Chief Justice Li, Ladies and gentlemen, Thank you for giving me the

Chief Justice Li, Ladies and gentlemen, Thank you for giving me the

游客2023-12-25  24
问题     Chief Justice Li,
    Ladies and gentlemen,
    Thank you for giving me the privilege of attending this historic dedication and for asking me to speak to you this morning. //
    Universities, like most other human institutions and enterprises, must be always in search of new systems, new models, new ways to perform their essential mission. That is why it is of paramount importance for this school to prosper and succeed. And when it does, your model can inspire dynamic changes in legal education throughout your great nation. Your success is important for China. And your school is important for other nations who want to rely upon law and the legal profession to find common goals to achieve common progress. //
    In the United States our law school professors have immense talent, and law schools are influential in government and in society at large. As some of you know, our law review system relies on students who are just beginning to study and to explore the law to engage in formal criticism of decisions made by judges. Judges, of course, are senior to students in years and in experience. But the judges respect and welcome the criticism from those who are just beginning to study the law. //
    Judges do not view student and faculty criticism simply as a necessary way to train the next generation of legal thinkers. Judges and indeed the whole profession embrace the criticism as a crucial check on the power of the bench and bar. We rely on criticism from law students to see if we can find new insights to express new principles that strengthen the Rule of Law. So our law professors and our law students can be proud of their work, even when that work criticizes authority. //
    Sometimes we hear law professors say: "we teach our students how to think. " In one sense this should not be at all surprising. Any teacher in any subject at any level wants to teach students how to think. So in some respects the law professor’s boast is nothing more than a commonplace observation. Successful teachers always seek to inspire students to be precise and clear. // Too often, however, the suggestion or connotation is that professors at law schools have some sort of a monopoly on clear thinking. That, of course, is pretentious, narrow, and simply wrong. And to prove that law has no monopoly on thinking, one need only notice those law schools which now hire law professors with a rich, diverse interdisciplinary background. Our law professors come to law school with degrees not only in law but other fields as well. //
    The thirst for interdisciplinary diversity has had an effect on the ranks of law students as well. It used to be that desks in law school classrooms were manned by pupils with a more or less homogeneous background. Most had undergraduate majors in pre-law or political science and had come straight to law school after completing their undergraduate studies. Today we see a different dynamic. Alongside the political science undergrad we find economics, chemistry and literature majors, or even find students have made a professional mark on the world in one field or who have an advanced degree and who are now eager to bring that experience to our venerable profession. //
    The law professor’s self—important claim that he or she teaches students how to think is in need of some revision, some refinement. We can discard that unwarranted pretension, yet we can continue to capture the vital and unique societal function law schools perform. We can say that law schools train students how to think about simple things in a formal way. This is the path to a world of thought that discovers moral principles and social responsibilities in everyday activities. //
    If the law student is to succeed in this worthwhile project, he or she must be patient. This may account in part for the slight, initial disappointment some beginning law students feel. They come to law school filled with idealism and great expectations. They are eager to learn the truths that ought to inform any enlightened system of justice. Then the student finds that he or she is required to spend hours interpreting a few little words, or even the punctuation, in a contract or a statute. They might become impatient. They ask themselves "why am I spending my time on detail when I am so anxious to find solutions for the crises of our times?" To this question there are a number of answers. Let me give a few. //
    To begin with it is necessary to teach certain elementary rules and principles for interpreting documents, enforcing contracts, and imposing liability just so that we can have simple rules to begin managing an evermore complex society. Every science in every discipline must begin by teaching students its own vocabulary, and its own basic assumptions, and its own rudimentary principles. //And then, too, in law school we hope to teach the tools of debate and rhetoric. We want to teach a means for reconciling disputes and reaching common agreement through civil, productive, rational, respectful, honest discussion and debate. A student in a law school should learn to argue a difficult proposition in a graceful, diplomatic, courteous, logical way that shows at all times the respect that he or she has for all others engaged in the process. //
    (Excerpt from remarks by Justice Anthony Kennedy, U.S. Supreme Court on the Occasion of the Opening of the Peking University School of Transnational Law)
选项
答案     首席大法官李先生，
    女士们，先生们，
    感谢你们给我如此殊荣出席今天上午这一具有历史意义的创院典礼，也谢谢你们邀请我发表演讲。//
如同其他大多教人文机构和企业一样，大学必须经常为执行自身的基本使命不断寻求新的体系、新的模式和新的方法。这就是为什么这所学院的兴旺与成功具有至高无上的重要意义。这所学院如取得成功，你们的模式就可以激发这个伟大国家的法律教育不断进行变革。你们的成功不仅对中国具有重要意义，对于希望依靠法律和法律行业取得共同进步、达到共同目标的其他国家而言，也同样具有重要意义。//
    在美国，我们的法学教授拥有很高的才智，法学院对政府和整个社会都具有影响力。你们有些人知道，我国的法律审察制度依靠刚开始学习和探索法律的学生以规范方式对法官做出的裁决提出批评意见。当然，法官比学生年长且富有更多的经验，但法官尊重并欢迎初学法律的人士提出批评。//
    法官们不仅仅视法学院师生的批评为培养下一代法律思想家的一种必要手段。法官乃至整个法律界都认识到批评是制约法官和律师权力的重要手段。我们依靠法学院学生的批评，试图发现一些新的见解，借此阐释有助于增强法治的新原则。因此，我们的法学教授和法学院学生都为自己的工作感到自豪，即便在批评权威时也是如此。//
    有时，我们会听到法学教授说：“我们教导学生如何思考。”从某种意义上来说，这种说法丝毫不令人感到意外。任何学科、任何层面的教师都希望教学生如何思考。因此在某种程度上，可以说法学教授的这种自夸不过是一种十分普遍的言论成功的教师历来启发学生要做到头脑严谨、思维清晰。//但法学教授们的言下之意常常是，法学教授对思维的清晰性具有某种垄断性。这当然是过于自命不凡、狭窄和完全错误的。要证明法律并不垄断思维，人们只要注意一下某些法学院聘用法律教授的情况就可以了。这些受聘的法律教授具有丰富多样的跨学科背景。我们的法学教授不仅拥有法律学位，而且拥有其他学科的学位。//
    对跨学科多样性的渴求也对各级法学院学生产生了影响。过去法学院教室里的学生拥有的背景大同小异。他们大都是大学法律预科或政治学专业的本科生，毕业后直接进入法学院学习。今天，我们看到的是另一种态势。除了政治学本科生外，还有主修经济学、化学和文学的学生，甚至有一些学生已在世界上某个专业领域取得了卓越的成就，或已获得高级学位，现在迫切希望将个人专长带入我们这个崇高的行业。//
    法学教授们声称他们教导学生如何思考，这种自命不凡的说法需要修正并加以完善。我们可以一方面摒弃这种无根据的自命不凡，另一方面继续强调法学院所发挥的关键和独特的社会功能。我们可以说，法学院训练学生如何规范地思考简单问题。他们沿着这条道路可以走入一个思想的世界，从而在日常生活中发现道德原则和社会责任。//
    为了在这个值得为之努力的学科取得成功，法学院学生必须具备耐心。一些法律专业的新生最初会感到有些失望，其中部分原因就是他们缺乏耐心。他们进入法学院时踌躇满志、雄心勃勃。他们渴望学习任何开明公正的司法制度秉承的真理。但随后，学生们发现他们必须花费大量时间解释一份合同或一项法规中的只言片语，甚至是标点符号。他们可能因此失去耐心。他们会问自己：“我多么希望为解决我们这个时代的种种危机寻求出路，而此时我为什么要在细枝末节上花费时间?”对这个问题有几种答案。我想谈谈其中几个。//
    首先，讲授有关解释文本、执行合同和追究责任的基本规则和原则的确很有必要，以便我们能够为着手管理这个日益复杂的社会掌握一些简要原则。任何一门学科中的任何知识，都必须始于教给学生专业语汇、基本假设和基础原则。//其次，我们也希望在法学院传授论辩和论证的技巧。我们希望传授一些方法，通过文明、有效、理性、相互尊重以及开诚布公的讨论和辩论来调解纠纷，达成共同协议。一名法学院学生应当学会以文雅的风度、得体的言谈、彬彬有礼的姿态和严密的逻辑思维对棘手的案例进行论辩，自始至终对其他的所有涉案方表示尊重。//
    (节选自美国最高法院大法官安东尼?肯尼迪在北京大学深圳研究生院举行的北京大学国际法学院创院典礼上的讲话)
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3303481.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)