无罪推定与诉诸无知论证比较研究

A Comparative Research of Presumption of Innocence and the Argument of Appeal to Ignorance

摘要: 无罪推定与诉诸无知论证的论证形式虽然相同,但实质却有根本区别,主要表现在两个方面:(1)诉诸无知论证转移了举证责任,无罪推定并未转移举证责任;(2)诉诸无知论证中的立论主体和评判主体相同,无罪推定过程中的立论主体和评判主体并不相同。正是基于这些根本差异,本文认为,无罪推定不同于诉诸无知论证,无罪推定的逻辑本质并不是“诉诸无知”。

Abstract: The argument form of innocence presumption is same as that of appeal to ignorance,but they are essentially different.Their differences are mainly as follows: 1) the burden of proof is shifted in the argument of appeal to ignorance,but not in presumption of innocence;2) the assertor and judger who are both same in the argument of appeal to ignorance,but not in presumption of innocence.Based on these differences,this paper argues that presumption of innocence is essentially different from the argument of appeal to ignorance.