法与正义的关系问题是思想史的重要议题，也是新时代中国特色社会主义法治建设的重要课题。鲁道夫·施塔姆勒作为新康德主义法学的创始人，其正义法理论开启了“自然法的复兴”运动，也同马克思主义法学思想形成了鲜明对照。本文立足于历史唯物主义基本原理，运用历史分析、比较研究等方法，以其代表作《正义法的理论》为中心，就施塔姆勒正义法理论及其方法论基础进行梳理、阐释，并基于马克思相关思想予以评析。 施塔姆勒所谓的“正义法”指的是具有正义品质的实在法，寻找一种确定实在法是否具有正义品质的形式性方法构成其理论体系的总问题，其出发点则在于确立正义法的理念——社会理想。一方面，他根据正义法的理念，推出具有实际判断标准作用的抽象的正义法原则，即尊重与参与的原则。另一方面，他把作为待评判对象的生活事实归入正义法的一定模型中，通过形式化的外观进行评判。 施塔姆勒正义法理论的根本方法：一是对于形式与质料的区分；二是对于法的概念与理念的区分。关于前者，施塔姆勒依据康德哲学，强调形式对质料的决定作用，认为科学的首要目标是把握研究对象的形式。这种形式在社会生活中就体现为法，质料则体现为人类的社会交往和经济生活，法作为形式性的因素为社会成员的经济交往提供了行为模式的规定性。这一方法体现于法学理论中，形式就体现为法的概念及理念，而质料则是在历史中被给定的实在法，法学研究的目标是用前者把握后者。而法的概念与理念的区分，则意味着对于实然问题“法是什么”和应然问题“法如何能是正义的”也必须加以区分。 从唯物史观审视之，施塔姆勒的方法存在根本缺陷。因为，法等上层建筑与经济基础并不是形式与无形式的质料之间的关系，而是相对外在的形式与同样蕴含了形式的内容之间的关系。经济活动和经济关系作为社会生活的本源性内容，要求法的体系等社会的形式性因素必须与之相适应，这就是经济对法所具有的决定作用。作为社会生活中的权利关系而非立法者个体意志，法在本质上并不具有脱离阶级关系的纯粹形式性特征，正义的理念同样如此。通过将旧自然法思想中的正义因素由实质内容转化为形式因素，施塔姆勒调和了作为对正义的“追求”的实在法与阶级对立的现实，但这一调和的代价是造成理论的空洞性。只有从经济基础特别是生产关系出发，才能克服这种形式主义并科学地理解正义法问题。
The relationship between law and justice is an important topic in intellectual history and a key issue in the construction of the socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics in the new era. Rudolf Stammler, the founder of Neo-Kantian jurisprudence, initiated the "revival of natural law" movement with his theory of justice in law, which sharply contrasts with Marxist legal thought. This paper, based on the basic principles of historical materialism and employing methods such as historical analysis and comparative study, focuses on Stammler's theory of just law and its methodological foundation, centered around his representative work "The Theory of Justice in Law," to clarify and interpret, and to evaluate it based on Marx's relevant ideas.Stammler's concept of "just law" refers to substantive law possessing qualities of justice, with the central issue of his theoretical system being the search for a formal method to determine whether substantive law possesses qualities of justice. His starting point lies in establishing the idea of justice in law—social ideals. On one hand, based on the idea of justice in law, he derives abstract principles of justice that serve as practical criteria, namely the principles of respect and participation. On the other hand, he subsumes the facts of life, which are the objects to be judged, into a certain model of the law of justice, and judges them by means of a formalised method.The fundamental methods of Stammler's theory of justice in law are twofold: firstly, distinguishing between form and material; secondly, distinguishing between the concept of law and the idea of law. Regarding the former, Stammler, drawing on Kantian philosophy, emphasizes the determining role of form on material, believing that the primary goal of science is to grasp the form of the subject of study. This form is manifested in social life as law, while the material appears as human social interaction and economic life; law, as a formal factor, provides normativity for economic exchanges among society's members. This method is reflected in legal theory, where form embodies the concepts and ideas of law, while material is the given substantive law in history, with the objective of legal research being to use the former to understand the latter. The distinction between the concept and idea of law implies differentiating between "what is law" and "how law can be just" .From the perspective of historical materialism, Stammler's method has fundamental flaws. This is because the relationship between law, as a superstructure, and economic base is not a relationship between form and formless material, but rather a relatively external relationship between form and content, which also contains form. Economic activities and relations as the foundational content of social life demand that the systemic elements of law, and other social formal factors, must correspond to them; this is the determinative role of economics on law. Law, as a system of rights in social life, rather than the individual will of lawmakers, fundamentally lacks purely formal characteristics independent of class relations, and the idea of justice is similarly affected.By transforming the substantive content of justice from the old natural law thought into formal factors, Stammler reconciled the pursuit of justice in substantive law with the reality of class antagonism; however, this reconciliation led to theoretical emptiness. Only by starting from the economic base, especially production relations, can we overcome this formalism and scientifically understand the problem of justice in law.
