Yu Zhigang: Male: 1973 Born in May, Luoyang, Henan. 1995 graduated from the Law Department of Renmin University of China with a bachelor's degree in law; 1998 graduated from the law school of Renmin university of China with a master's degree in criminal law; In July, 20001,he graduated from Law School of Renmin University of China with a doctor of law. In July of 20001year, he joined China University of Political Science and Law as a lecturer; In July 2002, he was promoted to associate professor; In 2005, he was promoted to professor; Now he is a professor and doctoral supervisor at the School of Criminal Justice of China University of Political Science and Law; He is also the Deputy Procurator-General of Shunyi District People's Procuratorate in Beijing. 2002-2004: Post-doctoral mobile station of theoretical economics, School of Economics, China Renmin University, engaged in post-doctoral research in theoretical economics; 1 in 2004 to1in 2005; Visiting scholar at Oxford University Law School, UK, engaged in criminal law research. Up to now, * * * has published personal monographs 10, co-authored many books, published more than 100 academic papers in journals such as Legal Studies and China Law, participated in or presided over more than 10 provincial and ministerial scientific research projects, and won provincial and ministerial awards for scientific research achievements many times.

Foreword Chen Xingliang

The value of crime is an extremely complicated theoretical problem. The "criminal benefit theory" criticized by Yu Zhigang in this book is a manifestation of relativism crime view. How to treat this relativistic view of crime is really worth thinking deeply. Personally, I don't advocate the expression of "criminal benefit theory", but I tend to agree with the relativism crime view in the opposite sense of absolute crime view. Therefore, it will also become the object of criticism in this book. This kind of criticism is actually an academic criticism, and academic contention is absolutely necessary for academic progress. It is in this mutual criticism that we can clearly distinguish academic right from wrong and clarify the way of academic reasoning. In The Human Basis of Criminal Law (Renmin University of China Press, 2nd Edition, 2006), I once talked about crime under the proposition of social function of crime. It is pointed out that the existence of crime is reasonable in the sense of functional analysis, which provides a certain tension for the society, thus making the society leap forward in the alternate evolution of order and disorder, crime and non-crime. Especially when social norms or value norms lag behind social life, the so-called crime that violates such social norms or value norms often becomes a harbinger of social change, affects the development of society in its unique form, and finally causes the change of criminal concept, so as to get rid of the shackles of crimes defined by legal norms and complete a historic leap from crime to non-crime. (Page 354-355) I used the word "tension" in this passage. I really didn't think about it carefully at that time, but I just brought it out in an essay. In this book, Yu Zhigang made an in-depth textual research and investigation on the word tension from the perspectives of physics, physiology, psychology and sociology. And this rigorous attitude towards learning is awe-inspiring. Physically speaking, tension is the internal force to restore the original shape after the object is deformed by external force. Therefore, I agree with Yu Zhigang's point of view. Tension is not a driving force, but a force that keeps an object in its original shape. For a society, tension means that the structure of this society is elastic, and even if it is destroyed by some centrifugal force, it can maintain the stability of its social structure with a certain centripetal force. Of course, whether and how a crime with certain rationality can provide a certain tension for society is indeed specious. This shows that if we delve into some habitual sayings, I'm afraid we will find problems more or less. For example, "equal election" is a very popular term, but the election is "selective", that is, to choose among several candidates, it must be based on the difference, and there is no election if it is equal. From the linguistic point of view, "equal election" is a word that obviously violates logical rules and is illogical. Therefore, Yu Zhigang's in-depth thinking on academic spirit is worthy of recognition.