預見可能性在過失犯構造中體系位置的混亂,根源于傳統理論未區分過失的認定與過失的歸責。作為經驗事實范疇的預見可能性,僅對過失歸責的判斷產生影響。預見可能性具有超越于過失犯的一般意義,它構成刑法中自我答責的正當性門檻。立足于法律中個體的形象從道德主體向社會主體的轉變,需要引入社會的維度,倡導責任的社會化理論,以行為是否背離社會的規范性期待作為罪責的基本內容。責任的社會化理論,努力將罪責的概念與一般預防的目的相協調。一種既能發揮刑罰限制機能又能兼具預防有效性的責任理論,具有相對的合理性。依托此種理論框架,對預見可能性因素的重新定位,合乎責任主義的要求。直面我國實務中的亂象,在處理過失案件時,有必要將涉及預見可能性問題的案件與其他類型的案件作區別化處理。

The traditional theory of negligent crime does not distinguish the definition of negligence from the imputation of negligent crime,and this has resulted in the confusing position of foreseeablity in the structure of negligent crime. Foreseeability is a category of empirical fact,and it can only influence the judgment of imputation in negligent crime. The factor of foreseeability has a general meaning beyond the field of negligent crime,and it constitutes the threshold of justification for self-responsibility in criminal law. Based on the shift of a person’s image from a moral subject to a social subject in the law system,people need to introduce the dimension of society and correspondingly to propose a theory of socialized culpability. According to it,the nature of culpability lies in the deviation of a conduct from the normative expectation of society. The theory of socialized culpability manages to make the concept of culpability in harmony with the aim of criminal punishment. Such a theory is relatively more reasonable,because it considers preventative effects in the teleological meaning,while still keeping the function of limiting the state power of criminal punishment. On the basis of this kind of theoretical framework,the reconstructed theory of foreseeablity could meet the requirement of the culpability principle. In dealing with negligent crime cases in the judicial practice of China,it is necessary to distinguish the cases involving the problem of foreseeablity from those involving the others in negligent crime.