近來國內法學界流行著兩個對於中國傳統的批評。其一指責中國傳統司法者不遵循法律和先例，僅僅就事論事，憑天理人情作成判決；其二聲稱中國傳統文化裡幾乎沒有法學可言。二者都與事實不符。第一，中國自秦漢時起，法律已極繁多，在有明文可以適用或有成案可以比照的情形，司法者都樂於遵循，不會自找麻煩另尋判決的依據。如果沒有法律或成案可用，任何法制裡的司法者都該先仔細分析案情（「就事論事」），然後探索法的精義（「天理人情」）而作成一個合乎公平正義的判決；中國傳統司法者的做法並非例外。第二，中國歷代都有許多學者不僅以純理性的觀點和方法對於當代的法律加以注釋、批詳，並且從歷史背景和社會經驗中去深究其淵源、目的、效能，以及法與其它社會規範的關係、法的正當性，法律條文不足時應該如何補救等等法學上的重要問題，留下許多著作，對於這些問題提出了精闢的見解。只因他們的觀點、方法和所用的語言及陳述方式與近人習見的不同，所以被忽略了。 中國傳統法制自成一系，與世界另幾個重要法系併立，各有短長。如要加以檢討，應該先對它作一番整體的、深入的研究；如果想用另一法系的某些規定作為他山之石以改善中國法制，則更須對那些規定甚至整個法系作一番同樣的研究，看清了二者的優劣，慎為取捨，不可以輕易地將中國目前的問題一概歸咎於傳統，更不該盲目地仿效他人。

Administration of justice in traditional China has been criticized for disregarding established rules and precedents and thus likened to "Khadi justice." It is a misunderstanding. Since the Qin and the Han periods when laws proliferated and decided cases recorded, traditional Chinese judges, as civil servants elsewhere, took the easy route of applying existing rules and precedents. In the absence of such guidelines they had to find other ways to solve problems brought to them, particularly civil disputes. In doing so, they would carefully examine the facts and resort to norms above the law（e.g., principles of equity and general precepts of justice）, a practice shared by judges in all jurisdictions. Traditional Chinese jurisprudence is said to be underdeveloped. This only demonstrates how ignorant the critics are. Even before the Qin, legal theories flourished. Through the later periods many scholars devoted themselves annotating the statutory laws and studying basic jurisprudential subjects such as the origin, objectives and functions of law, the relationship between law and other social norms, and left enormous amount of works of great profoundness. The criticisms are apparently prompted by a now prevalent dissatisfaction with the present Chinese legal system, but a sweeping denial of the Chinese legal tradition is not a good starting point for improvement, especially if the critique is based on misunderstanding and ignorance.