Epistemology of Law

O trabalho tem como objetivo analisar, a partir da epistemologia e da psicologia do testemunho, o desenho institucional adotado pelo Código de Processo Penal brasileiro em relação à prova testemunhal e avaliar sua adequação a um modelo racional de verificação dos fatos.

Using cases and legal precedent on transgender employment discrimination in the US-American context, this article investigates the epistemological consequences of creating a gendered legal subject. It interrogates the ways that courts enact certain kinds of knowledge claims that deny the experiences of transgender litigants as transgender. It argues how judicial reasoning tends to create conditions of transgender legibility that reproduces preconceived notions of normative, cisgender sex/gender experiences and knowledges, contributing to hermeneutical injustice.

The paradigm of the Economic Analysis of Law, based on the epistemological and methodological assumptions of neoclassical economic thought, provides two major contributions to the Law: a systematic view of human behavior and consider the legal rules as an incentive modifier. This leads the Economic Analysis of Law, at least in its dominant version (Chicago school), to consolidate an idea of the effectiveness of laws (real and effective functioning of laws). On the other hand, jurists have maintained a reticent attitude towards this reductionist conception of the Economic Analysis of Law, especially in Civil law. Because, from the Philosophy of law, they have been more concerned with resolving questions about the validity and justice of laws than with determining their effectiveness. Therefore, this thesis focuses on contrasting the idea of effectiveness as a technical and neutral meaning that follows from the origins and foundations of the Economic Analysis of Law with the idea of legal validity that is present in the iusphilosophical currents of Law (natural law, legal positivism and neo-constitutionalism) in order to note the epistemological and, therefore, methodological differences of these two fieldsof knowledge.Keywords:Economic Analysis of Law, Philosophy of law, effectiveness of laws,legal validity

[PHILOLEP 2015 DRAFT PAPER]
The paper focuses on the apparent inconsistency in Dworkin's thouhgt, arising from putting altogether two widely discussed arguments: argument from theoretical disagreement and the right answer thesis. From the epistemolological point of view the theoretical resolution of any peer disagreement which arises in hard cases is a suspension of judgment. If Dworkin want to criticize positivism by pointing to theoretical disagreements in legal practice, he can't consistently hold the one right answer thesis...unless he admits that any solution of theoretical disagreements is de facto a practical one. In that case, however, his basic idea of recognizing "true propositions of law" appears to be just a sham.

O trabalho proposto consistiu na análise da produção do saber universalista de Direitos Humanos diante da expansão ocidental nas práticas ditas civilizatórias. A partir disso, investigou-se a formação do ideal de Direitos Humanos presente na legalidade internacional e constitucionalismo democrático. Nesse sentido, propôs-se delinear os contornos de como esses direitos cumprem com a proposta expansionista da modernidade. Isto porque, a hipótese foi de que a lógica da produção do saber transcendeu sua particularidade na concepção dos Direitos Humanos. Sob o viés crítico pretendido, fez-se relação da ideologia humanista presente nos Direitos
Humanos com a tradição moderna. No busca de, compreender, como o projeto racional da modernidade pautado nos valores iluministas foi determinante à difusão dos Direitos Humanos.

Las categorías de estudio planteadas por el epistemólogo Thomas S. Kuhn en su clásico libro La Estructura de las Revoluciones Científicas (1962), han marcado un antes y un después en la Filosofía de las Ciencias Físicas. No obstante, muchas Ciencias Sociales han tomado sus conceptos  sobre todo el de “paradigma”, para el estudio de sus propias realidades. El Derecho no ha sido ajeno, siendo esta disciplina muchas veces estudiada en sus métodos y formas desde la perspectiva kuhniana.
Pero, ¿es posible encontrar en la Ciencia Jurídica un “paradigma” común; una “Ciencia Normal”; una “Comunidad Científica”; una “inconmensurabilidad” y demás categorías de la Teoría de Kuhn? Se analizará en este documento, si es factible descubrir un paradigma unificador en una teórica Ciencia Normal que tenga por objeto de estudio al Ordenamiento Jurídico Argentino. De igual forma, se observará a la comunidad jurídica local, en busca de la inconmensurabilidad entre los seguidores del paradigma teórico actual y los que propugnan uno distinto y por lo tanto una Revolución Científica, en el intento de derrocarlo.
Entendemos que la Ciencia Jurídica argentina, tiene como uno de sus objetos, el estudio del ordenamiento del propio sistema jurídico; de este modo eludimos la multiplicidad de sistemas jurídicos positivos mundiales y otros aspectos, más propios de la Sociología Jurídica o la Filosofía del Derecho. Evitamos asimismo, la Teoría General del Derecho, en la que la definición del objeto de estudio sigue siendo conflictiva. Intentaremos dilucidar si es posible encontrar en esta Ciencia “blanda” un paradigma unificador, aceptado por una comunidad científica, que le dé el status de Ciencia Normal, en términos de Thomas Kuhn.

Abstract: The essay discusses the role of legal theories, revealing also vices and its falsification in the broad process of theoretical construction and training of scientific knowledge, pointing out the importance of epistemological reflections in the science of law. It discusses also about fallibilism in science, especially in the legal field, which does not address precisely on the idea of truth, but also fit into the logic of conjectures and refutations in the formation of legal knowledge. The essay also seeks to defend a more systemic role in the enforcement of rights, pointing out the need for greater objectivity and rationality in dealing with legal problems, despite the uncertainty in the law, that is, the legal theories must honor legal certainty. Furthermore, criticizes the decision-making parameter is based only on the contingent nature of the case, because it fosters an unnecessary series, however, without promoting an effective step towards meeting the rights and, of course, increases costs operating, functional and institutional of state. Finally, we adopt a qualitative scientific research, notably through the literature review, to reach the conclusions this essay.

Keywords: Legal Theory. Fallibilism. Legal uncertainty. Decision-making Parameters. Rationality