La decisión judicial y las reglas de la argumentación desde la teoría de la argumentación de Neil Maccormick

The purpose of this research is to approach to Neil MacCormick’s argumentation theory, which is part of the tradition of the law of English origin, which in turn is drawn from the empiricism. In its nuclear elements (principle of universality, coherence, consistency and consequentialist arguments), MacCormick’s theory of argumentation, determines parameters that lead to reasonable legal decision, pursuant to a bivalence between dogmatic demands own rules, legal principles and real-world experiences. In understanding this theory should be noted that the key role is the study of easy and difficult cases. The use of practical reason leads us to think in logical arguments or formal correctness or in practical human actions that lead to achieving not justify arbitrary arguments, in the court decision. Finally, a critical analysis is performed to determine if these parameters set forth in MacCormick’s theory of argumentation, are sufficient for a correct ruling.

• Autores: León Scarpeta, Sara Natalia; Paredes Escobar, María Juliana
• Fecha de publicación: 2016
• Institución: Universidad de San Buenaventura
• Repositorio: Repositorio USB
• Idioma: spa
• OAI Identifier: oai:bibliotecadigital.usb.edu.co:10819/4966
• Acceso en línea: http://hdl.handle.net/10819/4966
• Palabra clave: Argumentación jurídica; Principio de coherencia; Principio de consistencia; Principio de universalidad; Casos difíciles; Casos fáciles; Legal argument; Coherence principle; Consistency principle; Universality principle; Hard cases; Clear cases; Teoría del derecho; Investigación jurídica; Argumentación jurídica
• License: Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.5 Colombia