• JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
 
  Bookmark and Share
 
 
Doctoral Thesis
DOI
10.11606/T.8.2010.tde-20102010-151046
Document
Author
Full name
Carlos Eduardo Batalha da Silva e Costa
E-mail
Institute/School/College
Knowledge Area
Date of Defense
Published
São Paulo, 2010
Supervisor
Committee
Terra, Ricardo Ribeiro (President)
Bôas Filho, Orlando Villas
Lopes, Jose Reinaldo de Lima
Nobre, Marcos Severino
Rodriguez, José Rodrigo
Title in Portuguese
A construção do enfoque nas teorias jurídicas: subsídios para repensar o debate em torno da racionalidade no direito
Keywords in Portuguese
Hermenêutica jurídica
Ponto de vista
Positivismo jurídico
Racionalidade
Teorias jurídicas
Abstract in Portuguese
A relação entre razão e direito faz parte da tradição do pensamento ocidental. No período moderno, essa relação serviu de base para o surgimento de uma cultura jurídica autônoma, dentro da qual foram elaboradas as idéias de sujeito de direito e sistema jurídico. No entanto, a modernidade também criou condições para o nascimento das chamadas teorias jurídicas, que se constituem como uma nova forma de discurso jurídico, distinta das teorias filosóficas e das dogmáticas jurídicas, por não manifestarem o modelo de racionalidade tradicional, associado à concepção de lei natural. Para compreender a racionalidade nesse novo âmbito do discurso dos juristas, é proposto, nesta tese de doutoramento, um caminho peculiar: por um lado, tomam-se por objeto teorias jurídicas que se tornaram referência no contexto anglo-saxônico, ou seja, fora dos marcos habituais da racionalização na Europa continental moderna; por outro lado, são considerados como fio condutor para esta investigação os enfoques interpretativos construídos como legítimos por essas teorias, em vez de configurar sua racionalidade a partir de divisões escolares ou matrizes epistemológicas. Essa delimitação permite revelar três modelos novos e distintos de racionalidade jurídica, que resultam do desenvolvimento de diferentes concepções de pontos de vista no contexto do debate entre as teorias jurídicas de John Austin, Oliver W. Holmes Jr., Hans Kelsen, Herbert L. A. Hart, Robert Alexy e Ronald Dworkin. Esses três modelos, por sua vez, contribuem para ressaltar os limites heurísticos da contraposição positivismo vs. antipositivismo para tratar da racionalidade no direito contemporâneo.
Title in English
The formulation of focus in legal theories: a contribution to rethinking the debate over rationality in law
Keywords in English
Legal interpretation
Legal positivism
Legal theories
Point of view
Rationality
Abstract in English
The relation between reason and law is part of the Western thought tradition. In the modern period, this relation served as basis for the emergence of an autonomous legal culture, within which the ideas of "subjects of law" and "legal system" were elaborated. However, modernity has also created conditions for the birth of the so-called legal theories, which were constituted as a new form of legal discourse (distinct from the legal dogmatics and philosophical theories of law), for they do not present the traditional model of rationality associated with the conception of natural law. A peculiar method is proposed in this doctoral thesis, in order to understand the rationality in this new sphere of legal discourse: on the one hand, legal theories which have become reference within the Anglo-Saxon world i.e., theories outside the usual landmarks of rationalization in modern continental Europe are taken as object; on the other hand, the interpretive approaches (focuses) formulated as legitimate by these theories are considered as expressions of rationality, instead of rationality as originated from divisions by schools of thought or epistemological matrices. By means of this method, three new distinct models of legal reasoning are revealed. These models are the outcome of different concepts of "point of view" which were defended throughout the dialogue which took place between the theories of John Austin, Oliver W. Holmes Jr., Hans Kelsen, Herbert L. A. Hart, Ronald Dworkin and Robert Alexy. These three models, in turn, contribute to highlighting the heuristic limits of the opposition legal positivism vs. non-positivism in the debate over rationality in contemporary law.
 
WARNING - Viewing this document is conditioned on your acceptance of the following terms of use:
This document is only for private use for research and teaching activities. Reproduction for commercial use is forbidden. This rights cover the whole data about this document as well as its contents. Any uses or copies of this document in whole or in part must include the author's name.
Publishing Date
2010-10-20
 
WARNING: Learn what derived works are clicking here.
All rights of the thesis/dissertation are from the authors
Centro de Informática de São Carlos
Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations of USP. Copyright © 2001-2021. All rights reserved.