Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Andrade Neto, João
Data de Publicação: 2016
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Direito GV
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595
Resumo: This article aims to realign the separation between the participant’s and the observer’s perspectives of legal interpretation. This distinction has acquired considerable importance in contemporary debates about law’s nature and purpose, but received only scant attention in Brazilian specialized literature. To fill this gap, this paper investigates which are the characteristics of each perspective that justify the separation and turns choosing a viewpoint into a fundamental methodological choice for both the study and the application of law. Adopting Alexy’s conception, the article will demonstrate that each viewpoint has its internal logic and requires arguments of different nature, which justifies the separation. After exposing the distinctive characteristics of each viewpoint, the article will refine the participant’s perspective by contrasting it to the position of a legal community member. This should help to counter a powerful argument against the separation. Once this objection is dismissed, it becomes clear that choosing the correct perspective is a necessary (though not a sufficient) condition for the truth or the validity of any legal proposition.
id FGV-2_a32be041a9205e73db9d65d8da690a52
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/66595
network_acronym_str FGV-2
network_name_str Revista Direito GV
repository_id_str
spelling Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of lawParticipante ou observador? Uma escolha entre duas perspectivas metodológicas de estudo e aplicação do direitoObserverParticipantInternal viewpointExternal viewpointArgumentationObservadorParticipantePerspectiva internaPerspectiva externaArgumentaçãoThis article aims to realign the separation between the participant’s and the observer’s perspectives of legal interpretation. This distinction has acquired considerable importance in contemporary debates about law’s nature and purpose, but received only scant attention in Brazilian specialized literature. To fill this gap, this paper investigates which are the characteristics of each perspective that justify the separation and turns choosing a viewpoint into a fundamental methodological choice for both the study and the application of law. Adopting Alexy’s conception, the article will demonstrate that each viewpoint has its internal logic and requires arguments of different nature, which justifies the separation. After exposing the distinctive characteristics of each viewpoint, the article will refine the participant’s perspective by contrasting it to the position of a legal community member. This should help to counter a powerful argument against the separation. Once this objection is dismissed, it becomes clear that choosing the correct perspective is a necessary (though not a sufficient) condition for the truth or the validity of any legal proposition.Este trabalho tem por objetivo reabilitar a separação entre duas perspectivas de interpretação do Direito: a do participante e a do observador. Apesar da importância que a distinção adquiriu nos debates contemporâneos sobre a natureza e a interpretação do Direito, ela não tem recebido tratamento adequado na literatura especializada brasileira. Diante disso, este estudo indaga quais são as características próprias de cada perspectiva que justificam a separação e fazem da opção por um ponto de vista uma escolha metodológica fundamental tanto para o estudo quanto para a aplicação do Direito. Partindo da concepção alexyana, pretende-se demonstrar que cada ponto de vista possui uma lógica interna distinta e mobiliza argumentos de diferente natureza, o que justifica a separação. Uma vez identificadas essas características distintivas, propõe-se a redefinição da perspectiva do participante, a partir da figura do membro da comunidade jurídica, o que permite enfrentar um forte argumento contrário à separação. Superada essa objeção, torna-se forçoso reconhecer que a escolha da perspectiva correta é uma condição necessária (embora não suficiente) da verdade ou validade de proposições jurídicas.Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas2016-09-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-891Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-891Revista Direito GV; v. 12 n. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-8912317-6172reponame:Revista Direito GVinstname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVporhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595/64220Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GVinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAndrade Neto, João2019-08-14T14:30:52Zoai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/66595Revistahttps://direitosp.fgv.br/publicacoes/revista/revista-direito-gvPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br2317-61721808-2432opendoar:2019-08-14T14:30:52Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
Participante ou observador? Uma escolha entre duas perspectivas metodológicas de estudo e aplicação do direito
title Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
spellingShingle Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
Andrade Neto, João
Observer
Participant
Internal viewpoint
External viewpoint
Argumentation
Observador
Participante
Perspectiva interna
Perspectiva externa
Argumentação
title_short Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
title_full Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
title_fullStr Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
title_full_unstemmed Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
title_sort Participant or observer? A choice between two methodological perspectives of study and application of law
author Andrade Neto, João
author_facet Andrade Neto, João
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Andrade Neto, João
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Observer
Participant
Internal viewpoint
External viewpoint
Argumentation
Observador
Participante
Perspectiva interna
Perspectiva externa
Argumentação
topic Observer
Participant
Internal viewpoint
External viewpoint
Argumentation
Observador
Participante
Perspectiva interna
Perspectiva externa
Argumentação
description This article aims to realign the separation between the participant’s and the observer’s perspectives of legal interpretation. This distinction has acquired considerable importance in contemporary debates about law’s nature and purpose, but received only scant attention in Brazilian specialized literature. To fill this gap, this paper investigates which are the characteristics of each perspective that justify the separation and turns choosing a viewpoint into a fundamental methodological choice for both the study and the application of law. Adopting Alexy’s conception, the article will demonstrate that each viewpoint has its internal logic and requires arguments of different nature, which justifies the separation. After exposing the distinctive characteristics of each viewpoint, the article will refine the participant’s perspective by contrasting it to the position of a legal community member. This should help to counter a powerful argument against the separation. Once this objection is dismissed, it becomes clear that choosing the correct perspective is a necessary (though not a sufficient) condition for the truth or the validity of any legal proposition.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-09-02
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595
url https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66595/64220
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GV
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GV
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-891
Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-891
Revista Direito GV; v. 12 n. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 869-891
2317-6172
reponame:Revista Direito GV
instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron:FGV
instname_str Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron_str FGV
institution FGV
reponame_str Revista Direito GV
collection Revista Direito GV
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br
_version_ 1798943709775003648

Registros relacionados