¿Puede la investigación jurídica considerarse científicamente válida? La argumentación como criterio de validez
Assuming the critics that legal research often receives due to the lack of scientific grounds based in the method, this article raises the need to generate guidelines that guarantee the academic rigor of legal work and propose legal argumentation as its criteria of scientific validity. Based on Atie...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=7103672 |
| Source: | Ciencia jurídica, ISSN 2007-3577, Vol. 8, Nº. 15, 2019 (Ejemplar dedicado a: enero-junio 2019), pags. 37-58 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
Assuming the critics that legal research often receives due to the lack of scientific grounds based in the method, this article raises the need to generate guidelines that guarantee the academic rigor of legal work and propose legal argumentation as its criteria of scientific validity. Based on Atienza, this text suggests the use of propositional logic, Toulmin’s model of argumentation and the rules of practical speech that Alexy borrows from Habermas, as constitutive elements of a model for the evaluation of legal research aimed to guarantee methodical rigor and scientific validity. |
|---|