Resumen

AGUIRRE ROMAN, Javier Orlando; PABON MANTILLA, Ana Patricia  y  GARCIA OBANDO, Pedro Antonio. DEMONSTRATION VERSUS ARGUMENTATION. A CASE OF DEBATE BETWEEN THE COLOMBIAN SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Vniversitas [online]. 2009, n.119, pp.137-160. ISSN 0041-9060.

From the perspective of Chaím Perelman's theory of juridical argumentation, the text shows the first result of the research about the premises of the argumentation and the argumentative techniques used by the Colombian Constitutional Court in concrete and real cases that could be catalogued as "hard cases." The theoretical frame is constituted by Chaím Perelman's theory of juridical argumentation, which is a rhetorical and descriptive approach. The result that now we present shows a part of the construction of that theoretical frame and its application in regards to the question about how the Courts have established their models of judicial justification and how they can be interpreted from a theory of the argumentation based on Perelman. The conclusion reached is double: on the one hand, it has been shown another perspective of approaching the problem of the judicial decisions; and, on the other one, it has been presented the bases of Perelman's theory of argumentation and their effective application to concrete and real cases of the national reality.

Palabras clave : demonstration; argumentation; hard cases; rhetoric; theory of argumentation; Aristotle; Perelman.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )