Alexyjeva teorija racionalnega pravnega razpravljanja kot teorija pravnega razumevanja

diplomsko delo

Vita Jagrič (Author), Tomaž Keresteš (Mentor)

Abstract

Robert Alexy je leta 1976 predstavil svojo teorijo pravnega argumentiranja. Na bogati teoretični podlagi teorij razpravljanja je zasnoval teorijo splošnega racionalnega praktičnega razpravljanja. Praktična razprava bo racionalna, kadar bo izpolnjevala kriterije racionalnega praktičnega utemeljevanja, ki so Alexyjeva pravila razpravljanja. Alexy nadalje postavi tezo posebnega primera, v kateri zatrjuje, da je pravna razprava poseben primer splošne praktične razprave. To prepričanje utemeljuje s pomočjo treh razlogov, da gre tudi v pravnih razpravah. (i) za praktična vprašanja, (ii) poteka pod zahtevo po pravilnosti, ter (iii) da zanjo veljajo posebni omejujoči pogoji. Za pravno razpravo veljajo dodatna, posebna pravila, to sta notranja in zunanja utemeljitev. Alexy zatrjuje tudi za sodni postopek, da gre za pravno razpravo v skladu s tezo posebnega primera, pri čemer se izkaže sodnikova odločitev, če že ne za edino pravilno, vsaj za relativno pravilno. Alexyjeva teza je v literaturi deležna izjemnega odziva, na eni strani zagovornikov, še posebej pa kritikov, med njimi so: Weinberger, Neumann, Tugendhat, Habermas, Kaufmann, Engländer, Braun, Gril in mnogi drugi. Ugovori se nanašajo tako na Alexyjevo teorijo splošnega racionalnega praktičnega razpravljanja, kakor tudi na tezo posebnega primera, med njimi npr. na: praktično pravilnost, zahtevo po pravilnosti, transcendentalnopragmatični argument, nujnost razprave – monolog, pravno razpravo in praktična vprašanja, naravo sodnega postopka. Alexy je že na začetku smatral postavljene ugovore kot priložnosti za razjasnitev teze ter izboljšanje modela, ne pa vzroka za njegovo opustitev. Zdi se, da je na postavljene ugovore dejansko mogoče odgovoriti z izboljšavami modela. Pravna razprava o veljavnosti teze posebnega primera še zdaleč ni končana in tudi danes mnenja niso poenotena.

Keywords

diplomska dela;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2016
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher:	[V. Jagrič]
UDC:	340.1(043.2)
COBISS:	5333803
Views:	1281
Downloads:	103
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	ALEXY'S THEORY OF RATIONAL LEGAL DISCOURSE AS A THEORY OF LEGAL ARGUMENTATION
Secondary abstract:	In 1976 Robert Alexy presented his theory of legal argumentation. Based on wide theoretical foundation of discourse theories he designed a theory of general rational practical discourse. Practical discourse will be rational when it meets conditions of rational practical reasoning, which are Alexy’s rules of discourse. Next, Alexy presented special case thesis, claiming that legal discourse is a special case of a general practical discourse. He supports his thesis with three arguments, so that: (i) legal discourse is about practical questions, (ii) in legal discourse claim to correctness is raised, and (iii) legal discourse is subject to special restrictions. In legal discourse additional, special rules are applied, this are the internal and external reasoning. Alexy claims for the process before the court to be a legal discourse in accordance with the special case thesis, whereas the judge’s decisions turns out if not the only correct one, to be relatively correct. Alexy’s thesis gains enormous feedback in the literature, from supporters on one side, and especially of critics on the other side, among which there are: Weinberger, Neumann, Tugendhat, Habermas, Kaufmann, Engländer, Braun, Gril and many others. Objections are referred to Alexy’s theory of general rational practical discourse as well as to the special case thesis, among others e.g. to: practical rightness, claim to correctness, transcendental-pragmatic argument, necessity of communication – monologue, legal discourse and practical questions, and the nature of the process before the court. Right in the beginning Alexy has considered the raised objections as a chance for clearing up the thesis and improving the model, and not as his failure. It seems that to the raised objection actually may be responded with the model improvements. The legal discourse on the validity of the special case thesis is far from being put to an end, and up to now the opinions haven’t unified.
Secondary keywords:	Robert Alexy;Discourse Theory;Theory of Legal Argumentation;Special Case Thesis;Claim to Correctness;Transcendental-pragmatic Argument;
URN:	URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS):	Bachelor thesis/paper
Thesis comment:	Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages:	30 f.
ID:	9170474