MACCORMICK'S INTEGRATIVE THEORY: Analysis of the Rationality of the Justification of Judicial Decisions

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.22533/at.ed.216562512037

• Palavras-chave: Theory of Legal Argumentation, Justification, Consistency, Universality and Coherence.

• Keywords: Theory of Legal Argumentation, Justification, Consistency, Universality and Coherence.

• Abstract:

  The article explores the theory of legal argumentation of the Scottish philosopher Neil MacCormick, known for its integrative approach. The work is based on a theoretical approach that seeks to harmonize elements of legal positivism and its formal logic with a pragmatic and critical perspective. The methodology adopts a dual analysis of legal justification: the internal scheme, which uses deductive logic for easy cases; and the external level, which evaluates the consistency and practical consequences of judicial decisions in difficult cases. In connecting the two schemes, the principle of universality is central to ensuring that decisions are fair and democratically applicable to future cases. The main results indicate that MacCormick's integrative theory provides a legal framework capable of justifying decisions in both easy and difficult cases, and contributes to the development of a more robust theory of standard legal argumentation by emphasizing rationality, pragmatism, and fairness in judicial decisions, integrating normative principles with analysis of the assessment of the practical consequences of decisions.