证据语境中的论证与叙事:论证与故事的混合形式理论与刑事诉讼中处理证据的先行理论的批判性辩证研究

Antonio Sanches Sólon Rudá
{"title":"证据语境中的论证与叙事:论证与故事的混合形式理论与刑事诉讼中处理证据的先行理论的批判性辩证研究","authors":"Antonio Sanches Sólon Rudá","doi":"10.25058/1794600x.2132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this work I seek to investigate the use of arguments and narratives within the scope of theories that deal with the question of evidences, specifically in the Story Model, the Anchored Narratives Theory and the Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments and Stories. I question whether the normative-instrumentalized verification process of evidence, formulated in hybrid theory, meets the need to treat the evidence in order to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent. I argue that the hybrid theory does not address the question of proof as to the nature of the imputation of the agent's criminal liability, which is it does not seek to identify whether the criminal fact was perpetrated by way of intention or recklessness. I conclude adducing that the hybrid theory does not meet the need to treat the evidence to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent.","PeriodicalId":205682,"journal":{"name":"Misión Jurídica","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Argument and narrative in the evidence context : critical dialectical study on the Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments and Stories and the antecedent theories that deal with evidence in criminal proceedings\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Sanches Sólon Rudá\",\"doi\":\"10.25058/1794600x.2132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this work I seek to investigate the use of arguments and narratives within the scope of theories that deal with the question of evidences, specifically in the Story Model, the Anchored Narratives Theory and the Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments and Stories. I question whether the normative-instrumentalized verification process of evidence, formulated in hybrid theory, meets the need to treat the evidence in order to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent. I argue that the hybrid theory does not address the question of proof as to the nature of the imputation of the agent's criminal liability, which is it does not seek to identify whether the criminal fact was perpetrated by way of intention or recklessness. I conclude adducing that the hybrid theory does not meet the need to treat the evidence to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":205682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Misión Jurídica\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Misión Jurídica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25058/1794600x.2132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Misión Jurídica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25058/1794600x.2132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这项工作中,我试图在处理证据问题的理论范围内调查论证和叙事的使用,特别是在故事模型、锚定叙事理论和论证和故事的混合形式理论中。我质疑在混合理论中制定的证据的规范-工具验证过程是否满足处理证据的需要,以便确定代理人所犯罪行的归责性质。我认为,混合理论没有解决关于代理人刑事责任归责性质的证明问题,也就是说,它没有试图确定犯罪事实是通过故意还是鲁莽的方式实施的。本文的结论是,混合理论不能满足对证据进行处理以确定行为人所犯犯罪归责性质的需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Argument and narrative in the evidence context : critical dialectical study on the Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments and Stories and the antecedent theories that deal with evidence in criminal proceedings
In this work I seek to investigate the use of arguments and narratives within the scope of theories that deal with the question of evidences, specifically in the Story Model, the Anchored Narratives Theory and the Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments and Stories. I question whether the normative-instrumentalized verification process of evidence, formulated in hybrid theory, meets the need to treat the evidence in order to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent. I argue that the hybrid theory does not address the question of proof as to the nature of the imputation of the agent's criminal liability, which is it does not seek to identify whether the criminal fact was perpetrated by way of intention or recklessness. I conclude adducing that the hybrid theory does not meet the need to treat the evidence to identify the nature of the imputation of the crime committed by the agent.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信