Zetética e dogmática, um diálogo (im)possível?: uma crítica antropológica ao decisionismo jurídico ocidental

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributor.advisorPinto, Felipe Chiarello de Souza
dc.contributor.advisor-co1Bôas Filho, Orlando Villas
dc.contributor.advisor-co1Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/1147850440799616por
dc.contributor.advisor1Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/9554142049617388por
dc.contributor.authorGrampa, Victor Henrique
dc.creator.Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/2725775011784565por
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-24T16:00:57Z
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-28T18:06:29Z
dc.date.available2020-05-28T18:06:29Z
dc.date.issued2016-11-29
dc.description.abstractThis paper seeks to find out whether "the dialogue between the sciences of Law and Anthropology is possible", and if so, "what are the possible contributions from such dialogue and its potential epistemological obstacles?” Three hypotheses are presented from this: 1) "the dialogue is not possible considering two different views, i.e., zetetic and dogmatic"; 2) "as long as some relativization is considered, the dialogue between those two fields is possible in a less categorical division between both zetetic and dogmatic views"; and 3) a middle ground between the two first ones. The main objective of this research is to "analyze distances and proximities between the sciences of Anthropology and Law and their possible contributions." The specific objectives are to "verify the implication of such contributions on the aforementioned fields," and to "critically analyze how such fields of knowledge interrelate as well as the reasons why they occur to a greater or lesser extent, if possible." This research used the critical literature review as the scientific method for analysis. In summary, the theoretical reference is Tércio Sampaio Ferraz Júnior, Orlando Villas Bôas Filho (in his reading of Niklas Luhmann and Legal Anthropology), and Pierre Clastres. The research problem lies in a challenging area that is highly relevant due to the difficulties found in cultural and legal pluralism: "the difficulty of communication between Law and cultural pluralism, especially with the pluralist contributions of Anthropology, which are often not taken into account in the legal decision-making. This situation leads to the research problem, since it is necessary to find out whether such dialogue is possible or not and what are its implications. In one of the chapters, we seek to structure the "scientific constitution of these fields through the discussion between zetetic and dogmatic theories," supported by Ferraz Júnior and Luhmann’s work. In the next chapter, we delimited some historical periods between both Law and Anthropology from the 19th to 21st century," based on Eric J. Hobsbawm and Villas Bôas Filho's work. Then we sought to verify "some possible contributions to Law through the constitution of Social and Legal Anthropology, considering the impacts on Western political power and the pluralist structures, such as the plurinational states," based on the work of Pierre Clastres and indigenist theorists. Finally, we conclude, "it is possible to bring Law and Anthropology close", and, although the epistemological obstacles exist, they derive from a structuring of the modern society, especially from the conceptualization of political power as command-obedience and the purposes of such rationality, rather than from some a priori epistemological obstacle.eng
dc.formatapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document*
dc.identifier.citationGRAMPA, Victor Henrique. Zetética e dogmática, um diálogo (im)possível?: uma crítica antropológica ao decisionismo jurídico ocidental. 2016. 123 f. Dissertação (Direito Político e Econômico) - Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, São Paulo.por
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.mackenzie.br/handle/10899/24008
dc.keywordsconstitutional, political, and economic laweng
dc.keywordspolitical and legal anthropology and anthropology of laweng
dc.keywordslegal pluralism and ethnocentrismeng
dc.keywordsethnocide and genocideeng
dc.keywordshuman rights and diversityeng
dc.keywordsPierre Clastreseng
dc.languageporpor
dc.publisherUniversidade Presbiteriana Mackenziepor
dc.rightsAcesso Restritopor
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectdireito constitucional, político e econômicopor
dc.subjectantropologia política, jurídica e do direitopor
dc.subjectpluralismo jurídico e etnocentrismopor
dc.subjectetnocídio e genocídiopor
dc.subjectdireitos humanos e diversidadepor
dc.subjectPierre Clastrespor
dc.subject.cnpqCNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO::TEORIA DO DIREITO::ANTROPOLOGIA JURIDICApor
dc.titleZetética e dogmática, um diálogo (im)possível?: uma crítica antropológica ao decisionismo jurídico ocidentalpor
dc.typeDissertaçãopor
local.contributor.board1Menezes, Daniel Francisco Nagao
local.contributor.board1Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/4101655062938301por
local.contributor.board2Ghirardi, Jose Garcez
local.contributor.board2Latteshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/2258433269720331por
local.publisher.countryBrasilpor
local.publisher.departmentFaculdade de Direito (FDIR)por
local.publisher.initialsUPMpor
local.publisher.programDireito Político e Econômicopor
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
Divulgação não autorizada pelo autor.docx
Tamanho:
10.98 KB
Formato:
Unknown data format
Descrição:
Baixar
Coleções
Direito Político e Econômico - Dissertações - Direito Higienópolis