Epistemological Beginnings of Argumentation in a Criminal Case
https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-6794-2022-4-116-125
Abstract
Aim. To provide preliminary justifications in a criminal case in the light of philosophical, logical and judicial procedural principles, which are prerequisites for the implementation of the deliberative concept of legal proceedings.
Methodology. The methods of analysis of scientific literature, synthesis, comparative law were used. Results. The fundamental provisions of the argumentation process when considering a criminal case in court on the merits are given. The epistemological foundations of cognition make it possible to form methods and algorithms of argumentation in court, which are based on logical techniques and allow the most effective influence on the inner conviction of both the court and the opposing party in a competitive environment.
Research implications. Since the conceptuality of the criminal process lies in the competitiveness of the parties, for this reason the judge acts as an independent arbitrator, who, without giving any source of evidence a predominant legal force, passes judgment on the case. In this regard, the theoretical and practical expediency of the study is seen in the study of the origins of the foundations for the formation of internal conviction and the objectivity of the final decision, the verdict in a criminal case, both accusatory and acquittal, in the light of the argumentation process, which originates from epistemology and the laws of logic.
About the Author
E. V. Bryanskaya
St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena V. Bryanskaya – Cand . Sci . (Law), Assoc . Prof ., Department of Criminalistics
ul. Letchika Pilyutova 1, St. Petersburg 198206
References
1. Alekseev A. P. Argumentatsiya. Poznaniye. Obshcheniye [Argumentation. Cognition. Communication]. Moscow, MGU Publ., 1991. 150 p.
2. Bezlepkin B. T. Kommentariy k Ugolovno-protsessual’nomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Commentary on the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, KnoRus Publ., 2011. 656 p.
3. Bolotova U. V. Kriticheskoye myshleniye v zhizni sovremennogo obshchestva: avtoref. dis. … kand. filos. nauk. [Critical thinking in the life of modern society: abstract of Cand. Sci. thesis in Philosophy Sciences]. Pyatigorsk, 2007. 26 p.
4. Bryushinkin V. N. [Critical thinking and argumentation]. In: Bryushinkina V. N., Markin V. I., eds. Kriticheskoye myshleniye, logika, argumentatsiya [Critical thinking, logic, argumentation]. Kaliningrad, 2003, pp. 29–35.
5. Vladimirov L. E. Ucheniye o sudebnykh dokazatelstvakh [The doctrine of forensic evidence]. Tula, Autograph Publ., 2000. 464 p.
6. Volf M. N. [Foundations of argumentation in early Greek philosophy: analogy as a type of argumentation]. In: Istoriya filosofii [History of Philosophy], 2019, no. 4, pp. 110–118.
7. Gerasimova I. A. [Argumentation of presentism]. In: Epistemologiya & filosofiya nauki [Epistemology & Philosophy of Science], 2008, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 188–198.
8. Yemeren F. H., Grootendorst R. Speech acts in argumentative discussions (Rus. ed.: Rechevyye akty v argumentativnykh diskussiyakh. St. Petersburg, Notabene Publ., 1994. 239 p.).
9. Korzhuev A., Popkov V., Ryazanova E. [How to form critical thinking?]. In: Vyssheye obrazovaniye v Rossii [Higher education in Russia], 2001, no. 5, pp. 55–58.
10. Bryushinkin V. N., Markin V. I., eds. Kriticheskoye myshleniye, logika, argumentatsiya [Critical thinking, logic, argumentation]. Kaliningrad, KSU Publ., 2003. 299 p.
11. Levchenko O.V. Dokazyvaniye v ugolovnom protsesse Rossii [Evidence in the criminal process in Russia]. Astrakhan, 2000. 134 p.
12. Bryushinkin V. N., ed. Modeli rassuzhdeniy – 2. Argumentatsiya i ratsionalnost [Reasoning models – 2. Argumentation and rationality]. Kaliningrad, 2008. 391 p.
13. Oganesyan S. G. Argumentatsiya, yeyo predmetnaya oblast i vozmozhnosti: avtoref. dis. … dokt. filos. nauk [Argumentation, its subject area and possibilities: Abstract of Dr. Sci. thesis in Philosophy Sciences]. Yerevan, 1997. 39 p.
14. Pavlov S. A. [The nature of inner conviction]. In: Molodoy uchonyy [Young scientist], 2019, no. 46 (284), pp. 182–184.
15. Elkind P. S. Tseli i sredstva ikh dostizheniya v sovetskom ugolovno-protsessualnom prave [Goals and means of achieving them in the Soviet criminal procedure law]. Leningrad, LU Publ., 1976. 142 p.
16. Yudin E. G. Sistemnyy podkhod k osnovaniyu deyatel’nosti. Metodologicheskiye problemy sovremennoy nauki [A systematic approach to the basis of activity. Methodological problems of modern science]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1978. 391 p
Review
Views:
146
Email this article 