ARGUMENTATION, STRATEGY AND COGNITION: SUBSIDIES FOR A COMPREHENSIVE THEORY OF JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING

Brazilian Law studies about judicial decision-making usually stick to the rational-discursive aspect of sentences and rulings. In this article, are shown three distinct literatures that have been dedicated to the study of judicial decision-making: first, the most traditional and widespread, linked to the discussion of hermeneutics and theory of argumentation; a second one, related to political science, which analyzes the strategies and institutional constraints related to judicial behavior; and a third, originally from psychology and neurosciences, concerned about individual cognition and aspects of collective deliberation. We suggest that the search for a more comprehensive view of judicial decision, articulating these three dimensions-argumentation, strategy and cognition -, recognizing existent methodological differences between, but seeking to synthesize them into a coherent narrative, is a possible and desirable objective, which may allow advances of empirical studies.