• JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
 
  Bookmark and Share
 
 
Master's Dissertation
DOI
https://doi.org/10.11606/D.107.2019.tde-10082021-132213
Document
Author
Full name
Cândida Marcelle Villela Pereira Miranda
E-mail
Institute/School/College
Knowledge Area
Date of Defense
Published
Ribeirão Preto, 2019
Supervisor
Committee
Nojiri, Sérgio (President)
Ribeiro, Iara Pereira
Horta, Ricardo de Lins e
Silveira, Matheus de Mesquita
Title in Portuguese
A empatia e a decisão judicial
Keywords in Portuguese
Conceito de empatia
Empatia
Imparcialidade
Tomada de decisão judicial
Abstract in Portuguese
As declarações do Ex-Presidente Barack Obama no sentido de a empatia ser um atributo ou requisito importante para os juízes que fosse nomear, contribuíram para que os debates acerca do emprego da empatia no processo de tomada de decisão ganhassem contornos efervescentes. A partir de então, a utilização da empatia no cenário jurídico passou a ser bastante discutida. Contudo, em grande parte, a polêmica em torno da empatia se deve ao fato de seu conceito ainda ser impreciso. De fato, dependendo da definição adotada, a empatia pode ser benéfica ou maléfica à tomada de uma decisão jurídica imparcial. O objetivo da pesquisa, então, é avaliar a conveniência da empatia nos processos de tomada de decisões jurídicas. Para se chegar a esse resultado, além de ter sido necessário relacionar a empatia com o Direito, verificamos que ainda havia um terceiro elemento que intermediaria essa relação: a moral. E assim, falar de moralidade, principalmente com base nos argumentos de David Hume em "O Tratado da Natureza Humana", foi a ponte necessária para conectar Direito e empatia. A partir do conceito de empatia adotado pela pesquisadora, será defendido que a empatia não prejudica a imparcialidade das decisões judiciais. Para a elaboração desta tese, foram utilizados como base, principalmente, os textos "Against Empathy" e "Is Empathy Necessary for Morality?", de Jesse Prinz, autor assumidamente contra a empatia, assim como a obra "In defense of Judicial Empathy" de Thomas B. Colby, que, ao contrário de Prinz, defende o emprego da empatia no cenário jurídico. Ainda, foi de grande auxílio à construção do quanto aqui defendido, o livro "Paradoxos e Ambiguidades da Imparcialidade Judicial: Entre 'quereres' e 'poderes'", de Bárbara Gomes Lupetti Baptista que conseguiu aproximar a ideia de imparcialidade à realidade vivida pelos operadores de direito.
Title in English
Empathy and judicial decision
Keywords in English
Empathy
Empathy concept
Impartiality
Judicial decision making
Abstract in English
Former President Barack Obama's statement that empathy is an important attribute or requirement for judges to appoint has contributed to debates about the use of empathy in the decision-making process to gain effervescent contours. Since then, the use of empathy in the legal context has been widely discussed. However, the controversy surrounding empathy is largely due to the fact that its concept is still inaccurate. In fact, depending on the definition adopted, empathy can be positive or negative in making an impartial legal decision. The goal of the research, then, is to assess the desirability of empathy in legal decision-making processes. To reach this result, in addition to having to relate empathy to law, we found that there was still a third element that would mediate this relationship: morality. And so speaking of morality, principally based on David Hume's arguments in the "Treatise on Human Nature", was the necessary bridge to connecting law and empathy. From the concept of empathy adopted by the researcher, it will be argued that empathy does not prejudice the impartiality of judicial decisions. For the elaboration of this thesis, we used mainly the texts "Against Empathy" and "Is Empathy Necessary for Morality?", by Jesse Prinz, an author admittedly against empathy, as well as the work "In defense of Judicial Empathy", by Thomas B. Colby, which, unlike Prinz, defends the use of empathy in the legal setting. Still, it was of great help to the construction of what was defended here, the book Paradoxos e Ambiguidades da Imparcialidade Judicial: Entre 'quereres' e 'poderes'", by Bárbara Gomes Lupetti Baptista, who managed to bring the idea of impartiality closer to the reality lived by the legal operators.
 
WARNING - Viewing this document is conditioned on your acceptance of the following terms of use:
This document is only for private use for research and teaching activities. Reproduction for commercial use is forbidden. This rights cover the whole data about this document as well as its contents. Any uses or copies of this document in whole or in part must include the author's name.
Publishing Date
2021-09-14
 
WARNING: Learn what derived works are clicking here.
All rights of the thesis/dissertation are from the authors
CeTI-SC/STI
Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations of USP. Copyright © 2001-2024. All rights reserved.