Kontekst odkrycia i kontekst uzasadnienia w świetle topicznej koncepcji prawa
Context of discovery and context of justification in the light of the lopical concept of law

Summary/Abstract: The subject of this text is the distinction between the context of discovery and context of justification in legal reasoning, exemplified by the discursive concept of law which is represented by legal topics, however, the deliberations contained herein are of the philosophical and legal nature instead of dogmatic and legal one, thus, they do not directly refer to any field of law. The starting point and also justification for the deliberations is to assume a hypothesis for the possible adaptation of the appointed distinction in the theory of law. Its meaning has been limited to two separate questions referred to various aspects of legal interpretation and argumentation, the former being: “How do we arrive at formulating an interpretative hypothesis?”, and the latter: “How can it be justified?”. The main thesis of the text comes down to a statement that it is the nature of legal reasoning as presented by legal topics which defines both the way of arriving at an interpretative hypothesis understood as a proposal to settle a dispute as well as the way of justification for such hypothesis. As a result of that, a topical point of view is associated with both views being in favour of the genetic and validative value of heuristics in the process of legal cognition and the kind of preferred justification criteria, which, in case of topics, constitutes a consensus of opinions on what, in a specific here and now case, is or might be regarded as just. That means that the final decision on the value of legal reasoning and adjudicationis coming down to connect a specific legal effect with the actual state of affairs will be made on the basis of both the context of legal discovery and the context of justification.

• Details
• Contents