Filosofia sistemática-estrutural e direito: em busca de um quadro referencial teórico filosófico para pensar o direito na contemporaneidade a partir da radicalização da virada linguística

Abstract

The thesis aims to investigate the contributions of the Linguistic Turn and Lorenz Puntel's Structural-Systematic Philosophy (SSP) to contemporary legal theory. It seeks a new philosophical platform for law, an alternative to the models of modern transcendental philosophy and the philosophy of substance ontology, without being left simply to the uncertainties of postmodernity. In the first part, the Linguistic Turn is explored as a phenomenon that repositions language at the center of philosophical and juridical reflections. Based on authors such as Heidegger, Wittgenstein, and other representatives of analytical and hermeneutic philosophy, it is demonstrated how language transcends its function as a means of communication and assumes the role of a condition of possibility for the articulation of theoretical thought. This perspective is applied to critique the transcendental philosophical model, showing how a post-transcendental approach, centered on language, can offer greater objectivity and predictability for rationality. The relationship between the Linguistic Turn and law is explored through the analysis of how this phenomenon appears in various legal theories, especially in Kelsen, Hart, and Dworkin. In the second part, the thesis presents Puntel's Structural-Systematic Philosophy (SSP) as the current status of the Linguistic Turn. A theoretical framework capable of reconciling the dimensions of language and being, overcoming the dichotomies between subject and object. The SSP is highlighted as a collaborative and comprehensive philosophy, which seeks to integrate different philosophical traditions and promote a systematic analysis of the totality of reality. This philosophical platform allows for a more holistic approach to law, connecting practical and theoretical issues in a coherent and integral model. Law, thought from the perspective of the SSP, should move away from interpretations based on subjectivity to prioritize the theoretical consistency of linguistic articulations. This implies valuing reasoned argumentation and thematization of legal theses that can be evaluated by the critical community. The thesis thus proposes a depersonalization of subjectivity and the appreciation of the truth of the relationship between language and reality. This paves the way for a more rigorous legal model, less susceptible to arbitrariness, where law is reconsidered as a theoretical and linguistic practice about facts of the world. More than presenting definitive answers, the thesis opens a rich thematic field for future debates on the relationship between the SSP and law.