Legal realisms’ epistemological models and the empirical observation of adjudication
French legal realism, American legal realism, jurimetrics, empiricism, discourse, Brazilian Supreme Court
problems of the American realist tradition of empirical legal research. American legal realism ignores or disregards the observation of the nominal terms of the discourse and decisional reasoning of judges, limiting itself to observing the materially visible facet of judicial institutions, whereas Franco-Italian realism focuses on the analysis of judicial discourse and the decisional context itself. The thesis seeks to investigate the terms in which each of these traditions of legal realism interpreted and applied the concept of "empiricism" in legal research, and proposes a framework for systematizing these differences from the consideration of the internal or external dimensions of the decision-making act. The thesis goes on to propose an original explanation of why even theories developed by innovative theorists in certain legal cultures yield to a tendency to adhere to normativist models of legal research, as seems to be the case with Franco-Italian realism. To develop the reflection, the thesis proposes the analysis of a series of concrete cases of the Federal Supreme Court and the American and French jurisdictions. After all, it is argued that the theoretical models developed so far for the empirical analysis of judicial decisions and court behavior have to be revised to allow the understanding of the rapid changes brought about by the arrival of modern data science in legal analysis.