Three Discussions on the Relationship Between Proof and Truth

Abstract

The author takes critical account of the central discussion in Discussions 3 on evidence and truth in the judicial process. In a first introductory section, the discussion is briefly reconstructed and the notions of factual statement and evidential reasoning are introduced. From there, the subject is approached by means of a trifurcation, formulating in each branch some criticisms of the positions presented in the reconstructed discussion. First, the relationship between the justification of the factual statement, its truth and the justice of the decision is analysed. The second section deals with the cognitive or persuasive function of judicial evidence. Finally, it reconstructs what is presented as the central question in the contemporary discussion: the question of standards of proof. The essay concludes by showing the current state of discussion and conjecturing the direction it will have to take in order to resolve certain theoretical-practical drawbacks.