dc.creatorCondello, Angela
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-01 00:00:00
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-23T16:25:35Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-05T16:30:42Z
dc.date.available2019-07-01 00:00:00
dc.date.available2023-01-23T16:25:35Z
dc.date.available2023-06-05T16:30:42Z
dc.date.created2019-07-01 00:00:00
dc.date.created2023-01-23T16:25:35Z
dc.date.issued2019-07-01
dc.identifier10.14718/SoftPower.2019.6.2.15
dc.identifier2539-2239
dc.identifier2389-8232
dc.identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/10983/29983
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.14718/SoftPower.2019.6.2.15
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/6647629
dc.description.abstractEn 1873, Nietzsche afirmó que, para las cosas, se ha inventado una designación válida general y uniforme. Esta designación tiene fuerza normativa: de hecho, la legislación «lingüística» que domina la práctica del lenguaje establece las primeras leyes de la verdad (Sobre verdad y mentira en sentido extramoral). En otras palabras, para Nietzsche, la naturaleza artificial de la verdad, dada la naturaleza artificial del lenguaje mismo, estaba fuera de discusión. En este artículo, abordo el debate contemporáneo sobre la posverdad yuxtaponiéndolo a la idea de verdad “artificial” o “convencional” típica del discurso legal y mostrando la aporía detrás de cada búsqueda de la verdad. Para hacerlo, me centraré en la naturaleza específica de verdad “legal” y propongo considerar la centralidad de la fuerza performativa de los procedimientos de creación de la verdad –crucial para los abogados y la práctica legal– para subrayar la importancia que la tecnología juega en la construcción de la verdad también en el discurso político.
dc.description.abstractIn 1873, Nietzsche claimed that a generally and uniformly valid designation is invented for things. This designation has normative force: as a matter of fact, the «linguistic» legislation dominating the practice of language establishes the first laws of truth (On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense). In other words, for Nietzsche the artificial nature of truth, given the artificial nature of language itself, was out of discussion. In this paper, I approach the contemporary debate on post-truth by juxtaposing it with the idea of «artificial» or «conventional» truth typical of legal discourse and by showing the aporia behind each search for truth. In order to do so, I focus on the specific nature of «legal» truth and I invite to consider the centrality of the performative force of truth-making procedures – crucial for lawyers and legal practice – in order to underline the importance played by technology in the construction of truth also in the political discourse.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherSoft Power
dc.relationhttps://editorial.ucatolica.edu.co/index.php/SoftP/article/download/3573/3274
dc.relationNúm. 2 , Año 2019 : Julio - Diciembre
dc.relation279
dc.relation2
dc.relation266
dc.relation6
dc.relationSoft Power
dc.relationAndina T. (2019). Truth, Lies and Post-Truth. In Condello A. & Andina T. (Eds.). PostTruth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationArendt H. (1968). Truth and Politics. In Arendt H. Between Past and Future. Eight Exercises in Political Thought (pp. 227-264). London: Penguin.
dc.relationCondello A. & Andina T. (Eds., 2019). Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationCondello A. (2019). After the Ordeal. Law and the Age of Post-Truth. In Condello A. & Andina T. (Eds.). Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationDerrida J. (1978). Writing and Difference. Alan Bass (Transl.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
dc.relationDomenicucci J. (2019). Can we trust post-truth? A Trojan Horse in liberal counterspeech. In Condello A. & Andina T. (Eds.). Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationFerraris M. (2017). Fare la verità. Proposta di una ermeneutica neorealista. In Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, vol. 11, n. 1.
dc.relationFitzpatrick P. (2017). Post-truth: For or Against Socio-legal Studies?. In Socio-Legal Review https://www.sociolegalreview.com/post-truth-for-or-against-socio-legal-studies
dc.relationFoucault M. (2007). Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. (Trans. Graham Burchell). Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
dc.relationMarconi D. (2019). Fake news, the crisis of deference, and epistemic democracy. In Condello A. & Andina T. (Eds.). Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationMason L. (2019). Idealism, empiricism, pluralism, law. Legal truth after modernity. In Condello A. & Andina T. (Eds.). Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law. London: Routledge.
dc.relationPatterson D. (1996). Law and Truth. Oxford: OUP.
dc.relationResta E. (2008). Diritto vivente. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
dc.relationSchiavone A. (2017). Ius. L’invenzione del diritto in Occidente. Torino: Einaudi.
dc.relationViola F. (1995). Judicial Truth. Persona y derecho, 32, 1995, pp. 249–266.
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.rightsAngela Condello - 2019
dc.sourcehttps://editorial.ucatolica.edu.co/index.php/SoftP/article/view/3573
dc.subjectPosverdad
dc.subjectDerecho
dc.subjectPrueba
dc.subjectProcedimiento
dc.subjectArte
dc.subjectArtificial
dc.subjectPost-truth
dc.subjectLaw
dc.subjectOrdeal
dc.subjectProcedure
dc.subjectArt
dc.subjectArtificial
dc.titleThe art of truth : remarks made between political and legal discourse.
dc.typeArtículo de revista


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución