This article investigates whether jurimetrics can be considered science and its impact on the legal world. Jurimetrics, an empiric investigation, refers to the organized study of judged cases, allowing the understanding of the real scenario of some matter, the incidence of a certain practice, as well as the legal and social trends in each period and place. The Internet provoked one of the greatest social transformations even seen by human beings, and jurimetrics emerge in this context as a tool that is rapidly integrating into the legal system. COMPAS (abbreviation of “Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions”), a U.S. software used to verify the possibility of criminal recidivism, based on the construction of algorithms that, despite keeping their details confidential, it is known, from the questions asked, that it is based on the analysis of the characteristics most present in convicts, is an example of artificial intelligence and use of jurimetrics already present in the judicial system. Thus, although there are some criticisms, the use of empirical tool of research is already effective in the legal field, which justifies its profound analysis. The article presents the historical context in which jurimetrics is inserted, exploring the evolution of science and law throughout history and exams the relationship between jurimetrics and the scientific methods of research. In addition, it questioned whether jurimetrics could bring a new reality to the legal system and contribute to more effective justice and its limits.
References
[1]
Bacon, F. (2000) Novum Organum. Virtual Books. http://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4702162/mod_resource/content/1/francis_bacon_novum_organum.pdf
[2]
Becho, R. L. (2020). Ativismo Jurídico em Processo Tributário. Revista dos Tribunais, 11, 729-739.
[3]
Descartes, R. (1962). Discurso do Método Para Bem Conduzir a PrópriaRazão e Procurar a VerdadenasCiências (2nd ed.). Difel—Difusão Europeia do Livro.
[4]
Dworkin, R. (2002). Levando os Direitos a Sério. Martins Fontes.
[5]
Ferraz Jr., T. S. (1986). A ciência do Direito (2nd ed.). Atlas.
[6]
Frank, J. (1949). Law and the Modern Mind. Stevens & Sons Limited.
[7]
Haack, S. (2012). Seis Sinais de Cientificismo. Liga Humanista Secular do Brasil.
[8]
Holmes, O. W. (1897). The Path of the Law. Harvard Law Review, 10, 457.
[9]
Kant, I. (2023) The Critique of Pure Reason. https://kantwesley.com/Kant/CritiqueOfPureReason.pdf
[10]
Kelsen, H. (1998). Teoria Pura do Direito (6th ed.). Martins Fontes.
[11]
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
[12]
Locke, J. (1959). Ensaiosobre o Entendimento Humano (5th ed.). Fundação Calouste Gulbenklan.
[13]
Loevinger, L. (1796). Jurimetrics—The Next Step Forward. Minnesota Law Review.
[14]
Nunes, M. G. (2016). Jurimetria—Como a estatísticapodereinventar o direito. Editora Revista dos Tribunais.
[15]
Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science—A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198745587.001.0001
[16]
Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Basic Books.
[17]
Rachlinski, J. (2018). The Politics of Legal Empirics: Do Political Attitudes Predict the Results of Empirical Legal Scholarship. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 174, 3-4.
