Judicial interpretation and guarantees; epistemological scope and repercussions

Abstract

The reflection on the objective seizure of legal knowledge and its impact on the interpretation, argumentation and instrumentation by judicial operators, and its disruptive reflection with reality, plays a fundamental role within legal epistemology. The above converges within the structure of the constitutional and democratic State of law, where constitutional guarantees emerge to protect the content of the fundamental norm. In this context, judges assume the indispensable task of responding to legal conflicts. This takes us to the validity of the interpretation and the argumentative construction that responds to these, the epistemology of the judicial decision is affirmed through the redefinition and significance of the legal norm. The development of this research focuses on identifying the values ​​and principles that affect the approval and valid definition of legal knowledge when resolving a case. The peremptory moment in which knowledge becomes one's own and converges with the very definition of the human being and its rational conformation.