Atomismo y holismo en la justificación probatoria

Abstract

Atomism and Holism in the Evidentiary Justification of Judicial Decisions

This paper explores the debate between atomistic and holistic approaches to evidential reasoning in law, with the purpose of assessing critically their contributions to a normative theory of the justifi cation of judicial decisions concerning facts. The author recognizes that holistic theories shed light on the semantic relevance of the whole story of the case to the intelligibility of each ultimate probanda, as well as on the justifi catory value of the explanatory integration between them and the whole evidentiary data available. At the same time, however, she argues that each ultimate probanda should be considered as a distinct conclusion for the purpose of its justifi cation and that the credibility of each piece of evidence, together with the strength of its inferential link with the probanda, should be object of an atomistic analysis.