Argumentação e contra argumentação: um discurso que pode condenar ou justificar

Abstract

The shakesperean play “The Merchant of Venice” approaches concepts and contemplates strategies that pass through the limits of fiction, in the proportion that goes far of the makebelieve, showing situations and conflicts that can do a part of the real life, reffering to a society that gives privileges to the major people, since that in all the play, the jew is underprivileged, by the simple fact of being a jew. This work aims to show clearly the view of each personage has about justice and what this relation brings to the life of each one, as personage of the play. Considering the complexity of all these questions, mainly in the attempt to adjust them to a concept of justice, we appropriate about this narrative moment to bring the true about anti-Semitism, social position, power, prejudice presented by the autor. In this perspective we developed an explain search, trying to ansewer the question: Will justice be done for both parts or just one of the parts, for example, the part more discredited was demaged? In this way we opted for analyse this play into the ambit of the law and philosophy, following the theoretical concepts of authors, like: John Rawls, Platão, Sócrates, Kant, Dworkin, among others. Therefore, in front of the done analyse, we concluded that the initial hipothesis did not concretize, namely, there was justice to both parts, even the protagonist losing all your goods, because the justice was applied according yo to the laws of Veneza.