Orientador: Marcos Antonio Alves / Banca: Rodrigo Martins Borges / Banca: Hércules Araújo de Feitosa / Resumo: Objetivamos avaliar a razoabilidade da abordagem bayesiana de Colin Howson ao problema da indução, tal como formulado por David Hume. Propomos que uma abordagem ao problema da indução será razoável se nossa compreensão da indução não regride em relação àquela fornecida por Hume. Por sua vez, o bayesianismo é uma corrente teórica derivada da adoção das teses conhecidas como gradualismo, probabilismo e revisão pela condicionalização; seu mérito é fornecer um modelo para representar e atualizar graus de crença. Em seu turno, o problema da indução configura-se como a busca para justificar racionalmente argumentos indutivos, tendo em vista a tese humeana segundo a qual é impossível fazê-lo, seja mediante argumentos demonstrativos, seja mediante argumentos prováveis. Para satisfazer a nosso objetivo, esta Dissertação divide-se em quatro capítulos. No primeiro capítulo, expomos o problema da indução e como Howson o interpreta. No segundo capítulo, comentamos propostas de solução ao problema da indução analisadas por ele. No terceiro capítulo, introduzimos conceitos e teses de probabilidade e bayesianismo. No quarto capítulo, apresentamos, em primeiro lugar, as teses específicas de Howson em relação ao problema da indução; em segundo lugar, criticamos sua interpretação de Hume, suas objeções a outras abordagens e sua própria proposta; finalmente, averiguamos a sua razoabilidade. Finalizamos o trabalho sintetizando as considerações realizadas. / Abstract: We aim to evaluate the reasonability of Colin Howson's bayesian approach to the problem of induction, as elaborated by David Hume. We propose that an approach to the problem of induction will be reasonable if our induction understanding does not regress in relation to that provided by Hume. In turn, bayesianism is a theoretical position derived from the adoption of gradualism, probabilism and conditionalization theses; its merit is to provide a model for representing and updating degrees of belief. The problem of induction is the search to rationally justify inductive arguments, due to the humean thesis according to which it is impossible to do so, neither through demonstrative arguments, nor through probable arguments. To achieve our goal, this Dissertation is divided into four chapters. In the first chapter, we expose the problem of induction and how Howson interprets it. In the second chapter, we discuss solutions to the problem of induction analyzed by him. In the third chapter, we introduce probability and bayesianism concepts and theses. In the fourth chapter, we present, first, Howson's specific theses regarding the problem of induction; second, we criticize his interpretation of Hume, his objections to other approaches, and his own proposal; finally, we examine whether it is reasonable or not. We finish this master's degree dissertation summarizing ours considerations. / Mestre

D'apparence banale, le principe de proportionnalité signifie en réalité un bouleversement profond du droit. L'importance de ce développement, ainsi que le retentissement de ce principe partout dans le monde, explique l'intérêt considérable que suscite cette question dans la littérature récente. Cependant, il n'est pas commun d'analyser ce principe dans un contexte particulier, en tant que manifestation d'une culture spécifique. Cette thèse entreprend une telle analyse dans le contexte de l'Union européenne, qui s'avère à maints égards paradigmatique, à partir d'un examen du raisonnement de la Cour de justice dans ses décisions en application des libertés de circulation. Cet examen permet, d'un côté, de prendre acte de l'ampleur du potentiel transformateur du principe de proportionnalité sur les plans formel, matériel et institutionnel. En effet, ce principe ayant été conçu par la Cour comme une évaluation de l'efficience des mesures étatiques, les implications sont lourdes à l'égard de la forme de raisonnement employée par la Cour, la fonction des libertés de circulation et enfin la répartition de compétences entre l'Union et les Etats membres. D'un autre côté, le principe de proportionnalité s'avère également un miroir particulièrement apte à refléter les particularités de la culture juridique de l'Union, au sein de laquelle un discours de nature technocratique se montre prévalent. / Despite its apparent innocuousness, the principle of proportionality actually brings about a profound transformation of the law. The importance of this development, as well as the spread of this principle throughout the world, accounts for the considerable interest that this issue has raised in recent scholarship. However, it is uncommon to analyze this principle within a specific context, as a manifestation of a particular culture. This thesis embarks on such an analysis within the context of the European Union, which would seem paradigmatic, by examining the reasoning of the European Court of Justice in its judgments applying the freedoms of circulation. This examination will make it possible, on the one hand, to take cognizance of the potential for transformation of the principle of proportionality at a formal, substantial and institutional level. lndeed, this principle having been conceived by the Court as an evaluation of efficiency of State measures, the implications are significant with regards to the form of reasoning employed by the Court, the function of the freedoms of circulation and finally the distribution of competence between the Union and the Member States. On the other hand, the principle of proportionality becomes a particularly appropriate mirror for reflecting the specific characteristics of the legal culture of the European Union, within which a technocratic discourse appears prevalent.

The CRC is an ethical foundation documents to strengthen children's position in the family law process and ensure that both the child's needs and rights are met. According to article 12 all children have the right to participate in processes and decisions that affect them, where their opinions should be given weight in accordance to their age and maturity. Even to meet the child's best interests (article 3) should be the main target at each crucial decision on issues affecting children. The definition of the child's best changes in time and place and leads to individual assessments needs to be made based on the needs of each child, by their individual interests and situation. In practice it may also be deemed to be a dilemma to consider both articles, tension may arise when the child ́s will and the best interests of the child do not correspond. Based on theories of child's status as an actor or non-actor in the assessment through the different perspectives: care logic and legal logic, we want to understand how assessors in different cases of access account to the articles that determine their decisions. Our study has been conducted through a qualitative research with textual analysis of five Swedish cases from District Court and Court of Appeal from the years 2015-2016. The outcome of the study shows that two logics (care logic and legal logic) generates in the assessments of the child ́s best and that their decisions is depending on which one of those thats dominate. The results also shows that the children ́s will depends on its age and maturity which also determine the children ́s influence and status as actors or non-actors in the legal process of access