Law Against Rhetoric: Establishing the Truth in Legal Disputes when Using Argumentation Tricks
https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.1.31.144-169
Abstract
The desire to achieve truth is an important feature of the civilization that developed in the territories of the far and near Mediterranean in the 8th-2nd centuries BC and exists nowadays. Law, considered as a description of the essential properties of social reality, has been formed as a system of means that makes it possible to establish in a conflict situation the truth regarding the facts that are subject to assessment by the law enforcer (usually the court). Recently, however, the law’s focus on truth has been questioned as its achievability has been contested in philosophy and rhetoric. The lack of demand for true knowledge, its historicity, difficult achievability, fundamental nature of lies, and the dominance of pseudo-true knowledge are pointed out. It is noted that similar processes are reflected in the legal understanding of truth, which does not negate its fundamental significance for law. At the same time, statements about the impossibility of achieving truth in a dispute are often based on seemingly true, but in fact incorrect statements (so-called argumentative tricks); those can be overcome with the use of rhetoric. A typology of such tricks is given. It is pointed out that classifying tricks as acceptable is incorrect, since they constitute deception, although not prohibited by law. Tricks that go beyond the scope of discussion (tricks of appeal) are considered. Methods are proposed to counter them with rhetoric, which makes it possible to clearly demonstrate the fallacy of the relevant statements and maintain confidence in the possibility of establishing truth in the legal process, which, in turn, ensures the preservation of social justice.
About the Authors
O. V. Malyukova
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga V. Malyukova, Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Associate Professor, Professor, Department of Philosophy and Sociology
Moscow
O. M. Rodionova
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga M. Rodionova, Dr. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Professor, Department of Civil Law
Moscow
References
1. Anisov, A.M., (2019). Ontological status of evidence by reduction to absurdity. Lies as a problem of formal ontology. Moscow: Aletheia, pp. 123–187. (In Russ.).
2. Bonner, A.T., (2009). Problems of establishing truth in civil proceedings. St. Petersburg: Legal Book. (In Russ.).
3. Bortnikova, N.A., (2023). Responsibility for misleading the court. Prepared for the ConsultantPlus system. (In Russ.).
4. Dubrovsky, D.I., (2010). Deception. Philosophical and psychological analysis. Moscow: Canon+ROOI “Rehabilitation”. (In Russ.). Gromov, N.A. and Nikolaichenko, V.V., (1997). Principles of criminal procedure, their concept and system. State and Law, 7, pp. 33–40. (In Russ.).
5. Ivanov, O.V., (1964). Objective truth in Soviet civil procedure. Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow. (In Russ.).
6. Jaspers, K., (1991). The meaning and purpose of history. Moscow. (In Russ.).
7. Kara-Murza, S.G., (2005). Manipulation of consciousness. Moscow: Eksmo Publ. (In Russ.).
8. Khalikov, A.N., (2014). Content of the category of truth in criminal proceedings. Current problems of Russian law, 7, pp. 1415–1420. (In Russ.).
9. Khilyuta, V.V., (2009). Misconception is an obligatory sign of fraudulent deception. Russian justice, 4, pp. 29–31. (In Russ.).
10. Kunitsyna, I.V., (2014). Dispute in law and procedural methods of its resolution. Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. (In Russ.).
11. Kurylev, S.V., (1952). The concept of material truth in Soviet justice. Socialist legality, 5, pp. 31–42. (In Russ.).
12. Kurylev, S.V., (1966). Establishing the truth in Soviet justice. Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow. (In Russ.).
13. Lisanyuk, E.N. and Khamidov, A.A., (2021). Argument to ignorance and argument from silence. Discourse, 7 (1), pp. 5–16. (In Russ.).
14. Malyukova, O.V., (2022). Modern rhetorical narratives in the optics of domestic rhetoric. Society: philosophy, history, culture, 5, pp. 31–41. (In Russ.).
15. Malyukova, O.V., (2023a). Logical consequence. In: Logic. Moscow: Prospekt Publ., pp. 244–264. (In Russ.).
16. Malyukova, O.V., (2023b). Meaning and modern technologies of meaning formation. Society: philosophy, history, culture, 5 (109), pp. 23–31. (In Russ.).
17. Mezinov, D.A., (2013). “Objective truth” in criminal proceedings: to the discussion on the bill of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation. Criminal Justice, 1(1), pp. 29–36. (In Russ.).
18. Muradyan, E.M., (2002). Truth as a problem of judicial law. Moscow: Yurist Publ. (In Russ.).
19. Nikiforov, A.L., (2008). The concept of truth in the theory of knowledge. In: The concept of truth in socio-humanitarian knowledge. Moscow: IFRAN, pp. 5–30. (In Russ.).
20. Ponomarenko, S.I., (2021). Truth in criminal proceedings. Bulletin of the Taganrog Institute named after A.P. Chekhov, 1, pp. 322–328. (In Russ.).
21. Primate Hugo of Orleans. Lies and malice rule the world. Transl. by L. Ginzburg. Available at: http://litena.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000066/st094.shtml. (In Russ.).
22. Proving and decision-making in adversarial criminal proceedings. Moscow: Norma, Infra-M Publ., 2022. 448 p.
23. Rivlin, L.A., (1951). The concept of material truth in Soviet criminal proceedings. Socialist legality, 11, pp. 42–52. (In Russ.).
24. Samsonov, N.V., (2019). The principle of objective truth in modern administrative and civil proceedings. Administrative law and process, 2, pp. 26–29. (In Russ.).
25. Shakhanov, V.V., (2017). Legal dispute: essential analysis. Bulletin of the Vladimir Law Institute, 4(45), pp. 172–175. (In Russ.).
26. Shakiryanov, R.V. and Shakiryanova, D.R., (2021). Transformation of the category “judicial truth” in the digital economy. Bulletin of Civil Procedure, 6, pp. 36–76, doi: 10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-6-36-76. (In Russ.).
27. Soviet civil procedural law: textbook (1965). (In Russ.).
28. Theory of State and Law: textbook for universities (2023). Moscow: Yurayt Publishing House. (In Russ.).
29. Voplenko, N.N., (2013). Truth and justice: problems of interrelation. Bulletin of the Saratov State Law Academy, 6 (95), pp. 102–113. (In Russ.).
30. Zazhitsky. V.I., (1996). Legal principles in the legislation of the Russian Federation. State and Law, 11, pp. 92–97. (In Russ.).
31. Zherebin, V.S., (2001). Problems of legal conflictology. Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Malyukova O.V., Rodionova O.M. Law Against Rhetoric: Establishing the Truth in Legal Disputes when Using Argumentation Tricks. Kutafin Law Review. 2025;12(1):144-169. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.1.31.144-169
Views:
68
Email this article 
