A BELIEF IS NOT FOUNDED IF REMAINS UNANSWERED ANY OBJECTION TO IT - OR THE NECESSARY OBVIOUSNESS OF ART. 489, § 1, IV, OF BRAZILIAN CIVIL PROCEDURAL CODE

Due to a increasing protagonism by the Judiciary, legal mechanisms to rationally control the activity of its members acquire even greater importance. One of these legal mechanisms is the duty to make explicit the base of their decisions. In this paper, we start from the hypothesis that it is essential, for a decision to be considered based or grounded, that all objections that have been raised to it are refuted. Based on bibliographic research, following hypothetical deductive and fallibilism methodology, it will be verified whether this conjecture arises, and is compatible, not only with constitutional procedural principles, such as the right to petition and the due process of law, but with the way Epistemology understand the foundation of knowledge and beliefs in general. With this, it will be verified whether art. 489, § 1, IV, of Brazilian Civil Procedural Code, since prescribes an obviousness, is applicable to other procedural subsystems, such as administrative procedural law, and labor or criminal procedural law, regardless of the specific infra-constitutional legislation.