According to Alexy (2015, p. 74), there are two types of rules of legal argumentation. The rules of the first type establish when and how arguments should be used, and the rules of the second type define what to do in case of conflict between the rules of the first type.
He (Alexy, 2015, p. 74) considers that there are two rules of the second type that establish provisional hierarchies between interpretative arguments: 1) linguistic arguments prevail prima facie over all other kinds of arguments; 2) linguistic, genetic and systematic arguments prevail prima facie over general practical arguments.
Alexy (2015, p. 74) argues that the strength of the linguistic argument derives from the principle of the authority of the legislator and the principles of democracy, the separation of powers, and the rule of law. He (Alexy, 2015, p. 74) clarifies that general practical arguments are insufficient to resolve social conflicts and that, for this reason, such arguments are weaker than linguistic, genetic, and systematic arguments.
Bibliographic references
ALEXY, Robert. Direito, razão, discurso: estudos para a filosofia do direito. Translated by Luís Afonso Heck. 2. ed. rev. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado Editora, 2015.