: Neste artigo pretendemos verificar em que medida as leituras de Deleuze e de Chaui nos ajudam a compreender a Ética de Espinosa como uma inovadora filosofia prática ou filosofia da práxis. O forte nexo entre teoria e prática tem sido enfraquecido por muitas leituras que defendem a tese do “paralelismo espinosano”, pois atribuem um privilégio do atributo pensamento em relação à extensão, isto implicaria em um privilégio da teoria em relação à prática e à experiência. As leituras de Deleuze (...) e de Chaui, ao contrário, sublinham que a originalidade das teses teóricas da Ética reside em sua necessária aplicação prática, portanto na inseparabilidade entre teoria e prática, pensamento e extensão, mente e corpo, tipos de conhecimento e modos de vida. Ambos propõem outra interpretação da tese nuclear do paralelismo na filosofia de Espinosa. Desdobramos a pesquisa em três tópicos: 1) leitura de Deleuze: Ética enquanto filosofia prática; 2) problema do paralelismo: as diferentes leituras; 3) leitura de Chaui: Ética enquanto filosofia da liberdade. (shrink)

Neste artigo examinaremos algumas conexões entre a crítica de Adorno e Horkheimer à razão instrumental circunscrita ao livro Dialética do Esclarecimento e a crítica genealógica de Nietzsche à "vontade de verdade", tema explorado em vários livros . Em seguida retomaremos a leitura de Habermas em O Discurso Filosófico da Modernidade sobre a crítica radical nietzschiana à racionalidade moderna, com o objetivo de examinar dois pontos: 1) quais argumentos sustentam a tese da inconsistência e da falta de fundamento da crítica genealógica (...) nietzschiana? 2) por que Habermas afirma que os herdeiros da crítica nietzschiana repetem essa inconsistência, incluindo a própria crítica de Adorno e Horkheimer? Pretendemos demonstrar, ao contrário de Habermas, que Adorno e Horkheimer no programa de desmitologização da razão instrumental retomam o projeto crítico nietzschiano com o objetivo construir um novo sentido positivo e desmitificado para o esclarecimento. (shrink)

Nietzsche declara em uma carta de 1881 que sua filosofia e a de Espinosa partilham de uma “idêntica tendência geral”, resumida na fórmula: “fazer do conhecimento o afeto mais potente”. Contudo, em anotações do mesmo período da carta declara que se para Espinosa o conhecimento é um afeto para ele o conhecimento é uma paixão. O que significa, em Espinosa, definir o conhecimento como afeto e, em Nietzsche, o conhecimento como paixão? Para responder a esta questão delimitamos dois objetivos. Primeiro: (...) compreender porque Espinosa define na Parte V da Ética o conhecimento de terceiro gênero como o afeto mais potente e não um paixão. Para tanto, precisamos verificar: 1. a distinção entre os termos paixão e afeto no contexto da teoria dos afetos ; 2. a relação entre a teoria dos três gêneros do conhecimento e a teoria dos afetos. Segundo: examinar o que significa, para Nietzsche, o conhecimento como paixão. Delimitamos essa pesquisa aos textos do período da carta tendo por fio condutor as expressões: “paixão do conhecimento” e “nova paixão”. (shrink)

Neste trabalho partimos da seguinte hipótese: o advérbio simul e a expressão plura simul são chaves para compreender as principais teses inovadoras da ética de espinosa, assim como a leitura desta obra proposta por Marilena Chaui no livro Nervura do Real ii.

This paper examines the efforts of contractualists to develop an alternative to aggregation to govern our duty not to harm (duty to rescue) others. I conclude that many of the moral principles articulated in the literature seem to reduce to aggregation by a different name. Those that do not are viable only as long as they are limited to a handful of oddball cases at the margins of social life. If extended to run-of-the-mill conduct that accounts for virtually all unintended (...) (in the sense of undesired) harm to others—noncriminal activities that impose some risk of harm on others—they would rule out all action. Moreover, because such conduct poses an irreducible conflict between freedom of action and freedom from expected harm, it can be regulated only by principles that accept the necessity of making precisely the sorts of interpersonal trade-offs that contractualism is foundationally committed to reject: trade-offs in which the numbers count, such that a risk of serious harm to one person can be justified by small benefits to the many. (shrink)

I consider the contrast between Leibniz's relational concept of spacetime and Einstein's special and general theories of relativity. I suggest that there are two interpretations of Leibniz's view, which I call L1 and L2. L1 amounts to saying that there is no real inertial structure to spacetime, whereas in general relativity the inertial structure is dynamical or real in Lande's sense ; i.e., it can be ‘kicked’ and ‘kicks back,’ causing gravitational effects. If there is no real inertial structure to (...) space-time then, as Weyl points out, the concept of the relative motive of several bodies has no more foundation than the concept of absolute motion for a single body. Thus, L1 seems to be untenable. L2 is a more sophisticated view which rejects the geometrical aspect of Newtonian space-time as a container for events, but accepts the existence of a real structure which determines the inertial properties of matter. (shrink)

An extended analysis and account of the psychological/social/cognitive dynamics of intellectual controversy. The immediate focus is the recurrent failure of intellectual engagement, in encounters having to do with with truth, knowledge, language, science, and/or objectivity, between, on the one hand, rationalist-realist-objectivist philosophers and/or those they have instructed and, on the other hand, constructivist-pragmatist ("postmodern") theorists and/or those persuaded by their critiques and/or alternative views. Individual chapters examine critiques and defenses of objectivist-rationalist views in law, politics, literary studies, ethics, communication theory, (...) and philosophy of science. Theorists whose views are discussed critically at some length include legal scholar Robin West and philosophers Jürgen Habermas, Karl-Otto Apel, and Philip Kitcher. (shrink)

A one-of-a-kind reference to the international vocabulary of the humanities This is an encyclopedic dictionary of close to 400 important philosophical, literary, and political terms and concepts that defy easy—or any—translation from one language and culture to another. Drawn from more than a dozen languages, terms such as Dasein (German), pravda (Russian), saudade (Portuguese), and stato (Italian) are thoroughly examined in all their cross-linguistic and cross-cultural complexities. Spanning the classical, medieval, early modern, modern, and contemporary periods, these are terms that (...) influence thinking across the humanities. The entries, written by more than 150 distinguished scholars, describe the origins and meanings of each term, the history and context of its usage, its translations into other languages, and its use in notable texts. The dictionary also includes essays on the special characteristics of particular languages—English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. Originally published in French, this one-of-a-kind reference work is now available in English for the first time, with new contributions from Judith Butler, Daniel Heller-Roazen, Ben Kafka, Kevin McLaughlin, Kenneth Reinhard, Stella Sandford, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Jane Tylus, Anthony Vidler, Susan Wolfson, Robert J. C. Young, and many more.The result is an invaluable reference for students, scholars, and general readers interested in the multilingual lives of some of our most influential words and ideas. Covers close to 400 important philosophical, literary, and political terms that defy easy translation between languages and cultures Includes terms from more than a dozen languages Entries written by more than 150 distinguished thinkers Available in English for the first time, with new contributions by Judith Butler, Daniel Heller-Roazen, Ben Kafka, Kevin McLaughlin, Kenneth Reinhard, Stella Sandford, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Jane Tylus, Anthony Vidler, Susan Wolfson, Robert J. C. Young, and many more Contains extensive cross-references and bibliographies An invaluable resource for students and scholars across the humanities. (shrink)

This would have been a better book if Sampson had argued his main point, the usefulness of the Simonian principle as an explanation of the evolution, structure, and acquisition of language, on its own merits, instead of making it subsidiary to his attack on ‘limited-minders’ (e.g., Noam Chomsky). The energy he has spent on the attack he might then have been willing and able to employ in developing his argument at reasonable length and detail. He might then have found that (...) argument faulty, or even wrong. Underdeveloped as it is, however, his point about the Simonian principle does seem to have thepossibility of some significance in understanding the empirical issues of this book (and the dichotomy of ‘limited’ and ‘creative’ minds is certainly not one of these).What Sampson has done inMaking Sense has the appearance of science, and theoretical linguistics, and therefore it is somewhat puzzling to find the conclusions that the human mind cannot be scientifically studied (p. 10), and that theoretical linguistics is a “mirage” (p. 210). His statement that It may still seem worthwhile to some to work out the exact implications for present-day linguistic structure of the fact that languages are evolved systems, but I cannot see that there is much glamour or, indeed, much substance in this task (p. 210) would surely be surprising to a geneticist or ethologist. We hope his apparent misunderstanding on this point will not lead him to give up his profession, in which he seems willing and able to make a significant contribution.What in particular is required is a clear indication of how the Simonian principle imposes itself in the ontogenesis of language. Consider Chomsky's example of the rule for forming questions in English. For sentence (1) below, children able to deal with such examples would give (2) but not (3) as the corresponding question (Chomsky, 1975, p. 31).The man who is tall is in the room.Is the man who is tall in the room?*Is the man who tall is in the room?Now compare Sampson's evolutionary explanation for the structure-dependence of rules which is illustrated in (1)-(3): “once a behavior-pattern has become thoroughly established, it will tend to be treated as a fixed given when used as a constituent of a more complex, later-learned behavior-pattern” (p. 183). In order for this to account for Chomsky's example it would have to be the case that children learn relative clauses before they learn questions, which simply isn't true.In conclusion, we wish not to seem unaware of the problems with the position Sampson is attacking, or unaware of the sometimes dogmatic way it too has been presented. Chomsky's hypothesis of innate linguistic ideas seems, fundamentally, to derive from the claimed rapidity and uniformity of language acquisition in the face of limited and degenerate data. Chomsky appears to have been unwilling to argue these points directly or to show their relation to others, for which he has argued, for example, the implausibility of some abstract constraint's having been learned (cf. 1971, pp. 22–44; 1975, pp. 30–33; 1980, pp. 35–52). And almost from his first invoking of rationalism in support of his linguistic method, Chomsky has himself resorted to an unnecessarily polemical attack on empiricism (cf. 1965, p. 58, n. 33). The innateness issue is just not clear or simple enough to justify so much animus, or even conviction. (shrink)

Bioethics education now takes place outside universities as well as within them. How should clinicians, ethics committee members, and policymakers be taught the ethics they need, and how may their progress best be evaluated?

We are within nature and culture, conditioned simultaneously by genes and meanings. This form of our self-understanding is the result of fundamental modifications that happened in modern philosophical anthropology and of the impact of the natural Science. In modern philosophy three types of approaches to the human situation were constituted at different times: the idealist, the naturalist, and the culturalist, and the problem of whether humanity is natural (biological) or cultural has begun to take precedence over the issue of human (...) supernatural roots. Both approaches are presented, their presuppositions discussed, and arguments in favor of a version of the culturalist approach. Only the culturalist approach allows us to understand our own self-constitution and, in particular, our self-reflectivity, as well as the naturalist attempts to ignore them and immerse ourselves in nature. (shrink)

ABSTRACTDeveloping strategies to reduce inequities in health requires an understanding of how inequities occur, determining the salient factors in their production, and deciding which ones are most amenable to change. The recognition of several principles regarding the manifestations and genesis of inequities can help to decide on strategies. In making decisions, it is important to consider whether the aim is to reduce disparities in the occurrence of ill health or to reduce disparities in the severity of ill health. Evidence shows (...) that the major impact on equity of health services, particularly regarding their potential to reduce severity, is attributable to the strength of primary care resources and services in communities and countries. Virtually every influence on the genesis of inequities is determined by the political context in which policy is made. The issue of health services is not different in this regard from other types of strategies.There is no longer any doubt about the pervasive influence of social factors on health. Almost two centuries of descriptive research provides convincing evidence of associations between social structures and relationships and health status in all countries and in all societies; if there is anything new from more recent research, it is that the association is not limited to differences between the lowest social strata and other social strata. Rather, the association is noted throughout the social spectrum. That is, there is a social gradient in health such that, for many if not most manifestations of ill health, the lower the social stratum, the worse the health.The challenge for the future is to understand why this is the case, to create a consensus that these inequalities are unnecessary and unacceptable, and to devise strategies that are both effective and possible. This paper will focus on the first of these aims, in a context that facilitates attention to the second and third aims. (shrink)

The series, founded in 1970, publishes works which either combine studies in the history of philosophy with a systematic approach or bring together systematic studies with reconstructions from the history of philosophy. Monographs are published in English as well as in German. The founding editors are Erhard Scheibe (editor until 1991), Günther Patzig (until 1999) and Wolfgang Wieland (until 2003). From 1990 to 2007, the series had been co-edited by Jürgen Mittelstraß.

Work is purposeful human activity oriented toward a useful outcome, particularly, but not exclusively, activity directed toward the satisfaction of human needs. It is distinguished from leisure, which encompasses human activity undertaken primarily for enjoyment or relaxation. Work includes both wage labor and uncompensated activities that, nevertheless, provide human beings with useful goods and services. Nurturing labor – sustaining the lives of children and preparing them for mature participation in society – is work, too.

Cultural critics of the “feminization of love” have argued that heterosexual love has been feminized by a stress on emotional expressivity that masks “masculine” love, with its greater emphasis on instrumental behaviors. Using survey data, this article examines the extent to which the feminization-of-love hypothesis can be extended to same-sex friendships. Data analyses revealed that women's friendships were more expressive than men's only when a narrow, positive definition of expressivity was employed; men's friendships were found to be more aggressive, but (...) no more instrumental, than those of women. These and other findings support the conclusion that women's friendships are more similar to the cultural images of heroic friendship and sisterhood than to the narrower image of feminized love. (shrink)