Se argumenta que la crítica de Pryor al escepticismo sobre la justificación perceptiva está fuera de foco: mientras que el dogmatismo puede ser una explicación exitosa sobre la justificación perceptiva de las creencias empíricas de primer orden (i.e. de la justificación proposicional), es estéril frente a las críticas escépticas (de segundo orden) sobre el estatus epistémico de las creencias justificadas perceptivamente (es decir, frente a críticas que señalan la ausencia de justificación doxástica). Argumentamos que las dos principales motivaciones que Pryor (...) ofrece a favor de su dogmatismo –evitar el escepticismo respecto de la justificación perceptiva y proporcionar una explicación intuitiva de la misma– fallan, debido, principalmente, a su compromiso con ciertas tesis de corte externista que imposibilitan la satisfacción de los requisitos metaepistémicos impuestos por el escéptico. En vista de este déficit explicativo respecto a sus propias motivaciones, concluimos que el dogmatismo no es una explicación adecuada de la justificación perceptiva en general. (shrink)

It is argued that Pryor's criticism of scepticism of perceptual justification misses the point: while Pryor's dogmatism can provide a successful explication of the perceptual justification of first order empirical beliefs ( i.e. , an explication of propositional justification), it is barren vis à vis second order sceptical criticisms about the epistemic status of beliefs justified via perception (that is, criticisms pointing to the lack of doxastic justification). We argue that the two main motivations that Pryor offers for his dogmatism (...) – to avoid scepticism of perceptual justification and to explicate perceptual justification – fail due to his commitment with some externalist theses, which make it impossible to satisfy the metaepistemic requisites imposed by the sceptic. Hence given the lack of satisfaction of Pryor's own goals, we conclude that Pryor's dogmatism is not an adequate explication of perceptual justification. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 123.4 (2002) 629-633 [Access article in PDF] Phiroze Vasunia. The Gift of the Nile: Hellenizing Egypt from Aeschylus to Alexander. Classics and Contemporary Thought 8. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2001. xiv + 346 pp. Cloth, $45. Alexandre Tourraix. L'Orient, mirage grec: L'Orient du mythe et de l'épopée. Edited by Evelyne Geny. Paris: Presses Universitaires Franc-Comtoises, 2000. 165 pp. Paper, fi24.39. Professor (...) Tourraix is an optimistic reactionary. He sets out his aim with refreshing clarity. He seeks to challenge "l'orthodoxie provisoirement établie," which denies that the Greeks were "tributaires de la représentation du monde véhiculée par leur langue... indo-européenne." Tourraix accuses the "adepts" of this "orthodoxy" of citing Dumézil when he excluded Greece from the regularity of Indo-European patterns of thought, while they reject his basic trifunctional theory. This, Tourraix insists, is not a "doctrine" or an "ideological credo," but the result of a "rational elaboration" (15-16).Tourraix is not concerned with radical outsiders. He dismisses the whole of Said's Orientalism because of the latter's blunder in referring to the chorus of the Persae as women. He warns that Bernal should not be taken seriously because his works are not founded on a "scientific hypothesis but on ideological presuppositions" (75). Tourraix's opponents are the professional classicists, notably Martin West, Walter Burkert, and Ruth Edwards. These promote the idea of a substantial Southwest Asian influence on Greek civilization but are unconcerned with Egypt. In the terminology of this reviewer, Tourraix's polemic is not against the "Revised Ancient Model" but as a supporter of the "Extreme" version, he opposes the "Broad Aryan Model."Tourraix's two centers of concern are Troy and Thebes. Troy interests him as a marginal entity between Greek and Barbarian. He admits that pottery and Hittite texts indicate that there were Mycenaean influences in the Troad. On the other hand, he rightly points out that Homer Hellenized the Trojans more than evidence from other sources can sustain. It has also been impossible to correlate the Homeric version of the city's fall with the date and scale of the destructions of Troy VI, VIIa, and VIIb. Tourraix therefore follows the hypothesis of Paul Wathelet that the destruction described in the epics was not that of an unimportant settlement on the Dardanelles but was really that of the great Greek city of Thebes, which was undoubtedly destroyed in the thirteenth century B.C.E.This is just one example of Tourraix's general approach, which is not to accept things at face value but to probe more deeply. On the central theme of his [End Page 629] book, he agrees that many Greek myths and legends would suggest "Oriental" connections and origins and that much Greek iconography appears to be "Oriental" or Egyptian (75). But he knows that such symbols were devoid of content (23). Unfortunately for his scientific credentials, however, he frequently has to rely on the words probablement or peut-être to see Indo-European essences behind the Oriental forms (e.g., 22-23).Clearly Tourraix has always been concerned with Indo-European "cultures." He has published extensively on both Greeks and Persians and the relations between them. When looking at Greek culture, he sees three main indicators of "l'héritage indo-européen." The first is language: He takes a Whorfian view of its determining power and is unconcerned that less than 40 percent of the Greek vocabulary has known Indo-European cognates. The second indicator is trifunctionalism: Tourraix sees the Indo-European base whenever he encounters a triple. Three, however, is an attractive number to speakers of many languages. The Christian Trinity appears to have originated among Aramaic speakers, and Mesopotamian and Phoenician cities had the same tripartite division of the male inhabitants into citizen, resident alien, and slave that later occurred in the Greek poleis. Thus, besides its vagueness, trifunctionalism is not an... (shrink)

En 2011 el señor Mario Posada Ochoa donó a la Universidad EAFIT una extensa y poco conocida colección de arte; acaso unos cuantos amigos habrían visto de cerca las 480 obras que recibió la Universidad, de artistas como Segundo Angelvis, Inés Acevedo Bernal, Sergio Trujillo Magnenat, Luis A. Rengifo y Ramón Vásquez, entre otros. Algunas de ellas carecían de la firma del autor o de un dato que comprobara la autoría, y estaban deterioradas, más que por el tiempo, por (...) el improvisado bodegaje: don Mario las había guardado durante cuarenta años en su hermosa casa de Maracaibo, en el centro de la ciudad. En Extensión Cultural de EAFIT han procurado, desde entonces, conservar este legado. (shrink)

The science of man, by A. Schaff.--The humanistic meaning of natural science, by R. Mukerjee.--The role of social sciences in the struggle for progress, by R. Schlesinger.--Scientific research in developing countries, by J. D. Bernal.--Problems of science and technology in underdeveloped countries by, D. D. Kosambi.--Priorities in scientific research for economic development, by J. Bognar.--Science and technology in underdeveloped countries, by S. H. Zaheer.--Science and scientific workers, by E. Olszewski.--Medical research in developing countries, by C. G. Pandit & N. (...) P. Gupta.--Changing society and crisis of enterprise, by Z. Tanic.--The university and society, by E. G. Edwards.--The intellectual and society, by V. B. Singh.--Indo-Soviet relations in retrospect, by K. P. S. Menon.--Fifteen years of cooperation between Indian and Soviet paediatricians, by I. N. Ussov. (shrink)

Some ways of defending inequality against the charge that it is unjust require premises that egalitarians find easy to dismiss—statements, for example, about the contrasting deserts and/or entitlements of unequally placed people. But a defense of inequality suggested by John Rawls and elaborated by Brian Barry has often proved irresistible even to people of egalitarian outlook. The persuasive power of this defense of inequality has helped to drive authentic egalitarianism, of an old-fashioned, uncompromising kind, out of contemporary political philosophy. The (...) present essay is part of an attempt to bring it back in. (shrink)

1. The present paper is a continuation of my “Self-Ownership, World Ownership, and Equality,” which began with a description of the political philosophy of Robert Nozick. I contended in that essay that the foundational claim of Nozick's philosophy is the thesis of self-ownership, which says that each person is the morally rightful owner of his own person and powers, and, consequently, that each is free to use those powers as he wishes, provided that he does not deploy them aggressively against (...) others. To be sure, he may not harm others, and he may, if necessary, be forced not to harm them, but he should never be forced to help them, as people are in fact forced to help others, according to Nozick, by redistributive taxation. (shrink)

This book presents G. A. Cohen's Gifford Lectures, delivered at the University of Edinburgh in 1996. Focusing on Marxism and Rawlsian liberalism, Cohen draws a connection between these thought systems and the choices that shape a person's life. In the case of Marxism, the relevant life is his own: a communist upbringing in the 1940s in Montreal, which induced a belief in a strongly socialist egalitarian doctrine. The narrative of Cohen's reckoning with that inheritance develops through a series of sophisticated (...) engagements with the central questions of social and political philosophy. In the case of Rawlsian doctrine, Cohen looks to people's lives in general. He argues that egalitarian justice is not only, as Rawlsian liberalism teaches, a matter of rules that define the structure of society, but also a matter of personal attitude and choice. Personal attitude and choice are, moreover, the stuff of which social structure itself is made. Those truths have not informed political philosophy as much as they should, and Cohen's focus on them brings political philosophy closer to moral philosophy, and to the Judeo-Christian ethical tradition, than it has recently been. (shrink)

Post-pandemic: Triple Agenda for a New RealityPós-pandemia: tripla agenda para uma nova realidadeNew fields for applying bioethics have emerged out of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic, but many bioethical challenges remain; so, it is necessary to reflect on the reality that human beings will have to live after that. This reflection builds on a triple agenda: challenges, warnings, and guidance. The challenge agenda deals with upcoming scientific and biotechnological developments, adjustments to work and study, sustainable development reorientation, and changes in businesses and (...) entertainment companies. These challenges could be summarized as development paradigm shifts. The warning agenda includes the management of wild species, mistrust in political leaders, unsupportive and criminal human behavior, information overabundance, the emulation of pharmaceutical industries, and the determining factors of the culture of death. These warnings could be condensed in the importance of promoting the culture of life. The guidance agenda comprises a series of principles such as the human person’s dignity, the common good, the preferential option for the poor, the universal allocation of goods, solidarity, subsidiarity, and the care for our common home. This guidance points to a fundamental and existential environmental transformation. All these changes will be possible because of human resilience, professionalism, and social solidarity, shaping an actual comprehensive human development project.Para citar este editorial / To reference this editorial / Para citar este editorialGamboa Bernal GA. Pospandemia: triple agenda para una nueva realidad. Pers Bioet. 2020;24:127-135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2020.24.2.1Publicado: 27/11/2020. (shrink)

_Importance and implications of an oath in times of a pandemic_ _Importância e implicações de um juramento em tempos de pandemia_ La pandemia del SARS-CoV-2, que causa el Covid-19, es un hecho que está desestabilizando no solo los sistemas de salud, sino la misma cultura actual. En torno a ella hay una serie de elementos que complican su contención, mitigación y tratamiento: interrogantes sobre su origen, profusión de información, medidas de aislamiento con efectos diametralmente opuestos, despertar de una pesadilla de (...) agresión al ecosistema, develamiento de falencias y fragilidades de gobiernos, sistemas económicos y de salud pública; crisis de liderazgo y un largo etcétera. Se examina el trabajo del talento humano en salud a partir de la constatación de situaciones paradójicas frente al mismo y se plantea la importancia del Juramento hipocrático, como razón que justifica el accionar del personal de salud en escenarios normales, pero sobre todo en situaciones límite. Se concluye que el Juramento hipocrático, más que la Declaración de Ginebra, es un punto de partida clave para el actuar médico, también en las crisis, y que la humanidad debería cambiar y salir fortalecida de la pandemia, porque aprendió las lecciones que el Covid-19 le ha dejado. _Para citar este editorial / to reference this editorial / para citar este editorial_ Gamboa-Bernal GA. Importancia e implicaciones de un juramento en tiempos de pandemia. 2020;24:5-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2020.24.1.1 Publicado: 07/05/2020. (shrink)

In 2016, a new technique to edit genes was made public: the CRISPR-CAS9. Five years later, we can examine the advancement of this biotechnology from bioethics. It is evident that the gene-editing technique on the somatic line has been disseminated and is starting to show some results. Nonetheless, it is impossible to extend this work to the germlines through heritable human genome editing. Two documents are studied, the International Commission for the Clinical Use of Human Germline Genome Editing report and (...) the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing report, reflecting on their content and consequences. (shrink)

Now, we stand outcast and starving,Mid the wonders we have made….I belong to a school of thought which has been called analytical Marxism. Some of the partisans of this position, and that includes me, are deeply engaged by questions in moral and political philosophy which have not, in the past, attracted the attention of Marxists. We are concerned with exactly what a commitment to equality requires, and with exactly what sort of obligations productive and talented people have to people who (...) are relatively unproductive, or handicapped, or in special need. We seek a precise definition of what exploitation is, and we want to know exactly why it is wrong. (shrink)

In this stimulating work of political philosophy, acclaimed philosopher G. A. Cohen sets out to rescue the egalitarian thesis that in a society in which distributive justice prevails, peopleâes material prospects are roughly equal. Arguing against the Rawlsian version of a just society, Cohen demonstrates that distributive justice does not tolerate deep inequality. In the course of providing a deep and sophisticated critique of Rawlsâes theory of justice, Cohen demonstrates that questions of distributive justice arise not only for the state (...) but also for people in their daily lives. The right rules for the macro scale of public institutions and policies also apply, with suitable adjustments, to the micro level of individual decision-making. Cohen also charges Rawlsâes constructivism with systematically conflating the concept of justice with other concepts. Within the Rawlsian architectonic, justice is not distinguished either from other values or from optimal rules of social regulation. The elimination of those conflations brings justice closer to equality. (shrink)