Psychology related to areas such as gender, language, education and violence has provided scientific knowledge that is contributing to reducing coercive social relationships and to expanding freedom in sexual-affective relationships. Nonetheless, today there are new challenges that require additional developments. In the area of consent, professionals from the fields of law, gender, education and others, are in need of evidence about conditions in human communication that produce consent differentiating them from conditions that coerce. Up to now, consent has been focused (...) on verbal language, for example, “no means no” or “anything less than yes is no”. Despite the fact that focusing consent on verbal language is a very important part of the problem, and has meant a huge advance, it does not solve most of the issues currently raised, like the famous case of “La Manada” in Spain. This article presents the most recent results of a new line of research, which places the problem and the solution in communicative acts, and not only in speech acts. Even though there might be a “yes” in a sexual-affective relationship, there might be no consent, and it is indeed a coercive relationship if that “yes” has been pronounced in a relationship determined by institutional power or by interactive power. Institutional power may occur if who made the proposal for the relationship is a person in charge of the process of selecting personnel in a company and one of the candidates is the person who received the proposal. Interactive power may occur if who makes the proposal is situated in an equal or inferior position for instance in the company to the person receiving it, but the former threatens to make sextortion to the latter. The potential social impact of this research has been already shown in the cases analyzed for this study. (shrink)

La mujer todavía tiene numerosas barreras para poder acceder al Deporte (Pérez-Ugena, 2020). Esto se debe, tal y como indica Monforte y Úbeda-Colomer (2019) a que los estereotipos de género siguen existiendo en nuestra sociedad. El objetivo de estudio fue analizar los estereotipos de género en la Actividad Física y el Deporte en 51 adolescentes, utilizando para ello variables sociodemográficas y el instrumento de CEGAFD (Granda et al., 2018). Los resultados muestran que, en la mayoría de los ejemplos, se toma (...) como referente el sexo masculino, destacando también, diferencias significativas en la variable de Estereotipos de Género en el Deporte. (shrink)

We argue that prediction success maximization is a basic objective of cognition and cortex, that it is compatible with but distinct from prediction error minimization, that neither objective requires subtractive coding, that there is clear neurobiological evidence for the amplification of predicted signals, and that we are unconvinced by evidence proposed in support of subtractive coding. We outline recent discoveries showing that pyramidal cells on which our cognitive capabilities depend usually transmit information about input to their basal dendrites and amplify (...) that transmission when input to their distal apical dendrites provides a context that agrees with the feedforward basal input in that both are depolarizing, i.e., both are excitatory rather than inhibitory. Though these intracellular discoveries require a level of technical expertise that is beyond the current abilities of most neuroscience labs, they are not controversial and acclaimed as groundbreaking. We note that this cellular cooperative context-sensitivity greatly enhances the cognitive capabilities of the mammalian neocortex, and that much remains to be discovered concerning its evolution, development, and pathology. (shrink)

Two important questions arise concerning the properties that constitute the phenomenal characters of our experiences: first, where these properties exist, and, second, whether they are tied to our consciousness of them. Such properties can either exist externally to the perceiving subject, or internally to her. This article argues that phenomenal characters, and specifically the phenomenal characters of colours, may exist independently of consciousness and that they are internal to the subject. We defend this combination of claims against a recent criticism (...) according to which the unconscious phenomenal character of colours exists externally to the subject. We defend internalism about (potentially unconscious) phenomenal character by appealing to recent neuroscientific and behavioural evidence, and by rejecting the claim that externalism about phenomenal character is dialectically in a better position than internalism. In addition, we briefly present certain difficulties for externalist views of phenomenal character. These concern cases where the perceptual relation fails, but a perceptual experience still results. These points suffice to defuse the externalist critique of our view, and support the internalist variant of the consciousness-independence claim as the most plausible account of the unconscious phenomenal character of colours. (shrink)

Faz uma digressão acerca de alguns aspectos do 'Tratado de direito natural', sem esgotar suas possibilidades analíticas. Pretende, ao inserir a obra em seu contexto de produção, discutir a relação entre o direito natural tal como foi expresso por Tomás Antonio Gonzaga e as possibilidades de interpretação abertas pelo direito português de então.

Text se formou polemiky zabývá otázkou, zda je možné rozřešit filozofický spor mezi realismem a konstruktivismem. Oproti mínění Jaroslava Peregrina hájí autor tezi, že tento spor rozřešit lze, a to ve prospěch realismu. Argumenty pro realismus jsou výrazně přesvědčivější, zatímco konstruktivistické argumenty nejsou ničím podložené a zároveň vedou k absurdním důsledkům. The text adresses, in a polemical fashion, the question whether the philosophical dispute between realism and constructivism can be resolved. Against the opinion of Jaroslav Peregrin, the author defends the (...) thesis that this dispute can be resolved, in favor of realism. The arguments for realism are much more convincing, while constructivist arguments are baseless and at the same time lead to absurd consequences. (shrink)

Tento článek se zabývá problémem těžké volby při srovnávání dvou velmi odlišných alternativ. Takové srovnání můžeme akceptovat jako skutečné dilema, nebo odmítnout jako chybné posouzení, protože se srovnává něco nesrovnatelného. Ale co přesně namítáme, když někoho kritizujeme, že srovnává nesrovnatelné? Co vlastně znamená, když o někom řekneme, že srovnává jablka s hruškami? Ukážeme si, že hlavním zdrojem problému není skutečnost, že se srovnávají položky různého druhu, ale spíše potřeba zohledňovat relevantní kontexty. Náročnost porovnání je úzce svázána s náročností jeho zdůvodnění. (...) Skutečnost, že se srovnává nesrovnatelné, se pak projevuje ve vadách takového zdůvodnění. Zejména v tom, že se nedostává uspokojivá odpověď na praktické otázky, proč se v daném kontextu porovnávají zrovna tyto dvě položky, proč se zde porovnávají podle tohoto a ne jiného kritéria a co z takového porovnávání pro tento kontext vlastně vyplývá. Problém srovnávání nesrovnatelného bude ilustrován na příkladech z estetiky, etiky a teorie práva. This article deals with the hard choice when comparing two very different alternatives. Such a comparison can be accepted as a true dilemma or it can be rejected as a wrong evaluation because it is compared something incomparable. But what exactly do we object to by criticizing someone for comparing the incomparable? What does it mean to say that someone compares apples with oranges? I will show that the main source of the problem is not the fact that items of different kinds are compared, but rather the need to take into account relevant contexts. The difficulty of comparison is closely linked to the hardness of its justification. The fact that it is comparing the incomparable is then reflected in the defects of such a justification. Especially in the absence of a satisfactory answer to the practical questions why just these two items are compared in the given context, why they are compared here according to this and not another criterion, and what follows from such a comparison for this context. The problem of comparing the incomparable will be illustrated by examples drawn from aesthetics, ethics and legal theory. (shrink)

Abstract: Daniel Wegner’s theory of apparent mental causation is often misread. His aim was not to question the causal effectiveness of conscious mental states like intentions. Rather, he attempted to show that our subjective sense of agency is not a completely reliable indicator of the actual causality of action, and needs to be replaced by more objective means of inquiry.

_Europe Thirty Years After 1989_ explores what happened in the former socialist countries during the last thirty years and the reasons behind these events. The authors examine how values, memory, and identity have been transforming these countries since the year 1989.

El principal fundamento de la legitimidad de la ley es su origen democrático. Pero legislar, aparte de implicar una manifestación de voluntad del pueblo o de sus representantes, es un proceso en el que se intercambian argumentos de muy diverso tipo. De la argumentación legislativa emergen exigencias de justificación que se dirigen a quienes participan en la tarea de legislar, pero ello no necesariamente representa una intromisión en la democracia. Antes bien, una ley guiada en su producción por pautas de (...) deliberación y justificación es más resistente a la discrecionalidad jurisdiccional, comenzando porque la claridad e intelegibilidad de una ley, contribuye a la certeza del Derecho. La argumentación legislativa, como aproximación científica a la legislación, presupone un modo de comprender las relaciones entre Política y Derecho, en la que la legitimidad de la política reside en último término el carácter justificado de las decisiones. De hecho, desde una perspectiva metateórica, el elemento que permite diferenciar mejor entre las distintas aproximaciones científicas a la producción de normas se halla la noción de racionalidad legislativa (bastaría decir de ley) subyacente, de modo que la teoría y la técnica o técnicas legislativas serán muy distintas en función de si el punto de partida es una razón instrumental o consecuencialista (enfoque minimalista) o, por el contrario, una noción más compleja, que sin excluir otros aspectos, se encuentre abierta a exigencias de justificación práctica (enfoque maximalista). Por lo demás, la argumentación legislativa se asemeja en unos aspectos y difiere en otros de la argumentación en el ámbito jurisdiccional. Asimismo, presenta peculiaridades en función del ámbito temporal y espacial en el que se desarrolle la argumentación. Tales consideraciones son relevantes, tanto para determinar hasta qué punto son aplicables a la argumentación legislativa las aportaciones de la teoría estándar de la argumentación jurídica, como para concretar el papel que otras disciplinas, como la economía, la sociología o la ciencia política, pueden desempeñar en el proceso de legislación. (shrink)

The present article revolves around the notion of universality and its relation to freedom and temporal orientation in contemporary political thought, with a focus on Susan Buck-Morss' notion of universality. The purpose is twofold. Firstly, I discern and critique the historico-political premises of her approach. Secondly, I suggest an alternative historico-political approach to universality addressing the drawbacks of her approach. I present three objections to her approach. Drawing on Arendt's distinction between liberation and the practice of freedom, I first present (...) a critique of the conceptualisation of freedom on which Buck-Morss' approach hinges, arguing that she overemphasises the moment of liberation. Thereafter, I turn to her reflections on historical orientation. My third objection concentrates on Buck-Morss' concept of universality. As a heuristic tool to expound on my critique, I activate the distinction between fictive and ideal universality as suggested by Étienne Balibar. I contend that Arendt's distinction between liberation and the practice of freedom efficiently elucidates the questions at stake in Balibar's discussion, as well as how his distinction points to the limits of Buck-Morss' argumentation. Ultimately, I contend that these critical remarks open up for a more dialectical approach to universality as a historical-political problem. (shrink)

The article describes the obstacles to the emancipation of Roma women in the family and Czech society. The theoretical side deals with the recent changes in gender roles in the Roma family, changes in the position of Roma women and their discrimination as well as the concept of emancipation. The article aims to describe the obstacles a Roma woman must overcome in the course of emancipation. The data are based on qualitative socio-ethnographic research conducted through narrative interviews with 30 women (...) of different ages and classes who identify as Roma and live in three Czech regional capitals. The research sample was compiled using the snowball method. The data collected in the field research were analyzed in Atlas.ti using anchored theory. We identified five main obstacles to the emancipation of Roma woman. They include obstacles emanating from the family and the majority society as well as obstacles caused by the hegemony of masculinity and those emanating from the woman. By gaining an understanding of relations in Roma families, the situation regarding the emancipation of Roma women and the associated barriers may help those who come into daily contact with the Roma minority to take appropriate actions and apply the right interventions. (shrink)

Within current trends in cultural and narrative Victimology, the role of direct and indirect victims’ narrative testimonies is highlighted considering the limits of scientific knowledge to transmit and understand victims’ experiences across time in relation to the social processes of victimisation and reparation. Through the selection of some excerpts of open narratives, as examples of those experiences, within and outside Spain, this text explores some parallelisms and differences in the stories of victims of terrorism and victims of other serious crimes, (...) in terms of a critical interpretation of the concepts of epistemic justice and resilience, both understood under interdisciplinarity. (shrink)

The aim of the present study was to determine statistical differences in a set of badminton competition matches in five different modalities with regard to competition level (Group Phase versus Eliminatory Phase). Data from 453 sets (125 in men’s singles; 108 sets in women’s singles; 77 sets in men’s doubles; 73 in women’s doubles and 70 in mixed doubles) from the RIO 2016 Olympics Games were recorded and classified in two groups of variables to analyse variables related to match (5) (...) and set (15). A descriptive analysis and univariate test (Mann Whitney U) for non-parametric data were conducted. The results show in men’s and women’s singles all the variables related to match were higher in the Elimination Phase than in the Group Phase (p<0.01). In Sets 1 and 3, the longest set duration, rally and average rally were found in the Elimination Phase than Group Stage (p<0.05). In women’s singles, these differences were also recorded in Set 2. For doubles, the results are more stable among groups. Men’s doubles had a longer duration of the match and set (set 1 and set 2) (p<0.01), and also scored highest for average rally strokes (set 1 and set 3) (p<0.05) and shuttles used in the Elimination Phase versus the Group Phase along the match (p<0.01). In women’s doubles, more shuttles were used in a match in the Elimination than in the Group Phase. Moreover, the same results are established for Set 2, including for average rally. Mixed doubles saw no match going to three sets. However, the greatest differences showed a longer rally and average rally being registered in the Elimination than in the Group Phase. In conclusion, the timing factors of the badminton singles and doubles games were different in the Elimination and Group Phases. This information may help players and coaches prepare and administer different types of workouts or, more specifically, competition schedules adapted to the characteristics of modern badminton. (shrink)

Tomáš Hauer v publikaci věnované soudobým postmoderním teoriím nejprve vysvětluje genealogii pojmu postmodernismus a analyzuje francouzské filosofické myšlení na cestě od strukturalismu k postmodernismu. Na základě této analýzy pak vymezuje současný postmoderní kulturní obrat a zamýšlí se nad rolí veřejného prostoru v postmoderní společnosti. Čtenář se m.j. seznámí s dílem francouzských filosofů J. Derridy, J. F. Lyotarda, G. Deleuzeho, J. Baudrillarda či italského filosofa G. Vattima. Kniha je tak vhodným úvodem do problematiky postmoderního myšlení.

Many philosophers believe that our ordinary English words man and woman are “gender terms,” and gender is distinct from biological sex. That is, they believe womanhood and manhood are not defined even partly by biological sex. This sex/gender distinction is one of the most influential ideas of the twentieth century on the broader culture, both popular and academic. Less well known are the reasons to think it’s true. My interest in this paper is to show that, upon investigation, the arguments (...) for the sex/gender distinction have feet of clay. In fact, they all fail. We will survey the literature and tour arguments in favor of the sex/gender distinction, and then we’ll critically evaluate those arguments. We’ll consider the argument from resisting biological determinism, the argument from biologically intersex people and vagueness, the argument from the normativity of gender, and some arguments from thought experiments. We’ll see that these arguments are not up to the task of supporting the sex/gender distinction; they simply don’t work. So, philosophers should either develop stronger arguments for the sex/gender distinction, or cultivate a variety of feminism that’s consistent with the traditional, biologically-based definitions of woman and man. (shrink)

Modalists think that knowledge requires forming your belief in a “modally stable” way: using a method that wouldn't easily go wrong, or using a method that wouldn't have given you this belief had it been false. Recent Modalist projects from Justin Clarke-Doane and Dan Baras defend a principle they call “Modal Security,” roughly: if evidence undermines your belief, then it must give you a reason to doubt the safety or sensitivity of your belief. Another recent Modalist project from Carlotta Pavese (...) and Bob Beddor defends “Modal Virtue Epistemology”: knowledge is a belief that is maximally modally robust across “normal” worlds. We'll offer new objections to these recent Modalist projects. We will then argue for a rival view, Explanationism: knowing something is believing it because it's true. We will show how Explanationism offers a better account of undermining defeaters than Modalism, and a better account of knowledge. (shrink)

The paper addresses the recurrent charge that Richard Rorty is a “linguistic idealist”. I show what the charge consists of and try to explain that there is a charitable reading of Rorty’s works, according to which he is not guilty of linguistic idealism. This reading draws on Putnam’s well-known conception of “internal realism” and accounts for the causal independence of the world on our linguistic practices. I also show how we can reconcile this causal independence of things and the sense (...) of our discourse being guided by them with our autonomy with regard to the construction of various “vocabularies” with which we describe, or cope with, reality. In the final part, I address in some detail Rorty’s animadversions concerning the idea of the intrinsic nature of reality. I show them to be only partly successful. (shrink)

Las 15 piezas que ahora lo conforman abrevan en la Historia, en confeciones personales y entrevistas, y mezclan la literatura y el periodismo de manera audaz y perfecta. Los protagonistas son hombres excepcionales y el momento que se ha elegido para contar son las visperas de sus muertes -tal vez el momento de mayor soledad y de mayor intimidad de un hombre. A traves de la magistral escritura de Tomas Eloy Martinez tenemos el privilegio de asistir a los ultimos minutos (...) de sus vidas, el momento previo a perderlo todo y cuando, resistiendo a la indiferencia del mundo, se suena con alguna inmortalidad. (shrink)

Many contemporary epistemologists hold that a subject S’s true belief that p counts as knowledge only if S’s belief that p is also, in some important sense, safe. I describe accounts of this safety condition from John Hawthorne, Duncan Pritchard, and Ernest Sosa. There have been three counterexamples to safety proposed in the recent literature, from Comesaña, Neta and Rohrbaugh, and Kelp. I explain why all three proposals fail: each moves fallaciously from the fact that S was at epistemic risk (...) just before forming her belief to the conclusion that S’s belief was formed unsafely. In light of lessons from their failure, I provide a new and successful counterexample to the safety condition on knowledge. It follows, then, that knowledge need not be safe. Safety at a time depends counterfactually on what would likely happen at that time or soon after in a way that knowledge does not. I close by considering one objection concerning higher-order safety. (shrink)

Feminism has long grappled with its own demarcation problem—exactly what is it to be a woman?—and the rise of trans-inclusive feminism has made this problem more urgent. I will first consider Sally Haslanger’s “social and hierarchical” account of woman, resulting from “Ameliorative Inquiry”: she balances ordinary use of the term against the instrumental value of novel definitions in advancing the cause of feminism. Then, I will turn to Katharine Jenkins’ charge that Haslanger’s view suffers from an “Inclusion Problem”: it fails (...) to class many trans women as women. Jenkins offers a novel norm-relevancy account of woman to avoid the Inclusion Problem. Unfortunately, Jenkins’ account has serious internal problems, i.e. problems by Jenkins’ own lights: it is unintelligible, or it suffers from an Inclusion Problem of its own. After that, I will develop novel arguments for the conclusion that the project of Ameliorative Inquiry is both incoherent and also impossible to complete—at least, impossible to complete in a trans-inclusive way. Trans-inclusive feminism, therefore, would do well to move beyond Ameliorative Inquiry. Insofar as that’s not possible, trans-inclusive feminism inherits the incoherence of Ameliorative Inquiry. (shrink)

ABSTRACT We exist only because we inhabit a world in common, embedded within networks of associations between humans and nonhumans. This is endlessly disclosed by our experience of the world. And yet, despite its palpability, it is clear that we have failed to mobilize a notion of the common world into something capable of guiding our modes of thought and collective forms of activity—our attitudes, our affective lives, our politics. How have we arrived here? Bruno Latour's work suggests that an (...) answer can be found in the common world's status as information—its self-evidence works to exclude it from a world of values. What, then, should be done? In his recent work on the modes of existence Latour develops a pragmatic metaphysics inspired by the speculative method of Alfred North Whitehead. Metaphysical speculation becomes a tool for moving beyond the “bifurcation of nature” through the construction of abstractions with which to interpret the pluralism of experience. Rather than thinking of the common world as either a given fact or as a totalizing universal, Latour develops a notion of a common world out of the messiness of experience and, as such, hopes to transform us into beings who would be moved to actively pursue and care for such a notion. (shrink)

Do the facts of evolution generate an epistemic challenge to moral realism? Some think so, and many “evolutionary debunking arguments” have been discussed in the recent literature. But they are all murky right where it counts most: exactly which epistemic principle is meant to take us from evolutionary considerations to the skeptical conclusion? Here, I will identify several distinct species of evolutionary debunking argument in the literature, each one of which relies on a distinct epistemic principle. Drawing on recent work (...) in epistemology, I will show that most of these initially plausible principles are false, spoiling the arguments that rely on them. And we will see that each argument threatens only one popular view of moral psychology: a “Representationalist” view on which our moral judgments rely crucially on a mental intermediary—e.g. a sentiment, gut reaction, or affect-laden intuition—delivered by our evolved moral faculty. In the end, only one evolutionary debunking argument remains a menace: an “ Argument from Symmetry ” that I will introduce to the literature. But we will see that it should worry only all naturalists, pressuring them into a trilemma: give up moral realism, accept a rationalism that is incongruous with naturalism, or give up naturalism. Non-naturalists are free and clear. (shrink)