The contribution that may come from the general science of signs, semiotics, to the planning and development of education and learning at all levels, from early schooling through to university education and learning should not be neglected. As Umberto Eco claims in the “Introduction” to the Italian edition of his book Semiotica and Philosophy of Language (1984: xii, my trans.), “[general semiotics] is philosophical in nature, because it does not study a particular system, but posits the general categories in light (...) of which different systems can be compared. And for general semiotics philosophical discourse is neither advisable nor urgent: it is simply constitutive.” To the title of their book Semiotic Theory of Learning, at the centre of our attention in the present text, Andrew Stables, Winfried Nöth, Alin Olteanu, Sébastien Pesce, and Eetu Pikkarainen, rightly add the subtitle New Perspectives in the Philosophy of Education. This multivoiced contribution to research in learning and education in a semiotic framework has a unifying reference in the semiotics of Charles S. Peirce, but without disregarding an array of other distinguished exponents of the teaching and education sciences from different disciplines, semioticians and philosophers alike. This book, a polyphonic effort, with its appeal to “act otherwise,” and to do so investing in learning and education, no doubt makes a significant contribution in such a direction: education for transformation, for humanizing social change. Beyond evidencing what to us are particularly interesting aspects of the topics under discussion in Semiotic Theory of Learning, we also propose to continue and amplify this multivoiced dialogue. While highlighting still other aspects and contributions made by the same semioticians and philosophers presented by the authors of this book, involving such figures as Charles Peirce, Charles Morris, Thomas Sebeok, John Deely, etc., we have further introduced other voices made to resound throughout, whether directly or indirectly, like that of Victoria Welby, Mikhail Bakhtin, Emmanuel Levinas, Adam Schaff, Ferruccio Rossi-Landi, Marcel Danesi, Augusto Ponzio, and Genevieve Vaughan. (shrink)

This dissertation discusses whether Giacomo Leopardi can be considered a philosophical heir of Giambattista Vico, as some scholars retain, despite the fact that there is no evidence that Leopardi read Vico’s New Science or other works until late ; too late to demonstrate a direct influence of the philosopher’s thought on the deepest nexuses of Leopardi’s reflection. This dissertation clarifies how Leopardi responded to Vico-related questions characterizing the culture of his time through an innovative methodology that looks at the diffraction (...) of Vico’s ideas in Bourbon Restoration Italian culture. This work aims to paint a dynamic picture of Italian nineteenth-century polycentric culture through a geographical organization of the material; it in fact tackles the diffusion of Vico’s works and ideas from Naples to Venice, to Milan, to Leopardi’s hometown Recanati, to Florence, and again to Naples. Not only does this work shed new light on the existence of a Vico-Leopardi philosophical lineage, but it also present an original study of perceptions of time and history and of the dichotomy ancient/modern in Post-Napoleonic Italian culture. (shrink)

This article proposes an interpretation of the work of Giambattista Vico in order to show its relevance for the current debate between liberal universalism and its critics. After a critical reconstruction of its origin at the dawn of Modernity, and having iden- tified rationalism as one of its decisive features, we shall analyse some of the criticisms currently levelled against it by various postmodern authors. The work of Vico and of the traditions from which he drank are found to be (...) a rich source of ideas that may lead us toward a way out of the dead-end that this debate is currently facing. (shrink)

El artículo reconstruye sucintamente, en primer lugar, la historia de la llamada teoría de los climas desde la Antigüedad hasta la Ilustración, prestando especial atención a las ideas de Hipócrates, Aristóteles y Montesquieu. Se demuestra, en segundo lugar, cómo dicha teoría es revaluada al rango de mitología científica en virtud de la nueva configuración epistemológica que la geografía y la climatología adquirieron en el siglo xix. En tercer lugar, se postula que, a pesar de la crisis de su estatuto científico, (...) la teoría de los climas no desapareció en sus efectos, sino que antes bien sobrevivió en la organización colonial y en la construcción ideológica de la hegemonía occidental. Finalmente, a través de un análisis de la categoría «medio» se muestra cómo las relaciones entre el ser humano y sus condiciones geográficas se desarrollan en forma de un rico entramado de influencias que permiten postular una nueva comprensión ética y estética de dicha relación. (shrink)