Esta reflexión plantea el problema que se da al querer dar cuenta del individuo, como existencia, de manera sistemática en el terreno de las tendencias lógicas de la ética. Sören Kierkegaard, será la guía para plantear que tal pretensión es dañina y se presenta como la imposibilidad para la afirmación de la subjetividad como vitalidad abierta siempre a las posibilidades que ofrece la condición humana. Para el desarrollo de este planteamiento trataremos de confrontar algunos planteamientos de Kierkegaard -sobre todo el (...) de la irreductibilidad de la existencia a sistema- con la eticidad hegeliana en particular, para mostrar cómo se revienta el postulado de un sistema de la existencia. Este reventarse se debe entender no como destrucción de lo dado sino como enfrentamiento de ello y conducción hasta sus últimas consecuencias donde se hace manifiesta la imposibilidad de encerrar la existencia en la estrecha posición de la ética como ciencia normativa, es decir como imperativo de comportamiento y direccionamiento moral de la subjetividad por los carriles del pensamiento que absorbe al ser y que postula a la razón como la directriz de todo proyecto vital. (shrink)

Discussions about technical and technology abound, both in the philosophical field and in all areas of life. Technology crosses our daily life in a total way, it is part of us. Then, aware of this technological breakthrough, in this article we propose to discuss some analyse about the implications of the technology in capitalist societies. In order to do so, we will review the thesis of authors who realized the problem at different times: Herbert Marcuse, Jürgen Habermas and Andrew Feenberg. (...) During the work, we will see how technique and technology serve to establish the existing state of things, however, in its own constitution are the preconditions for a change of that state of things. In this way in will be seen how in the three authors a political character appears in the use of technology, and how, in some way technology -along whit science- serves to create ideology. Whit all this on the table, the article will try to show how technology directly influences the lives of human beings, and under this influences is that it can either to control or to free us. (shrink)

This article explores the possible links between the functionalist perspective and the new postcognitivist line of research in philosophy of mind. At first, we will summarize some approaches concerning the mind-body problem in order to focalize in the particularities of the functionalist proposal, that overcomes an approach to the issue in ontological terms. Then we will establish a link between the philosophy of mind and the cognitive sciences based on the situated cognition approach, establishing some conceptual clarifications about this field (...) of research that is also known in specialized literature as 4E cognition approach or postcognitivism. Finally, we will analize some of the tensions taht arise between the adoption of some aspects of this approach and the functionalism. (shrink)

In this research work the ontological positions of both Deleuze and Žižek will be analyzed, Deleuze argues that the lack, or the being of negation, is an error of representative understanding, while Žižek conceives his philosophy as driven by the absolute lack. An absolute opponent of Žižek's predecessor, Hegel, Deleuze rejects opposition as a constitutive feature of reality. However, Žižek reflects the concepts of Deleuze in his Lacanian reading of Hegel, while these concepts retain identical terms. For example, Žižek calls (...) "l'objet petit a" to the concept of "difference", while his term for absolute negation is "repetition" and, finally, refers to his philosophical system as No-all. These unique concepts in Žižek's thought share a language identical to that of Deleuze. Deleuze's philosophy is one of "difference", while his mode of proliferation is "repetition" and, finally, he often refers to his philosophy as "One-All". By mapping these common terms that do not denote normal language, but are immeasurable inverse logics, it becomes clear that Deleuze and Žižek are mirror images of each other, which are infinitely fragmented through the extension of their respective positions. (shrink)