According to the cohabitation account, all the persons that result from a fission event cohabit the same body prior to fission. This article concerns a problem for this account. Suppose Manuel and Jimena are suffering from an equally painful migraine. Unlike Jimena, however, Manuel will undergo fission. Assuming you have a spare painkiller, whom should you give it to? Intuitively, you have no more reason to give it to one or the other. The problem is that the cohabitation account suggests (...) otherwise. According to the account, there are two persons cohabiting Manuel’s body, in which case you should arguably give them the pill, since doing so alleviates the pain of more beings. One response argues that the two persons cohabiting Manuel’s body share one pain. Thus, giving them the pill alleviates no more pain than giving it to Jimena, and therefore you have no more reason to do one or the other. The goal of this article is to show that this response fails. (shrink)

Jonathan Schaffer has provided three putative counterexamples to the transitivity of grounding, and has argued that a contrastive treatment of grounding is able to provide a resolution to them, which in turn provides some motivation for accepting such a treatment. In this article, I argue that one of these cases can easily be turned into a putative counterexample to a principle which Schaffer calls differential transitivity. Since Schaffer's proposed resolution rests on this principle, this presents a dilemma for the contrastivist: (...) either he dismisses the third case, which weakens the motivation for accepting his treatment of grounding, or else he accepts it, in which case he is faced with a counterexample to a principle that his proposed resolution to the original cases depends on. In the remainder of the article, I argue that the prima facie most promising strategy the contrastivist could take, which is to place some restriction on which contrastive facts are admissible so as to rule out the purported counterexample to differential transitivity, faces some important difficulties. Although these difficulties are not insurmountable, they do pose a substantial challenge for the contrastivist. (shrink)

Kris McDaniel has recently defended a criterion for being an ontological pluralist that classifies the quantifier variantist as one. In this paper, I argue that this is a mistake. There is an important difference between the two views, which is sometimes obscured by a common view in the metaphysics of fundamentality. According to the simple analysis, a language is ideal—it allows for a maximally metaphysically perspicuous description of reality—just in case all its primitives are perfectly natural. I argue that this (...) analysis struggles to distinguish quantifier variance from ontological pluralism, and then I discuss various accounts that can do better. I then propose a criterion for being an ontological pluralist that does not misclassify the quantifier variantist. Finally, I discuss some additional advantages of my proposal. (shrink)

According to the cohabitation account, all the persons that result from a fission event cohabit the same body prior to fission. This article concerns a problem for this account. Suppose Manuel and Jimena are suffering from an equally painful migraine. Unlike Jimena, however, Manuel will undergo fission. Assuming you have a spare painkiller, whom should you give it to? Intuitively, you have no more reason to give it to one or the other. The problem is that the cohabitation account suggests (...) otherwise. According to the account, there are two persons cohabiting Manuel’s body, in which case you should arguably give them the pill, since doing so alleviates the pain of more beings. One response argues that the two persons cohabiting Manuel’s body share one pain. Thus, giving them the pill alleviates no more pain than giving it to Jimena, and therefore you have no more reason to do one or the other. The goal of this article is to show that this response fails. (shrink)

This essay explains why there are good reasons to practice philosophy as a way of life. The argument begins with the assumption that we should live well but that our understanding of how to live well can be mistaken. Philosophical reason and reflection can help correct these mistakes. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that philosophical reasoning often fails to change our dispositions and behavior. Drawing on the work of Pierre Hadot, the essay claims that spiritual exercises and communal engagement mitigate the (...) factors that prevent us from living in accord- ance with our conceptions of the good life. So, many of us have reasons to engage in philosophical reasoning along with behavioral, cognitive, and social strategies to alter our behavior and attitudes so that they’re in line with our philosophical commitments. In these respects, many of us should practice philosophy as a way of life. (shrink)

This essay explains why there are good reasons to practice philosophy as a way of life. The argument begins with the assumption that we should live well but that our understanding of how to live well can be mistaken. Philosophical reason and reflection can help correct these mistakes. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that philosophical reasoning often fails to change our dispositions and behavior. Drawing on the work of Pierre Hadot, the essay claims that spiritual exercises and communal engagement mitigate the (...) factors that prevent us from living in accordance with our conceptions of the good life. So, many of us have reasons to engage in philosophical reasoning along with behavioral, cognitive, and social strategies to alter our behavior and attitudes so that they’re in line with our philosophical commitments. In these respects, many of us should practice philosophy as a way of life. (shrink)

ABSTRACTIn this article, we contextualize and introduce the papers that comprise the special issue, “Bernard Suits’ Legacy: New Inspirations and Interpretations.” The articles discuss the work of S...

Suppose that it was possible to teletransport. The teletransporter would destroy your old brain and body and construct an identical brain and body at a new location. Would you survive teletransportation? Many people think that teletransportation would kill you. On their view, the person that emerges from the teletransporter would be a replica of you, but it wouldn't be you. In contrast, I argue that there's no relevant difference between teletransportation and ordinary survival. So, if you survive ordinary life, then (...) you survive teletransportation. Yet my argument may also show that we have little prudential reason to care about our survival in general. (shrink)

En este artículo defiendo que el problema humeano de la justificación racional de la inducción no ha contribuido a la comprensión filosófica de este tipo de inferencias. La teoría material de la inducción propuesta por Norton (2003) permite analizar el razonamiento inductivo más allá del laberinto justificativo humeano, pero con un corte demasiado alto: asumir que las inducciones dependen intrínsecamente de cómo es localmente la realidad. En su lugar, propongo una teoría de la inducción en la que las inducciones dependen (...) no de tesis ontológicas, sino de las capacidades cognitivas para comprimir información de un modo epistémicamente efectivo. (shrink)

Some bioethicists and political philosophers argue that rich states should restrict the immigration of health workers from poor countries in order to prevent harm to people in these countries. In this essay, I argue that restrictions on the immigration of health workers are unjust, even if this immigration results in bad health outcomes for people in poor countries. I contend that negative duties to refrain from interfering with the occupational liberties of health workers outweighs rich states' positive duties to prevent (...) harm to people in sending countries. Furthermore, I defend this claim against the objection that health workers in poor countries acquire special duties to their compatriots that render them liable to coercive interference. (shrink)

Given current studies in moral psychology and following recent cases of wrong behaviour occurred in elite sporting events ? e.g. the racist chants scandals in the English Premier League or the events following Mourinho's poke in the eye scandal ? I shall analyse the extent to which supporters' brain make-up is determining them to behave in an ?unfair way?. Yet this paper is not just a work on descriptive ethics, but a normative ethics work. Therefore, once I have developed the (...) ?psycho-biological account of sports supporters?, I shall explore whether or not a more virtuous account of sports supporting can be drawn. In order to fulfil this normative task I shall appeal to the concept of ?fair play?. The common view of fair play defines it as ?the act of abiding by the rules?. However, my account of fair play is more complex and it is based on the moral principle of respecting others. This is the reason why fair play is not just something related to athletes but to supporters as well. To conclude, I shall sketch the boundaries of fair-play-based supporting behaviour in order to propose some policies or strategies that can help us to promote a ?healthy? and virtuous behaviour among fans. (shrink)

La condición distribuida en el espacio y en el tiempo del deseo de saber no implica universalidad, sino más bien pluralidad, e incluso pluriversalidad. La universalidad implica tender a “lo Uno”, que desde Platón ha sido concebido como una entidad trascendente. La pluralidad que se propugna en esta contribución, inspirada en Leibniz y en James, se a!rma adversus unum, no versus unum. En consecuencia, se propugna una!losofía pluriversal, que indaga y a!rma la pluralidad en cada uno de los ámbitos que (...) investiga. También se señala el sustrato monoteísta de la universalidad en la lógica escolástica. Frente al monismo lógico-deductivo, que a!rma la existencia de un único modo de racionalidad, esta contribución a!rma la racionalidad pluralista, por contraposición a la racionalidad monista. Finalmente, se sugiere que la propia idea de universidad podría ser reemplazada ventajosamente por instituciones basadas en la multidisciplinariedad y en la pluralidad de perspectivas de análisis: las pluriversidades. "e condition distributed in space and in time of the philosophy does not imply universality, but rather plurality, and even pluriversality. Universality implies a tendency to “the One”, which since Plato has been conceived as a transcendent entity. "e plurality advocated in this contribution, inspired by Leibniz and James, states adversus unum, not versus unum. Consequently, it advocates a pluriversal philosophy, which explores and a#rms the plurality in each of the areas investigated. "e monotheistic substrate of universality in the scholastic logic is also remarked. Facing the logical-deductive monism, which a#rms the existence of a single mode of rationality, this paper claims for a pluralistic rationality, in contrast to the monist rationality. Finally, it is suggested that the very idea of the university could be advantageously replaced by institutions based on multidisciplinary and plurality of perspectives of analysis: pluriversities. (shrink)

El arte como lenguaje es una concepcióncompartida hoy por la Estética, tanto en susteorías filosóficas como científicas. El presente artículo se restringe a las consideraciones filosóficas,y en especial, a las de la teoríahermenéutica de Gadamer. El arte como lenguaje,o como fenómeno hermenéutico, es unatesis contra la idea del arte corno fenómenoestético puro y enfatiza por lo tanto el elementode comprensión y de mediación de sentido,contra el desmedido énfasis en el gusto, lavivencia y la expresividad, propio de la conciencia estética.

El hombre humaniza al mundo, le inyecta, lo impregna de su propia sustancia ideal y cabe imaginar, que un día de entre los días, allá en los fondos del tiempo, llegue a estar ese terrible mundo exterior tan saturado de hombre, que puedan nuestros descendientes caminar por él como mentalmente caminamos hoy por nuestra intimidad (�) cabe imaginar que el mundo, sin dejar de serlo, llegue a convertirse en algo así como un alma materializada, y como en �La Tempestad �de (...) Shakespeare, las ráfagas del viento soplen empujadas por Ariel, el duende de las Ideas. (shrink)

En este artículo se explora el fenómeno religioso en las comunidades virtuales, en las redes sociales y en la computación en nube, el impacto de los medios sociales en el diálogo interreligioso, sus logros y retos, así como la relevancia del diálogo intercultural para crear una sociedad multicultural. En estos días las tecnologías deben ser vistas como formas de vida, ya que su papel es cada vez más relevante en nuestra existencia cotidiana. Discutimos si el diálogo interreligioso puede beneficiarse de (...) un uso positivo e inteligente de internet. ¿Hay beneficios o perjuicios potenciales del uso de internet en el diálogo interreligioso? ¿Está internet desmitificando la religión? ¿Ha pasado de moda el concepto de silencio mistérico propio de las instituciones religiosas? También estudiamos cómo las comunicaciones tecnológicas pueden promover la comprensión, especialmente en las redes sociales y las comunidades virtuales. A pesar de los tópicos de que las comunidades virtuales son frecuentemente superficiales y están apartadas de la vida cotidiana, nos planteamos si pueden añadir valor a una experiencia de vida. ¿Debemos prestar atención a la importancia que las personas atribuyen al diálogo virtual? ¿Puede ser internet un elemento relevante en la experiencia religiosa? (shrink)

In his ethical treatises Aristotle offers a rich account of those conditions that render people’s behaviour involuntary, and defines voluntariness on the basis of the absence of these conditions. This dissertation has two aims. One is to offer an account of the significance of the notions of involuntariness and voluntariness for Aristotle’s ethical project that satisfactorily explains why he deems it necessary to discuss these notions in his Ethics. My own account of the significance of these notions for Aristotle’s Ethics (...) emerges from my arguments against the two most influential views concerning this significance: I argue that Aristotle’s concern with voluntariness in his Ethics is not shaped by a concern with accountability, i.e. with those conditions under which fully mature and healthy rational agents are held accountable or answerable for their actions; nor is it shaped by a concern with the conditioning of pain-responsive agents for the sake of socially useful ends that are not, intrinsically, their own. Rather, his concern is with reason-responsive agents and the conditions for attributing ethically significant behaviour to them. This is what I call ‘ethical ascription’. The second aim of this dissertation is to provide a comprehensive account of those conditions that defeat the ascription of ethically significant pieces of behaviour to reason-responsive agents, and to show the distinctiveness of Aristotle’s views on the nature of these conditions. The conclusions I arrive at in this respect are shaped by the notion of ethical ascription that I develop as a way of reaching the first aim. (shrink)

In a letter of September 1679 to Huygens, Leibniz proposed a calculus situs directly applicable to geometric relations without use of magnitudes. His researehes on this kind of Geometric Calculus were developed along all his life but, unfortunately, only a few Leibniz’ s writings on these matters had been published by Gerhardt and Couturat. They were closely connected to his own researches on Logic Calculus. From a chronological point of view, the unpublished manuscript Circa Geometrica Generalia may be considered as (...) the third most important Leibniz’ contribution on Calculus Situs. CGG summarizes several results obtained by Leibniz from 1679 to 1682 and contains some interesting ideas concerning set theory, geometric axioms, General Topology and Logic Foundations of Geometry.En una carta a Huygens escrita en septiembre de 1679, Leibniz propuso un calculus situs que fuese aplicable al estudio directo de las relaciones geometricas, sin utilizar magnitudes. Sus investigaciones en torno a los Cálculos Geometricos continuaron a lo largo de toda su vida, pero, lamentablemente, Gerhardt y Couturat sólo publicaron una pequeña parte de sus manuscritos sobre estos temas. Estasinvestigaciones estuvieron estrechamente conectadas con los trabajos de Leibniz sobre Cálculos Lógicos. El manuscrito inédito Circa Geometrica Generalia puede ser considerado, desde un punto de vista cronológico, como la tercera más importante contribución de Leibniz al Calculus Situs. En CGG Leibniz resume varios logros obtenidos desde 1679 hasta 1682 y expone ideas interesantes en relación con la Teoría de Conjuntos, los axiomas de la geometria, la Topologia General y los fundamentos logicos de la Geometría. (shrink)

Siendo Muguerza un gran conocedor de Kant, sus críticas a la moral kantiana han ido creciendo con el tiempo. Muguerza ha disentido del principio kantiano de universalización, ha primado el principio de autonomía y ha criticado el reino de los fines para, finalmente, ha elaborado una concepción propia del individualismo moral, basada en la alternativa del disenso. En este artículo se comentan algunas de las críticas de Muguerza a Kant, sobre todo las que atacan el carácter universalista e imperativo de (...) la moral kantiana. Asimismo se comentan otras objeciones al universalismo kantiano, provenientes de las éticas feministas y de la neuroética. Se concluye que el individualismo ético de Muguerza sigue siendo válido, aunque ha de ser reformulado en algunos aspectos. Al final se propone una interpretación axiológica de la moral kantiana, según la cual los principios que afirman Kant y Muguerza son valores que se contraponen entre sí, dando lugar a diferentes concepciones del individualismo ético según se prioricen unos u otros valores. (shrink)