En este artículo se aborda la distinción contemporánea en filosofía de la ciencia entre una lógica del descubrimiento y una lógica de la investigación. Tal distinción opone el descubrimiento como acción creadora a la actividad científica. A partir de la distinción entre lógica y razonamiento, se sugiere que es plausible recuperar el descubrimiento como parte de la actividad científica, contrario a planteamientos como los de Popper.

The article is focused on one of the first large armed conflicts between Japan and Soviet Union, the Battle of Lake Khasan, which took place in July, 31 - August, 11 1938. In this article, the author analyzes the data of the military casualties of the USSR and Japan in the result of the Battle of Lake Khasan, considering the documentary sources of both countries. To analyze the losses of the Red Army, the data given in the revised sources data (...) is recalculated and revised. By studying the casualties of the countries participating in the conflict, the author points out a great difference between the contemporary information of Russian historical researches on a problem and that of historians in the USSR. In addition, the author points out the mistakes of the Japanese researchers regarding the losses of the USSR and corrects them. It is shown in the article, which types of weapons were more effective considering the nature of the injuries, for example, artillery was very effective, but the bombing of Soviet aviation was almost inconclusive. The effectiveness of Japanese use of cold weapons during hand-to-hand fighting is shown, which is also evident through the nature of injuries. For the first time in Russia, all losses of the Japanese army were tabulated on the basis of the data of the Japan Ministry of Defense. This analysis gives an opportunity to evaluate the Battle of the Lake Khasan from the new side. (shrink)

The article is focused on one of the first biggest armed conflicts between Japan and Soviet Union, battle of lake Khasan, which took place in July, 31 - August, 11 1938. The author analyses the battle of lake Khasan from the perspective of Japanese troops, which draw some conclusions from the conflict. The author considers them as the ‘lessons that Japan learned‘. In particular, the merits and drawbacks of the Japanese army’s actions were analyzed. Drawbacks include problems with supplies and (...) equipment for army, command’s uncoordinated action resulted in disability of Japanese aviation to participate in that armed conflict. Among the merits, strong spirit of the Japanese troops and their capacity to seize the initiative in battle can be named. The other merits were use of the different tactics to destroy enemy’s weapons in the rear of the battlefield, heroism of the sappers, who fought face-to-face against tanks. On the whole, the findings of the Japanese military coincided with an information taken from G. S. Lyushkov, who flew to Japan trying to escape Stalin’s Great Purge and who gave a lot of valuable information regarding the Soviet army to Japan. It should be noted that, on the one hand, the Russian historical science looks at the battle of lake Khasan as a victory of the USSR, on the other hand, in Japan historians are not inclined to believe that this armed conflict ended up with Japan’s defeat. It is believed that the USSR won primarily through the excellence in human resources and well-equipped troops, as well as due to the imperial decree on the prohibition of attacks. (shrink)

El propósito de este artículo es desarrollar una relectura al mecanicismo moderno. Esto implica que una adecuada comprensión de este consiste, ante todo, en considerarlo como un proyecto antes que un sistema doctrinal consolidado. Para ello se toma como eje la filosofía de Leibniz, la cual, a diferencia del cartesianismo, identifica las inconsistencias que implica concebir el mecanicismo como un sistema filosófico completo, principalmente al pretender justificar mecánicamente el mundo natural, esto es, a partir de la figura, el tamaño y (...) el movimiento. Todo lo anterior no implica un rechazo completo del mecanicismo por parte de Leibniz, sino que permite concebirlo como un medio para desarrollar su filosofía, proponiendo una complementariedad entre la causa final y la causa eficiente. de este modo, el mecanicismo es reubicado como un problema metodológico para la ciencia natural antes que como un problema metafísico. This article aims to develop a second reading to the modern mechanicism. This implies that an appropriate understanding of mechanicism consists, above all, in considering it as a project, instead of a consolidated doctrinal system. To do so, we take Leibniz's philosophy as our building blocks, since unlike the Cartesianism, it does identify the inconsistencies implied when we conceive mechanicism as a complete philosophical system, mainly under the pretension to justify the natural world mechanically, that is, based on the figure, size and movement. It does not imply that Leibniz rejects entirely mechanicism, but allows us to understand it as a mean to develop his philosophy, proposing a complementary relationship between final cause and efficient cause. This way, mechanicism is re-posed as a methodological issue for the natural science instead of a metaphysical issue. (shrink)

We analyse the implications of classical liberal and libertarian approaches for distributive justice in the context of social welfare orderings. We study an axiom capturing a liberal non-interfering view of society, the Weak Harm Principle, whose roots can be traced back to John Stuart Mill. We show that liberal views of individual autonomy and freedom can provide consistent foundations for welfare judgements. In particular, a liberal non-interfering approach can help to adjudicate some fundamental distributive issues relative to intergenerational justice. However, (...) a strong relation is established between liberal views of individual autonomy and non-interference, and egalitarian principles in the Rawlsian tradition. (shrink)

Journal of Political Philosophy, Volume 30, Issue 3, Page 370-394, September 2022.

Kasahara, Javier. “Una relectura leibniziana al mecanicismo.” _Eidos_ 22 (2015): 35-48.

In 1937, the Japanese economist Kaname Akamatsu discovered specific links between the rise and decline of the global peripheries. Akamatsu’s theory of development describes certain mechanisms whose working results in the narrowing of the gap between the level of development of the economy of developing and developed countries, and, thus, in the re-structuring of the relationships between the global core and the global periphery. Akamatsu developed his model on the basis of his analysis of the economic development of Japan (...) before World War II, with a special emphasis on the development of the Japanese textile industry. Akamatsu’s catch-up development includes three phases: import of goods, organization of the production of previously imported products, and export of those goods. This model proved to be productive for analyzing the development of many other developing countries, especially in East Asia, making the theory of flying geese popular among the economists of these countries, as well as the whole world. The “flying geese” model produces certain swings that may be denoted as Akamatsu waves. Akamatsu waves may be defined as cycles (with a period ranging from 20 to 60 years) that are connected with convergence and divergence of core and periphery of the World System in a way that explains cyclical upward and downward swings (at global and national levels) in the movements of the periphery countries as they catch up with the richer ones. (shrink)