La interpretación monista de la ontología de Parménides aquí propuesta parece confirmada por la lógica ineludible que impregna enteramente su pensamiento. A pesar del carácter fragmentario de su poema, es posible reconstruir la férrea racionalidad de la ontología parmenídea. Esta lógica intrínsecamente coherente pone de manifiesto la absoluta necesidad de la naturaleza monística del ser. En esta perspectiva parece evidente la absoluta incompatibilidad de la perfecta racionalidad y coherencia de la verdad con la dimensión engañosa e inconsistente de la doxa.

Enlightenment confidence in reason and in our individual powers of reasoning have been subjected to growing criticism. One criticism is that Enlightenment universalism about reason has provided a cover story for cultural if not economic or political imperialism. I identify and criticize three central assumptions about reason common from the Enlightenment to the present day: That reason and tradition are distinct, if not conflicting intellectual resources; that reason is inherently a power of individuals; and that rejecting individualism in epistemology entails (...) historicist relativism. The contemporary debates between defenders of universalist views of reason and their multi-culturalist critics reproduce on an inter-cultural level the contests between Christian religious sects that originally compelled the development in Europe of Enlightenment views of reason. Both sets of debates recapitulate at a practical level the theoretical issues posed by dogmatism and question-begging , problems crystallized in Sextus Empiricus' Dilemma of the Criterion. I contend that rectifying the three erroneous Enlightenment assumptions about reason shows that Sextus' Dilemma can be resolved by a constructive account of self- and mutual criticism. This account provides a constructive response to the contemporary debates between the Enlightenment and its multi-culturalist critics. Surprisingly, the basic views required for a tenable, enlightened account of reason were developed by Hegel, whose views have been widely misunderstood because they have been forced into the very dichotomies against which Hegel argued convincingly. (shrink)

São inúmeras as interpretações que os modernos dão à obra de Ockham. No presente artigo, o autor afirma que Ockham é o primeiro pensador a conceber a explicação filosófica não mais como uma série de explicações concatenadas, a partir de princípios aceitos, mas como uma estratégia racional, que permite aos filósofos evitar uma série de problemas linguísticos e conceituais.

--- abstract is not requested by the Editor.

The recent publication of the books La razionalità, by Paolo Labinaz, and I modi della razionalità, edited by Massimo Dell’Utri and Antonio Rainone, offers the opportunity to provide an overview of some important discussions on rationality. In particular, I highlight how the modern and Cartesian ideal of this notion is undergoing a transformation that is enhanced by results coming from empirical studies in the field of cognitive science. These transformations are visible in many ambits concerning rationality: this discussion (...) privileges the traditional ones, i.e., logical, theoretical, and practical rationality. (shrink)

Why "System and Freedom"? Why "Rationality and Improvisation"? These are the two questions that are at the origin of the conference "System and freedom. Rationality and improvisation between philosophy, art and human practices". The conference, held on 28-31 January 2015 in the premises of the University of Turin and organized by the Center for Philosophical-religious Studies Luigi Pareyson, thanks to funding from the Piedmont Region, and with the sponsorship of the Interuniversity Center of Morphology Francesco Moiso, had a large audience (...) participation. There have been many reasons and reflections reported in this article, on the theme of improvisation and freedom, analyzed from a philosophical point of view. The very high quality of the speeches from the invited speakers and of all the speakers, the wide and lively public participation and certainly the intensity of the discussions contributed to the success of this long meeting. (shrink)