Este trabajo tiene un doble objetivo. En primer lugar, presentar dos paradigmas elaborados por Roberto Esposito y por Eligio Resta para pensar (con) otra racionalidad jurídica: derecho impersonal y derecho viviente. En segundo lugar, situar la genealogía de ambos paradigmas en las reflexiones suscitadas en el primer cuarto del siglo XX con Simone Weil y el debate Hans Kelsen-Eugen Ehrlich. La idea principal es plantear una singularidad jurídica en el interior de la Italian Theory.

Philosophers have used the terms 'impersonal' and 'personal value' to refer to, among others things, whether something's value is universal or particular to an individual. In this paper, I propose an account of impersonal value that, I argue, better captures the intuitive distinction than potential alternatives, while providing conceptual resources for moving beyond the traditional stark dichotomy. I illustrate the practical importance of my theoretical account with reference to debate over the evaluative scope of cultural heritage.

Matthew Babb offers a strikingly elegant argument for, and explanation of, the essential indexicality of intentional argument. His two key thoughts are that intentional action always involves intentions, and intentions are essentially indexical. In particular, every intention is indexically about the agent whose intention it is, i.e. de se. In this paper, I set out two models on which at least some intentions are not de se—they are impersonal—and I show that these models are compatible with the data Babb (...) points to. I also set out some more data that an account of essential indexical cases ought to be responsive to. Its span suggests that the claim that all intentions are de se, even if true, cannot be what explains what is going on in essential indexical cases involving intention. (shrink)

How does the concept of a person affect our beliefs about ourselves and the world? In an intriguing recent addition to his established Reductionist view of personal identity, Derek Parfit speculates that there could be beings who do not possess the concept of a person. Where we talk and think about persons, selves, subjects, or agents, they talk and think about sequences of thoughts and experiences related to a particular brain and body. Nevertheless their knowledge and experience of the world (...) is unaffected, in that it is largely like our own. It is their view of ‘themselves’ that is different (and superior) to ours. My paper critically assesses this ‘impersonal beings’ hypothesis through an examination of Parfit’s construal of the concept of a person. I argue that Parfit’s understanding of the concept of a person undermines his impersonal beings hypothesis. (shrink)

Pseudonymous mathematician Nicolas Bourbaki and his lesser-known counterpart E.S. Pondiczery, devised respectively in France and in Princeton in the mid-1930s, together index a pivotal moment in the history of modern mathematics, marked by international infrastructures and institutions that depended on mathematicians’ willingness to play along with mediated personifications. By pushing these norms and practices of personification to their farcical limits, Bourbaki’s and Pondiczery’s impersonators underscored the consensual social foundations of legitimate participation in a scientific community and the symmetric fictional character (...) of both fraud and integrity in scientific authorship. To understand authorial identity and legitimacy, individual authors’ conduct and practices matter less than the collective interpersonal relations of authorial assertion and authentication that take place within disciplinary institutions. (shrink)

The rationality of concern for oneself has been taken for granted by the authors of western moral and political thought in a way in which the rationality of concern for others has not. While various authors have differed about the morality of self-concern, and about the extent to which such concern is rationally required, few have doubted that we have at least some special reasons to care for our selves, reasons that differ either in degree or in kind from those (...) we have to care for others. The rationality of prudence as traditionally conceived was thus taken to be threatened by Lockean accounts of personal identity. For taking a person’s identity through time to consist in psychological continuity is often thought to result in the numerical distinctness of his present and future selves, thus leaving his present self in the unsavoury position of having to ask, “Why care specially about my future self, if he won’t really be me?”. (shrink)

The young Edmund Husserl stressed that the success of his philosophy hinged upon his ability to determine the subject and the predicate of impersonal propositions and their expressions, such as ‘It is raining’. This essay accordingly investigates the tenability of Husserl’s early thought, by executing the first study of his analysis of impersonal propositions from the late 1890s. This examination reshapes our understanding of the inception of phenomenology in two ways. First, Husserl pinpoints the subject by outlining why (...) impersonal expressions are employed during communication. This contravenes interpretations of the early Husserl as uninterested in intersubjectivity. Second, by studying how Husserl determines the predicate by investigating existential propositions, I show that Husserl, in the late 1890s, came to his final view on the concept of being. (shrink)

Suppose you and I are dividing a cake between us. If you divide and I choose, then—under standard assumptions—the distribution will be not only fair, but also envy-free. That is, neither of us prefers the other slice. The question that interests me in this essay, however, is the relationship between envy and fairness. Specifically, is it merely a coincidence that the envy-free distribution is fair, or does envy-freeness capture something important about fairness? I argue that envy-freeness does indeed capture something (...) about fairness. Yet, envy-minimizing—the compromise approach—does not. I first show that fairness does not plausibly require envy-minimizing; I then offer an explanation. Namely, envy-minimizing depends on the assumption that all envy is normatively equivalent. This assumption, however, is false. To illustrate, I introduce two types of envy—personal envy and impersonal envy—and show that impersonal envy is normatively significant in a way that personal envy is not. Specifically, impersonal envy is compatible with the rules of mutual justifiability; personal envy is not. I then use this distinction to explain the relationship between fairness and envy-freeness. In the process, the essay provides guidance on the fair division of heterogeneous and non-divisible goods. (shrink)

The rationality of concern for oneself has been taken for granted by the authors of western moral and political thought in a way in which the rationality of concern for others has not. While various authors have differed about the morality of self-concern, and about the extent to which such concern is rationally required, few have doubted that we have at least some special reasons to care for our selves, reasons that differ either in degree or in kind from those (...) we have to care for others. The rationality of prudence as traditionally conceived was thus taken to be threatened by Lockean accounts of personal identity. For taking a person’s identity through time to consist in psychological continuity is often thought to result in the numerical distinctness of his present and future selves, thus leaving his present self in the unsavoury position of having to ask, “Why care specially about my future self, if he won’t really be me?”. (shrink)

In this essay I propose a semantic analysis of impersonal uses of ‘you’, and related uses of other indexical expressions. The framework I employ is Kaplan’s classic analysis of indexical languages, enriched with independently motivated hypotheses about the identification of the semantically relevant context, and about the employment of generic expressions.

In this essay I propose a semantic analysis of impersonal uses of ‘you’, and related uses of other indexical expressions. The framework I employ is Kaplan’s classic analysis of indexical languages, enriched with independently motivated hypotheses about the identification of the semantically relevant context, and about the employment of generic expressions.

In this paper, I will examine a classof ethical problems that essentially involvescomputers. I will argue that this class of heretoforeunknown ethical problems arise in broadcastcommunication received with a device of some kind, andinvolve what I will call impersonal interaction. Ialso argue that the moral element in such problemslies in a conflict between property rights and freespeech rights. Finally, I will argue that the bestapproach to solving these problems requires thecreation of a new standard protocol for computercommunication rather than (...) laws governing the use ofcomputers. (shrink)

Resumen: A mediados del siglo XX, Blanchot elabora una crítica minuciosa de algunos tópicos de Camus. Su interés, sobre todo, se centra en la renovación camusiana del cogito sintetizada en la fórmula Me rebelo, luego somos. Para Blanchot, el hombre desgraciado ha perdido el poder de decir “Yo” y, por ello, es una figura de lo impersonal que no puede ser reconducida a la persona. Sin embargo, esto no implica la renuncia a la insumisión: Blanchot recupera la figura de (...) Sísifo para mostrar que hay una rebeldía de lo impersonal que excede al hombre, marcando así el camino a la “resistencia de lo neutro” que sería reivindicada por la filosofía francesa e italiana del siglo XXI.: In the mid-20th century, Blanchot developed a thorough critique of some of Camus’ topics. His interest mainly focused on the renewal of the camusian cogito synthesized in the formula “I rebel, therefore we are.” For Blanchot, the hapless man has lost the power to say “I” and is thus a figure of the impersonal that cannot be redirected to the person. Nevertheless, this does not entail a waiver of rebelliousness: Blanchot recovered the figure of Sisyphus to show that there is a rebellion of the impersonal that exceeds man, indicating the way to the “resistance of the neutral” to be claimed by French and Italian philosophy of the 21st century. (shrink)

The rule of law in our society is responsible for preserving personal freedoms in spite of a regulated economy. Thinking about law, Historically, Has moved from personal or authoritarian law to natural law to a theory of consent or contract. Contract depersonalizes human relations, In being regulated by impersonal agencies, Opening the way for government regulation. But this regulation is only of those areas of life which are impersonal and leaves people free with regard to the ends of (...) life. One danger to freedom in a controlled economy is the growth of administrative law. (staff). (shrink)

Literary racial impersonation occurs when a narrative work fails to express the perspective of a minority ethnic or racial group. Interestingly, even when these works express moral themes congenial to promoting empathetic responses towards these groups, they can be met with public outrage if the group’s perspective is portrayed inaccurately. My goal in this paper is to vindicate the intuition that failure to express the perspective of a minority group well renders the work defective, both aesthetically and morally. I argue (...) that available frameworks exploring the connections between aesthetic and moral realms of value are inadequate to analyzing this phenomenon and propose a novel connection between aesthetic and moral values. Specifically, I demonstrate that the primary defect of literary racial impersonation is aesthetic and contingently constitutes a moral defect in our current social context. (shrink)

들뢰즈는 죽음을 둘로 구분한다. 하나가 생물학적인 신체의 소멸로서의 ‘인칭적 죽음’이라면, 다른 하나는 기존의 자아 내지 인격이 붕괴 내지 와해됨으로써 새로운 개체 형성의 계기가 되는 ‘비인칭적’ 죽음이다. 들뢰즈의 강조점은 후자에 있다. 한 개체를 이전과는 전혀 다른 개체로 변화·생성시키는 계기가 되는 것은 오직 후자이기 때문이다. 그렇다면 결과적으로 인칭적 죽음을 자발적으로 택한 들뢰즈의 자살이라는 일화는 어떻게 해명되어야 하는가? 관련하여 하루미 오사키는 들뢰즈의 자살이라는 일화는 두 죽음이 상호 내적으로 결합될 필연성을 가질 수밖에 없음을 입증한다고 주장한다. 비인칭적 죽음에 생물학적 소멸이 전혀 관계하지 않는다면 그는 자살을 (...) 택할 이유가 없다. 반면 안드레 콜롬뱃은 들뢰즈의 자살을 순수한 사건으로서의 비인칭적 죽음이라고 해석한다. 그러나 하루미는 누락하고 있으나 콜롬뱃이 강조하는 바, 들뢰즈의 자살에 대한 논의는 두 종류의 죽음과 무관한 스피노자적 논의에서의 고찰을 필요로 한다. 본 논문은 이상의 두 주석가의 해석을 비교하고, 들뢰즈의 자살에 대한 스피노자적 해석 가능성을 제시한다. (shrink)

This essay examines Elizabeth Grosz's provocative claim that feminist and anti-racist theorists should reject a politics of recognition in favor of "a politics of imperceptibility." She criticizes any humanist politics centered upon a dialectic between self and other. I turn to Spinoza to develop and explore her alternative proposal. I claim that Spinoza offers resources for her promising politics of corporeality, proximity, power, and connection that includes all of nature, which feminists should explore.

Abstract:Contemporary French author Annie Ernaux makes salvaging, recycling, and defying obsolescence into a materialist poetics. Ernaux aligns her textual collages with a late-capitalist incarnation of the Parisian ragpicker. The overlap of the two main tropes in Ernaux’s oeuvre, the axis of reminiscence (embodied here mainly in the works The Years and A Girl’s Story) and the axis of everyday experience in late capitalistic Paris and its suburbs (Exteriors, Things Seen), assemble into a poetics of chiffonnage. In both axes, residues of (...) the everyday are recycled into writing, an effort that reframes the tradition of ragpicking from its context in nineteenth-century Paris into a discourse of waste and recycling. (shrink)

Interviews with female impersonators reveal the social, cultural, and economic aspects of their occupation and the subculture of the homosexual transvestite.

In this paper, I defend the view that the identity of indiscernibles could serve as an adequate basis for a general theory of identity. I then show how a theory of essentialism forces one to modify that general theory. In light of both the original and modified theory, I offer a new resolution of some of the classical and contemporary problems of personal identity.

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 8, Page 40-41, August 2012.

Heide Gerstenberger’s book offers a comparative view of the origins and emergence of the bourgeois state in England and France. Both, according to her, emerged out of ancien-régime type structures which were themselves distinct from feudalism. Whilst recognising the value of Gerstenberger’s attempt to avoid economic reductionism when explaining changing power-structures, it is suggested that analytical tools such as ‘class’, ‘mode of production’ and the ‘state’, which she confines to capitalism, do have considerable utility for the analysis of precapitalist régimes. (...) More importantly, it is suggested that her attempt to maintain that in England, as in France, an ancien-régime type society endured at least to the end of the eighteenth century obscures the fundamentally divergent paths taken by the two countries. This is compounded by her rejection of the idea of a French absolutism and an underestimation of the extent to which power-structures in England were modified by the precocious development of capitalism. Whilst suggesting that a bourgeois public space was able to develop in the interstices of structures of the ancien régime, Gersternberger fails to recognise the extent to which this had transformed the English polity by the mid-seventeenth century. (shrink)

How are claims about what people ought to do related to claims about what ought to be the case? That is, how are claims about of personal obligation, of the form s ought to ?, related to claims about impersonal obligation, of the form it ought to be the case that p? Many philosophers have held that the former type of claim can be reduced to the latter. In particular, they have held a view known as the Meinong-Chisholm Thesis, (...) which, on its simplest formulation, can be stated thus: MCT: s ought to ? if and only if it ought to be the case that s ?s.[i] This thesis, I will argue, is false, and the reason for its falsity is a general problem facing any related attempt to reduce personal to impersonal obligation. (shrink)

Nicholas Rescher presents an original pragmatic defense of the issue of objectivity. Rescher employs reasoned argumentation in restoring objectivity to its place of prominence and utility within social and philosophical discourse. By tracing the source of objectivity back to the very core of rationality itself, Rescher locates objectivity's reason for being deep in our nature as rational animals. His project rehabilitates the case for objectivity by subjecting relativistic and negativistic thinking to close critical scrutiny, revealing the flaws and fallacies at (...) work in the deliberations of those who dismiss objectivity as obsolete and untenable. Rescher takes to task the cultural relativism of contemporary social science and social theory, as well as that of liberalistic political correctness and the postmodern aversion to the normative. In holding such relativistic thinking up to the light of rational argument, he demonstrates that a rejection of objectivity is in fact unreasonable. Rescher further reveals that a relativistic apathy to truth and rightness actually destroys, in effect, the very conception it presumably elucidates. (shrink)

It is thought by some philosophers that certain arguments developed by Peter Strawson in Individuals show that Derek Parfit's claim in Reasons and Persons that experiences can be referred to without referring to persons is incoherent. In this paper I argue that Parfit's claim is not threatened by these arguments.

A promising strategy to make progress in the debate between consequentialist and non-consequentialist moral theories is to unravel the background assumptions of the respective views and discuss their plausibility. This paper discusses a background assumption of consequentialism that has not been noticed so far. Consequentialists claim that morality is about maximizing the impersonal good, and the background assumption is that an appropriate response to the impersonal good is necessarily a response to the impersonal good as a whole. (...) In this paper, I argue that we should understand the impersonal good as a complex good, and that an appropriate responses to a complex good need not be a response to that good as whole. This constitutes a novel objection against consequentialism. (shrink)