This article examines the visions on nanosciences and nanotechnologies (N&N) disseminated by a group of Brazilian scientists to legitimize this emergent field of research. For this purpose we analyzed reports on N&N published by the Journal of Science, edited daily by the Brazilian Society for the Progress of Science, from 2002 to 2007, covering the period in which the main events in domestic N&N research policy took place. Our analysis shows that researchers on N&N are spreading visions of progress, efficiency (...) and competitiveness related to the advances in this field, giving little attention to issues such as potential risks, and economic, social and ethical implications of these technologies. (shrink)

The current literature on nanoethics focuses on a wide array of topics such as equity, privacy, military, environment, human enhancement, intellectual property, and security. The identification of those topics leads to the adoption of an ethical stance, which we call the in itself dimension . In this article we argue that even though it is correct to identify the areas where ethical problems are imperative to deal with ( in itself dimension ), it is a partial approach. This is because (...) the in itself dimension pays no attention to another ethical stance; one that does not have anything to do with individual or collective responsibilities, but rather with the socio-economic system into which those responsibilities are embedded. We call this second issue the contextual dimension. (shrink)

El artículo analiza el desarrollo de las nanotecnologías en el contexto de la irrupción de la crisis económica mundial. Comienza destacando los elementos claves de una revolución tecnológica: las características técnicas, el papel en la acumulación de capital y el impacto sobre las clases sociales. Luego se analiza el lugar de la tecnología en el desarrollo, para terminar mostrando cómo las tendencias a la concentración del capital están envolviendo a las nanotecnologías, lo cual puede llevar a un mundo más desigual (...) al que ya existe hoy en día. Las nanotecnologías constituyen la base de la próxima revolución industrial que ya se está estableciendo. Con la irrupción de la crisis económica mundial también las nuevas tecnologías se verán impactadas. Algunos voceros gubernamentales de países desarrollados han mencionado que podrían ser utilizadas como palanca para salir de la crisis, por el contrario en este artículo se presenta el tema en el contexto de las tendencias a la concentración del capital. (shrink)

In a recent article, Sara Ahmed castigates so-called new materialist theorists for their accusations of a biophobia evident in feminism. Biophobia is taken simply to be the claim that feminists do not engage with biological detail in their theorizations, which is demonstrably not the case. However, an elaboration of new materialist usage of biophobia reveals that they are proposing a particular conceptualization of what an engagement with the biological means. They theorize an entanglement and non-separability of the biological with/in sociality, (...) and what they criticize in much feminism is the conventional assumption that the biological and the social are two separate and discrete systems that then somehow interact. If the new materialist arguments are fully contextualized and then applied to the supporting examples given in the article, the new materialist critique is actually borne out. (shrink)

Judith Butler's theory of the constitution of subjectivity conceptualizes the subject as a performative materialization of its social environment. In her theory Butler utilizes Louis Althusser's notion of interpellation, and she critiques the constitutive paradoxes to which its tautological framing leads. Although there is no pre-existing subject, as it is constituted in the turn to the interpellative hail, Butler nonetheless theorizes a guilt and compulsion acting on an “individual” that compels his or her turn to answer the hail. There is (...) a price to pay for subjectivity in Butler's schema: the reprimand of the interpellative law that punishes at the same time as it constitutes. But a return to Althusser's text finds that he does not rely so much on coercion and guilt in his explanation of the subject's answer to the hail. Althusser can instead be read as suggesting that we are already an instantiation and enactment of power-ideology and, to paraphrase Michel Foucault, are already the principle of our own “subjection.” This contests the notion that we are in any way compelled to submit to an external, punitive force to become subjects. As subjects, we are always-already the embodiment of the field of society-power-ideology. (shrink)

This article proposes an interpretation of the status of the Grundnorm in Hans Kelsen’s legal theory which addresses the broader philosophical problem of the ultimate foundation of normativity. It begins by reviewing the main objections that have been raised against Kelsen’s theory, pointing out that most of these can be met by a ‘transcendental’ interpretation of the Grundnorm as a condition of possibility for legal cognition. It then argues that in order to solve the problem of the ultimate foundation for (...) legal validity it is also necessary to read the Grundnorm in light of the parallel category of ‘nomo-dynamicity’, which Kelsen introduced in all his legal writings beginning with the Pure Theory of Law of 1933. This yields a conception of legal validity as an ‘essentially temporal’ category, from the point of view of which the problem of ultimate foundations cannot emerge because the beginning is by definition not situated conceptually within time. The broader conclusion is therefore that overcoming the problem of the ultimate foundation of normativity requires abandoning the theologico-political assumption that valid norms are posited through a sovereign gesture analogous to that through which God is supposed to have created the universe ex nihilo. Construing normativity as ‘essentially temporal’ implies that the search for ultimate foundations must run into a category that is entirely foreign to political theology but well known to phenomenology: that of an ‘always-already’. (shrink)

Moral relativism is deeply troubling for those who believe that, without a set of moral absolutes, democratic societies will devolve into tyranny or totalitarianism. Engaging directly with this claim, Carlo Invernizzi Accetti traces the roots of contemporary anti-relativist fears to the antimodern rhetoric of the Catholic Church, and then rescues a form of philosophical relativism for modern, pluralist societies, arguing that this standpoint provides the firmest foundation for an allegiance to democracy. In its dual analysis of the relationship between (...) religion and politics and the implications of philosophical relativism for democratic theory, this book makes a far-ranging contribution to contemporary debates over the revival of religion in politics and the conceptual grounds for a commitment to democracy. It conducts the first comprehensive genealogy of anti-relativist discourse and reclaims for English-speaking readers the overlooked work of political theorists such as Hans Kelsen and Norberto Bobbio, who had articulated the bond between philosophical relativism and democracy. By engaging with attempts to replace the religious foundation of democratic values with a neo-Kantian conception of reason, this book also offers a powerful case for relativism as the strongest basis for a civic ethos that integrates different perspectives into democratic politics. (shrink)

Christopher Meckstroth’s book The Struggle for Democracy poses and attempts to solve a central problem of democratic theory: what he calls the ‘paradox of authorization’, whereby the very activity of spelling out the political content of democracy is said to potentially contradict its object, since the democratic theorist may end up substituting himself or herself for ‘the people’ in deciding what this form government amounts to in practice. In order to avoid this problem, Meckstroth suggests that the political content of (...) democracy ought to be extrapolated out of concrete political struggles, by submitting competing claims to represent the people’s will to a rational scrutiny that tests them for internal coherence. While pointing out the intrinsic interest and originality of this approach, the review also advances some reservations concerning the posited criterion’s capacity to perform all the work Meckstroth assigns it. In the end, the proposed solution to the ‘paradox of authorization’ may fall prey to it too, since on its own terms the criterion of internal coherence is insufficient to specify any determinate outcomes. This leaves it up to the theorist applying it to decide which concrete proposals best satisfy the test. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The mainstreaming of environmental concerns paradoxically obscures their political dimension: as the goals of environmentalism become accepted, they are reduced to administrative problems to be solved in a purely technocratic way. This technocratic environmentalism has fueled a populist backlash that challenges the scientific basis of environmentalism. As a result, contemporary environmentalism appears to be stuck in a depoliticizing opposition between technocracy and populism. A possible way out of this depoliticizing trap consists in recognizing the intrinsic contestability of the core (...) premises on which environmentalism is based, since it is not merely the result of a straightforward application of scientifically provable facts, but also depends on normative principles and value choices. This opens the possibility for an internal pluralization of environmentalism, which shifts emphasis from the depoliticizing struggle between technocratic environmentalism and populist anti-environmentalism to the inherently political rivalry between different types of environmentalism. (shrink)

BackgroundPsychological support was provided by the Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing Integrative Group Treatment Protocol within the hospitals in the Northern Italy in favor of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of treatment in terms of symptomatology reduction related to peri- and post-traumatic stress; clinical improvement over time; and the maintenance of the achieved outcome over time.MethodsThe population was composed of healthcare workers who spontaneously requested psychological intervention in both the first and the (...) second emergency waves. Statistical analyses were carried out to highlight the differences in Impact of Event-Revised and Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory before and after the group intervention.ResultsIn both the first and the second waves, pre-treatment values are higher than post-treatment values for all dimensions of the IES-R. The results show that there are no significant differences between the first and the second wave with regard to the treatment effect. Healthcare workers maintained positive changes over time despite their prolonged exposure to an emergency and the possibility of retraumatization at the onset of a new emergency phase, irrespective of their working place. Healthcare workers who were treated in the first wave showed at the beginning of the second emergency wave less vulnerability and more resilience than those who were treated only in the second wave.Pre-treatment scores of healthcare workers affected by COVID-19 are discussed.ConclusionCOVID-19 had a significant impact on the well-being of healthcare workers who were working in hospitals. Psychological support in case of emergency is needed. (shrink)

ABSTRACTContrary to what some critics of epistemic democracy claim, the association between democracy and truth does not necessarily make the former inhospitable to conflict, contestation, and pluralism. With the help of John Stuart Mill and William James, truth can be interpreted so as to make it compatible with a democratic politics that appreciates conflict and dissent. In some circumstances, truth claims are politically relevant and should become the object of democratic deliberation.

Este artigo é fruto de uma longa discussão que estabeleci com diversos interlocutores a respeito do desenvolvimento da doutrina das ideias schopenhauerianas. Tal discussão iniciou-se por conta de uma reflexão sobre a filosofia de Mainländer que articulei, via e-mail, no ano de 2006, com o professor Giuseppe Invernizzi; e que, posteriormente, proseguiu autonomamente entre eu e o professor Sossio Giametta, sempre por e-mail. Agradeço, portanto, a ambos por suas contribuições e por suas frutuosas objeções, assim como por suas preciosíssimas (...) observações. Dedico a ambos os professores o resultado de nossa rica e frutuosa troca de opiniões. Agradeço também ao professor Matthias Koβler e a seus doutorandos, Daniel Schubbe e Jens-Peter Lemanski, por terem discutido comigo as teses sustentadas no presente artigo e expostas sob o título de Schopenhauers Ideenlehre durante o Doktorandkolloquium, ocorrido em 16 de fevereiro de 2009, junto à Forschungsstelle da Universidade de Mainz. Enfim, agradeço ao Dr. Alessandro Novembre, com o qual examinei o presente estudo em sua fase de elaboração, por suas sugestões e ponderadíssimas reflexões. (shrink)