El jesuita Francisco Suárez como eminente teólogo, filósofo y jurista de su época juega un papel relevante como precedente en la construcción de las categorías del pensamiento moderno. Una de estas categorías, no contemporánea del doctor eximio, es la de los derechos humanos. Son muchos los autores que anticipan alguno de sus elementos fundamentales ya en el pensamiento en torno al Derecho que desarrolla Francisco Suárez en sus principales tratados de filosofía jurídica y política como el De Legibus y la (...) Defensio fidei. En este trabajo trataremos de conectar la virtualidad del planteamiento suarista en el ámbito de los derechos humanos, explorando en su obra estos antecedentes y la dirección en la que los mismos se dirigen, así como las posibilidades de dialogo que abre en torno a la construcción de la concepción de los derechos humanos en el contexto actual. (shrink)

The will as first mover created in Francisco Suárez: The aim of this paper is to show that Francisco Suarez’s claim that the will is the prime mover of the human actions is grounded in his own metaphysical system. For that purpose, I argue that the will is not necessitated to act by any extrinsic efficient cause: nor by God’s grace, neither by the intellect, the law or fate. For all these active principles are either just a necessary condition for (...) the will’s act or something that necessitates the practical act of the intellect by which it guides the will, but does not affects the will itself. On the other hand, I argue that Suárez’s account on potency and act allows conceiving an efficient cause that is able to determine itself. Besides Suárez distinction between the transcendental sense of potency and act and the predicamental one –among which only the latter is relevant for this matte—, for him act does not perfect potency. Then the will can simultaneously be denominated patient and agent regarding its own action since it does not imply that the will can give itself something it previously lacked. (shrink)

What is commonly called a right has since about 1980 increasingly come to be called a subjective right. In this paper the origin and rise of this solecism is investigated. Its use can result in a lack of clarity and even confusion. Some aspects of rights-concepts and their history are also discussed. A brief postscript introduces Leibniz's Razor.

Peu connue à cause de l’absence d’ouvrage de référence qui la présenterait dans toute son étendue, la pensée politique de Leibniz présente cependant un intérêt non négligeable pour l’histoire de la philosophie politique. En concevant l’homme comme sociable par nature, Leibniz ne fait pas pour autant de l’État l’aboutissement des sociétés naturelles, mais plutôt un moment passager dans la réalisation du monde moral au sein du monde naturel. Dès lors, le meilleur régime pour un tel État, ne résultant pas d’un (...) contrat social bien que sujets et souverain y soient dans un rapport mutuel d’obligation, serait celui qui permettrait d’allier le mieux puissance et sagesse. Refusant tout pouvoir arbitraire, et insistant sur la nécessité de distinguer les pouvoirs, Leibniz considère la monarchie comme le meilleur régime en ce qu’elle serait plus facilement amendable : assisté d’un parlement, le puissant monarque ne pourrait qu’être sage.Little-known because of the lack of a work of reference that would present it in all its extent, Leibniz’s political thought is however of significant interest for the history of political philosophy. By conceiving humans has sociable by nature, Leibniz doesn’t depict the State as the outcome of natural societies, but rather as a passing moment in the realization of the moral world within the natural world. Therefore, the best regime for such a State, not resulting from a social contract although subjects and sovereign are there in a mutual relationship of obligation, would be the one uniting best power and wisdom. Refusing every arbitrary power and emphasizing on the necessity of distinguishing powers, Leibniz considers monarchy as the best regime for it would be more easily improvable: assisted by a parliament, a potent monarch could only be wise[1]. (shrink)

Practical reason and first principle of the natural law in Suárez: The aim of this paper is to examine the Suarecian theory of practical reason and its first principle, which is also the first principle of natural law. Although our main source is Suarez’s De anima, other texts are used as well, including De legibus ac Deo legislatore and Disputationes metaphysicae, wherein the Jesuit author introduces some relevant insights about the first principle of natural law. This paper attempts to show (...) that Suarecian practical reason operates independently of speculative reason and that natural law is a norm of reason, i.e., a practical and directive principle of human actions. (shrink)

Este estudio se propone destacar los resultados ofrecidos en la edición crítica y traducción portuguesa del libro De Legibus Uvm I Da Ley em Geral de F. Suárez, a cargo del mancomunado esfuerzo de investigadores lusos contemporáneos, quienes examinaron esa Obra de jurisprudencia nacida de las lecciones que F. Suárez diera desde 1601-3 y que plasmara en la edición original del tratado de Coimbra en 1612. Subrayo aspectos de la doctrina política que dejarán al descubierto un Suárez plura novavit, influyente (...) en la conformación moderna de la republica democrática. This paper calis the attention on the outcome of the research offered in the critical edition and Portuguese translation of the book De Legibus Livro I Da Ley em Geral de F. Suárez, done by the joint effort of contemporary Researchers, who examined that work of jurisprudence born of the lectures that Suarez gave around 1601-3, and that resulted in the original 1612 edition of the Coimbra treatise. I underline aspects of the political doctrine, which exposes a plura novavit-Suarez that promote a new form of the political regimes and influence in the shaping of the modern democratic republic. (shrink)