Pragmatic vindicatory genealogies provide both a cause and a rationale and can thus affect the space of reasons. But how far is the space of reasons affected by this kind of genealogical argument? What normative and evaluative implications do these arguments have? In this paper, I unpack this issue into three different sub-questions and explain what kinds of reasons they provide, for whom are these reasons, and for what. In relation to this final sub-question I argue, most importantly, that these (...) arguments are ambiguous about what they give us reasons for, meaning that they can be interpreted both as justifications for recognizing the normative standing of certain norms, values, and practices - and thus for living by them - and as excuses for those that do so. I illustrate this point by reference to the genealogical vindication of honour cultures, showing how the vindicatory argument can illuminate such case as one of excusing moral ignorance. Drawing on legal theory and moral philosophy, I show that different evaluative and normative implications hang on the result of the interpretation as either justification or excuse, and show that this ambiguity is a virtue rather than a limitation. (shrink)

In the last couple of years, two important books concerning moral progress arrived in the press, namely Philp Kitcher’s Moral Progress and Victor Kumar’s and Richmond Campbell’s A Better Ape. In this critical notice, I review both books and problematize the way in which they respectively try to tie together moral progress and the theory of evolution.

Examines the relationship of Derrida’s writings on architecture to his methodology of deconstruction and to deconstrutivism in architecture. Between 1984 and 1994 Jacques Derrida wrote and spoke a great deal about architecture both in his academic work and in connection with a number of particular building projects around the world. He engaged significantly with the work of architects such as Bernard Tschumi, Peter Eisenman, and Daniel Libeskind. Derrida conceived of architecture as an example of the kind of multidimensional writing that (...) he had theorized in Of Grammatology, identifying a rich common ground between architecture and philosophy in relation to ideas about political community and the concept of dwelling. In this book, Francesco Vitale analyzes Derrida’s writings and demonstrates how Derrida’s work on this topic provides a richer understanding of his approach to deconstruction, highlighting the connections and differences between philosophical deconstruction and architectural deconstrutivism. “Although there has been some discussion of the intersection of deconstruction and architecture in the past, mostly among architects and architectural critics, Vitale’s work is distinguished by the fact that it is written by a true philosopher who has a much more acute sense than has usually been the case of the philosophical underpinnings of Derrida’s exchanges with Tschumi, Eisenman, and others. Vitale is throughout concise, precise, insightful, and often brilliant.” — Geoffrey Bennington, author of Interrupting Derrida. (shrink)

In Kant’s logical texts the reference of the form S is P to an “unknown = x” is well known, but its understanding still remains controversial. Due to the universality of all concepts, the subject as much as the predicate is regarded as predicate of the x, which, in turn, is regarded as the subject of the judgment. In the CPR, this Kantian interpretation of the S-P relationship leads to the question about the relations between intuition and concept in judgment. (...) In contrast to intuition, if no concept, due to its universality, refers immediately to an object, how should one understand the relations of S and P to one another, as well as their relations to intuition, which corresponds to the possible individuality of the object in general = x? To answer this question, it is necessary to understand Kant’s notion of extension, and to prove its irreducibility to the Port-Royal notion of extension as well as to the Fregean one. (shrink)

ABSTRACT In times of crisis, interpersonal and group solidarity often emerge as people face critical challenges that threaten their survival. However, it remains unclear whether spontaneous solidarity practices are enough to effectively face such crisis situations. In this paper, we argue that to be fully effective, solidarity must be deployed through all its political tiers, from interpersonal and group relationships to institutional and legal normativity. We contend that solidarity relations can only reach an enduring goal if they solidify into stable (...) principles that can be acknowledged and enacted at the institutional level. Through an examination of recent literature and concrete case studies, the paper investigates the linkages and mutual dependencies between the various levels of solidarity developed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis may allow us to answer the question of whether a “Multilevel European Solidarity” is a realistic goal, and what is required to achieve it. (shrink)

Towards biodeconstruction -- Between life and death: différance -- The absolute programme -- The text and the living -- Between life and death: the bond -- Beyond life death: autoimmunity -- Living on: the arche-performative.

Can we say we live in a post-digital condition? It depends. This paper sets out to distinguish between the current mass digital culture and an authentic post-digital culture. If we mean “post-digital” as the full internalization and awareness of the result of the so-called digital revolution, then it is necessary a philosophical work to discuss related problems, identify the causes and propose solutions. An authentic philosophy of digital will, however, have to start from a clarification of the terms and basic (...) objects of its investigation. Here media theory is inserted as an analytical tool: the purpose of this essay is to outline a road map for a good media theory that interfaces with questions of definition of digital, also in light of the notions of space, time, and matter. As will be seen, the description given here for a “good media theory” does, in fact, coincide with an already existing – and inserted in the contemporary debate – school. In conclusion we will try to delineate the field of philosophical inquiry opened by the clarification brought by the previous analysis, and to suggest a general framework within which philosophy will have to move in order to finally reach the authentic post-digital condition. (shrink)

Wie bekannt unterscheidet Kant eine Anthropologie »in physiologischer Hinsicht« und eine »pragmatische« Anthropologie, aber die Anthropologie bleibt doch stets ein empirisches Wissen und besitzteindeutig keine apriorische Universalität. Umso mehr muss man sich über eine Reflexion aus dem handschriftlichen Nachlass wundern, wo Kant eine »anthropologia transcendentalis« erwähnt. Bei allen Vorbehaltenwegen der Singularität dieser Formulierung besitzt die Stelle eine wichtige Bedeutung und erfordert eine genauere Analyse. Denn in jener Reflexion erklärt Kant auch, dass der Gelehrte vermeiden müsse,ein »Cyclop« zu werden, das heißt (...) die Phänomene mit nur einem Auge zu betrachten. Dies sei nämlich die Haltung des »Egoisten der Wissenschaft «, der »seinen Kräften zu viel zutraut«. Jeder Arzt, Theologe, Jurist, selbst Geometer hat Kant zufolge »noch ein Auge nötig, welches macht, dass er seinen Gegenstand noch aus dem Gesichtspunkte anderer Menschen ansieht«. Dieser Gesichtspunktsteht hier ausdrücklich mit der »Critik« und der »Selbsterkenntnis« des menschlichen Verstandes und der menschlichen Vernunft in Verbindung: die Anthropologie wird hier also nicht nur als »transzendental« charakterisiert, sondern sie wird auch in direkten Zusammenhang mit dem anderen entscheidenden zentralen Titelwort der reifen kantschen Philosophie gebracht: »Kritik«. (shrink)

Introduction and translation into Portuguese of Kant's Reflection 5923 (AA 18: 385-7).

Concerning Descartes and Kant, Michel Fichant and Jean Luc Marion claim that “when Kant thinks, Descartes still implicitly advances”. Yet, is a convergence among ontological theses (Heidegger) sufficient to nullify divergences among methodological grounds? To refuse the relationship of inherency "Descartes in Kant”, it is necessary to move from the standpoint of being to that of thinking, and observe in what sense words like “evidence” and “certainty”, once redefined by Kant, clarify the originality of the methodological problem of the Critique (...) of Pure Reason. (shrink)

Since Kant interprets the logical form of judgment as a subordination of concepts' extensions, how should we understand their relationship to an unknown = x? Against traditional interpretations, elaborated from the background either of analytic philosophy or of Port-Royal Logic, one recovers the specificity of Kant’s notion of extension. It is necessary to distinguish: (1) the predicative relationship between the superior concept P and the inferior concept S, (2) the non-predicative relationship between the intuition of something individual = x and (...) the universals S and P. As a result, one finds out both the reflective and the determinative character of the relationship among universal, particular and singular in judgment. (shrink)

Bernard Williams is universally recognised as one of the most important voices in 20th century moral and political philosophy. Yet his thought has only rarely been the subject of comprehensive analysis and interpretation: more often, attention has focused on his celebrated critiques of specific theoretical paradigms, such as the Kantian and the utilitarian ones. This book attempts to fill this gap. Considering Williams' work in its entirety, it reconstructs the particular and fascinating picture of moral philosophy that emerges from it. (...) The ideal of ethical objectivity acts as a thread running through this reconstruction. More precisely, the basic question guiding the investigation is what remains of this ideal once Williams' critique of three fundamental ideas for moral philosophy has been sifted: that of normative theory, that of ethical knowledge and that of human nature (understood as a possible basis for objective ethical prescriptions). The answer, in a nutshell, is 'very little'. But this does not imply an abandonment to relativism. Rather, the answer implies the need to become aware of the historicity of our values and to re-examine them from a peculiar point of view, both historical and philosophical, in order to assess which ones deserve our trust. As suggested in this book, in the last years of his life Williams offered many useful insights for doing this. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage analyse le rôle des moeurs et des coutumes dans les discours philosophiques modernes et dans l'interrogation des classiques sur la subjectivité, le statut de la morale, la constitution et les limites de la souveraineté.