Parmenides and Melissus employ different deductive styles for their different kinds of argumentation. The former’s poem flows in an interesting sequence of passages: contents foreword, methodological premises, krisis, conclusions and corollaries. The latter, however, organizes an extensive process of deduction to show the characteristics of what is. In both cases, the strength of their argument rests on their deductive form, on the syntactical level of their texts: the formal structure of their reasonings help to identify the features and logical intersections (...) of their thoughts. On the one hand, Parmenides uses modal reasoning, enforcing the employment of the principle of the excluded middle. On the other hand, Melissus radicalizes the use of modal reasoning and employs counterfactual statements in order to develop his doctrine of what is. Despite their differences, both deserve a place in the Stone Age of logic and theory of argumentation due to their common ambition to demonstrate what is. (shrink)

Species are considered the basic unit of biological classification and evolution. Hence, they are used as a benchmark in several fields, although the ontological status of such a category has always been a matter of debate. This paper aims to discuss the problem of the definition of species within the new mechanistic approach. Nevertheless, the boundary between entities, activities, and mechanisms remains difficult to establish and always requires an analysis of what is meant by explanation. As a case study, the (...) paper describes the debate concerning the species category by considering different kingdoms: Animals, Bacteria, and Fungi. The inherently biological differences between those groups prevent the use of a single, universally applicable concept of species that could fit the mechanisms responsible for the variability present in these kingdoms. The same issue is encountered within each group, as highlighted through a focus on mammals and microbes. This controversy has given rise to opposite approaches, namely: monism, which looks for a single definition that might account for all species, and pluralism, which admits that different groups of organisms require somewhat different definitions. In order to develop an adequate definition of species, we propose to apply a new mechanistic framework, which considers the ontic-epistemic dimensions of scientific explanation in close parallel. The apt correlation between epistemic and the ontic aspects highlights the way in which the concept of species and the reference to data are strictly co-determined. This suggests that the concept of species is better understandable within a dual ontic-epistemic approach. (shrink)

This book offers twelve examples, from 1600-2000, of the development of scientific ideas that were shaped by religious factors. Understood in this way, the development of science is deeply influenced by theological ways of thought.

Indice: 1. Astronomia e tecnica di Ilario Altobelli; 2. Altobelli e i sistemi di mondo; 3. Altobelli e Regiomontano nella Demonstratio Ostendens artem dirigendi; 4. Conclusioni. Ilario Altobelli nasce nel 1610 nella regione italiana delle Marche, precisamente a Montecchio. Fu frate minore conventuale, ben presto occupato in incarichi didattici e pastorali dell’Ordine prima e come annalista poi2. La sua attività si svolse soprattutto tra Fermo, Ancona e Verona. Conosciuto per l’abilità retorica, fu teologo presso vari cardinali e fu il cardinale (...) Conti ad Ancona a mostrargli il Sidereus nuncius di Galileo 3. Altobelli si occupava infatti di matematica e di astronomia, ed ebbe... (shrink)

…sit necessaria sciencia mathematice ad bona anime procuranda.Scientific humanism in the 15th and 16th century witnessed the spread of Greek and Arabic mathematics, whose reading was disciplined by philological research, enriched by the practical sense of abacus masters and diffused by the press. This doesn't mean that before this time many of these works were totally unknown. Around the 13th century mathematics scholars were already familiar with the work of Theodosius, Archimedes, Vitruvius, the Banū Mūsā brothers and so on; however, (...) these works were confined to small intellectual circles, and turned into an object for philosophical speculation.This was the case of... (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to reconstruct the logical structure of Melissus philosophy, building on Laks Most’s translation and Barnes’ seminal work on the Samian. This will allow us to shed some light on the subtle argumentations of Melissus. On top of that, we frame Melissus’ metaphysics employing modern logical instruments. On one side, this reformulation makes clear a few assumptions hidden in the deductions made by the Samian; on the other side, our paper shows that contemporary analytic metaphysics (...) has forerunners dating back 2500 years. (shrink)

Il quinto secolo. Studi di filosofia antica in onore di Livio Rossetti. A cura di S. Giombini e F. Marcacci, Perugia 2010, ss. 752.

The article uses Zeno’s metrical paradox of extension, or Zeno’s fundamental paradox, as a thought-model for the mind-body problem. With the help of this model, the distinction contained between mental and physical phenomena can be formulated as sharply as possible. I formulate Zeno’s fundamental paradox and give a sketch of four different solutions to it. Then I construct a mind-body paradox corresponding to the fundamental paradox. Through that, it becomes possible to copy the solutions to the fundamental paradox on the (...) mind-body paradox. Three of them fail. But one of them – the Aristotelian one – gives us an interesting hint. Finally, this hint is pursued somewhat further and through comparison with Zeno’s fundamental paradox, the impossibility of a solution to the mind-body problem is shown again. The main new point of this article is the comparison of the mind-body problem with Zeno’s fundamental paradox. The article is a revised english version of an article published in: Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 23, 1998, p. 61-75. (shrink)