We argue that the mandatory moral bioenhancement of psychopaths is justified as a prescription of social morality. Moral bioenhancement is legitimate when it is justified on the basis of the reasons of the recipients. Psychopaths expect and prefer that the agents with whom they interact do not have certain psychopathic traits. Particularly, they have reasons to require the moral bioenhancement of psychopaths with whom they must cooperate. By adopting a public reason and a Kantian argument, we conclude that we can (...) justify to a psychopath being the recipient of mandatory moral bioenhancement because he has a reason to require the application of this prescription to other psychopaths. (shrink)

In this chapter, we investigate whether psychopathy is a mental disorder. We argue that addressing this question requires engaging, at least, with three principal issues that have conceptual, empirical, and normative dimensions. First, it must be established whether current measures of psychopathy individuate a unitary class of individuals. By this we mean that persons classifed as psychopaths should share some relevant similarities that support explanation, prediction, and treatment. Second, it must be proven that psychopathy harms the person who has it. (...) Third, it must be established that the harm associated with psychopathy is relevant for the ascription of disorder status. Regarding this latter issue, we argue that psychopathy should be considered a disorder if its harmfulness derives from certain incapacities or limited capacities. These incapacities should affect basic competences that are justifably required for conducting a preferable type of life. Within this framework, we tentatively advance the hypothesis that some normatively justifed conclusions and empirical evidence about psychopathy, that needs nonetheless to be further investigated, might support the claim that people with psychopathy have a mental disorder. (shrink)

The act of iudicare hostes (‘declare public enemy’) was a formal pronouncement of the Roman Senate, voted for the first time in 88 BCE following a proposal by L. Cornelius Sulla after his first march on Rome. Legal historians have generally interpreted it as an emergency measure intended to preserve legality in a situation of civil strife and viewed it as a consistently defined institutional framework throughout the final decades of the Republic. Through an analysis of Sulla’s performative political communication, (...) before, during and in the immediate aftermath of the march, this paper argues that the act of judging (iudicare) someone a public enemy (hostis publicus) was first deployed as a political action, void of legal effects. Later instances of iudicare suggest that this act underwent a process of institutionalization after 63 BCE. (shrink)

The topic of the present reflection is Christian religious belief. Specifically, we will use Husserlian tools in order to examine the positional nature of this particular type of belief. We will be less interested in the question concerning the success conditions of this experience and more in its noetic structure. According to our proposal, to believe by faith supposes (although it is not exhausted by) accepting the existence of mundane evidence speaking against this fundamental belief. The believer acknowledges the existence (...) of this contradicting en-doxical basis and nevertheless believes what she believes. We will refer to this simultaneous movement of accepting and cancelling as the concessive structure of the religious attitude. The para-doxical movement of experiencing conflicting evidence as being subjectively ineffective is a key component of this attitude. At least some inchoative conflict with the world is required in order for the religious belief to be religious. Lastly, we will try to show that, with a distinctive terminology, the idea that the Christian religious attitude involves a conflict between subjectivity and world is present not only in Kierkegaard but also in phenomenological figures like Scheler and even Husserl. (shrink)

In this paper I attempt to bring together (at least) two very different debates: one on justice, mercy and particularity, the other on the play of exclusionary reasons. My aim is to show how the discussion of the uneasy co-existence of justice and mercy pivots on the question of particularity. And, secondly, that the debate on exclusionary reasons can show us why law may fail to do justice in this context.

La decouverte de plus en plus profonde de la signification du christianisme a transforme la pensee de Fichte. Reciproquement, Fichte s'engage dans la voie d'une transformation du christianisme, au sens d'une metamorphose de la croyance en vision; il saisit la foi comme un stade imparfait de la science et souligne que seule cette derniere est a meme de supprimer l'exteriorite de l'Absolu. Le present ouvrage allie les points de vue genetique et systematique. De ses cinq parties, les quatre premieres exposent, (...) en suivant l'ordre chronologique, l'evolution de la theorie fichteenne du christianisme, depuis les textes prekantiens jusqu'a la Doctrine de l'Etat de 1813. La longue cinquieme partie, structuree thematiquement plutot que chronologiquement, est reservee non seulement a la reprise synthetique, mais aussi a la confrontation critique. Elle examine les differents aspects de la conception fichteenne du christianisme, notamment sa position a l'egard du Nouveau Testament, de la dogmatique, de la morale et de la mystique chretiennes. (shrink)

v. 1. pt. 1. Rationalisme, empirisme et crise des croyances au XVIIe siècle -- v. 1. pt. 2. Le procès du Christianisme dans la pensée du XVIIIe siècle -- v. 1. pt. 3. La philosophie de la religion chrétienne chez Kant et les postkantiens -- v. 1. pt. 4. La critique du Christianisme au XIXe siècle -- v. 2. pt 5. Philosophie chrétienne, philosophie du Christianisme au XIXe siècle -- v. 2. pt. 6. Vingtième XVIIe siècle. Index.

Providing the first English translation of Análisis del ser del mexicano, this book features a full biography of Uranga, a detailed overview of the translated text, and discussion of Uranga's relevance to contemporary debates in the phenomenology of culture, the philosophy of liberation, Latin American philosophy and phenomenology itself. Reading Uranga's brilliant words expertly translated and introduced by Carlos Alberto Sánchez finally allows us to understand why this Mexican philosopher is considered one of the most fearless and original thinkers of (...) the 20th century. (shrink)

In the article, we consider the objections of the capability approach to Rawls’s theory of public justification. The objection is that Rawls’s theory is considered with an exclusive focus on reason and rationality as essential properties of justice, excluding from the domain of justice people who do not possess these properties (such as people with severe cognitive impairments). We point out the shortcomings of the alternative proposal to the capability theory, which is based on the dignity of the species, because (...) we claim that no valid normative conclusions can be derived from the concept of the species. We conclude by adopting a model of public justification according to which duties and rights are determined by reasonable people (ideal legislators). Reasonable people impartially judge the principles of justice even for those who do not participate in the process of justification but deserve the recognition of rights by universalizing these rights. Through universalization, they justified these rights for themselves and for those they represented by presenting adequate representatives in the process of justifying the principles of justice for those who do not have the capability to be reasonable and rational. (shrink)

What are the Early Memoranda?1 When were they written? What are their sources? What is their purpose and their relation to Hume's works? These questions, usually addressed separately, are in fact tightly interwoven: they require an articulated response that embraces them all. Our response could be summarised as follows: far from being current reading notes, or even less the exhaustive diary of Hume's intellectual experience, the Early Memoranda are most likely second-tier texts, or—as James Harris recently conjectured—"notes taken from notes."2 (...) More generally, the Memoranda, with some possible exceptions, are the result of a selection between those "loose bits of paper" and "uncorrect thoughts"3 which Hume began to... (shrink)

This article aims to present four case studies of the different responses to governmental measures to fight the COVID-19 pandemic by supreme and constitutional courts, especially in cases of jurisdictions that have been facing democratic erosion. The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic demanded immediate public policies and other political decisions from the branches of government. Executive authorities were the main actors in effecting constitutional public health norms. The expectation was that they will abide by the rule of law in fulfilling (...) their duties; that has not been the case under governments that promoted democratic erosion. The different contexts of the threats posed to the constitutional democracies led populist and illiberal leaders to opportunistically either try to—and then be contained by courts—or effectively consolidate the expansion of powers under the conditions of the pandemic. Concentrating on four jurisdictions (the USA, Hungary, El Salvador, and Brazil), the article demonstrates that courts can effectively work as bulwarks against waves of democratic erosion, especially in situations of stress, as it was the case in the global COVID-19 pandemic. This hypothesis is also proven by episodes in which courts did not sufficiently operate to curb illiberalism because they were already captured. The analyses enable classifying the court’s responses to the COVID-19 executive measures in a threefold pattern: deferential, restrictive, and of forced capitulation. (shrink)

This paper proposes a novel method for identifying the public evaluative standards that contribute to the classification of certain conditions as mental disabilities. Public evaluative standards could contribute to ascertaining disabilities by outlining characteristics whose presence beyond a threshold is fundamentally important for the life of a person and whose absence or reduced occurrence constitutes a disability. Additionally, they can participate in determining disabilities by delineating particularly grave difficulties, impairments, or incapacities. Our method relies on a model of public justification (...) of evaluative standards that is inspired by Gerald Gaus’s theory of public reason. Thus, our approach recommends the justification of evaluative standards through sound deliberative routes from reasons accessible to all persons who participate in the process of justification and the convergence of what is justified in this way to each of them. We deem that disabilities could be caused both by problems in the internal characteristics of a person as well as by unfairness or a lack of hospitality in external circumstances. This is why the method of justification is applied to the assessment of those circumstances as well. If social or environmental circumstances cannot be justified through the convergence of reasons accessible to all persons involved in the process of justification, we have reasons to exclude the presence of a disability and ascertain the presence of inadequate external conditions. (shrink)

The author, who shared the 1959 Nobel Prize in Physics with Owen Chamberlain, offers impressions and recollections of the development of modern physics. Rather than a chronological approach, Segre emphasizes interesting, complex personalities who often appear only in footnotes. Readers will find that this book adds considerably to their understanding of science and includes compelling topics of current interest.

_Resumen_: Analizamos el papel asignado a los dispositivos espaciales en las utopías adoptando una perspectiva teórica amplia: cultural, social e histórica. Primero documentamos la tendencia de las utopías a plasmarse en proyectos espaciales y esbozamos posibles causas de este hecho: la impronta griega, la preeminencia de la forma socio-política “ciudad” y el influjo del _ars memoriae_ basado en tipos arquitectónicos. Después interpretamos la evolución histórica de la cuestión, reconociendo un punto de inflexión en el siglo XIX con el determinismo espacialista (...) e identificando dos planteamientos que denominamos terapéutica del espacio y poética del espacio. Uno ambiciona solucionar los problemas más urgentes de las ciudades industriales mediante la organización espacial. El segundo dispone los diseños espaciales para instaurar un modelo utópico de sociedad, que gracias a la extensión de la ciencia y a la idea de progreso, se consideraba realizable, siendo uno de sus modelos más emblemáticos el Familisterio de Guisa. (shrink)

«Greek Love is a modern invention», asserts the classical scholar. David Hume can claim the title of inventor. In his 1751 Dialogue on morals he used the phrase to account for the relationship between a university boy and a man of merit. How did Hume come to this expression? Pederasty was a traditional sceptical topic against a universal standard for morals. What did Hume think of this practice and its origin? When he accounts for pederasty and homosocial arrangements by negative (...) epithets, is Hume seriously condemning them or he is «only» and prudentially following the common use? The Article tries to give a first answer to these questions by examining Hume's writings and their sources, and the views of the modern authors. The Article delineates the eighteenth-century debate, without projecting on it our views, and maintains that, like some ancient philosophers according to Sextus Empricus, and possibly like Smith, Hume would have declared practice in itself «indifferent». (shrink)

Information entities are used in ontologies to represent engineering technical specifications, health records, pictures or librarian data about, e.g., narrative fictions, among others. The literature in applied ontology lacks a comparison of the state of the art, and foundational questions on the nature of information entities remain open for research. The purpose of the paper is twofold. First, to compare existing ontologies with both each other and theories proposed in philosophy, semiotics, librarianship, and literary studies in order to understand how (...) the ontologies conceive and model information entities. Second, to discuss some open research challenges that can lead to principled approaches for the treatment of information entities, possibly by getting into account the variety of information entity types found in the literature. (shrink)

Hailed by the Journal of the History of Astronomy as "charming and witty," this chronicle by a renowned physicist traces the development of scientific thought from the works of the "founding fathers" — Galileo, Huygens, and Newton — to the more recent discoveries of Maxwell, Boltzmann, and Gibbs. 1984 edition.

L’objet du présent article est le suivant : comment développer une justification publique en matière de justice qui respecte à la fois le pluralisme entre des citoyens libres et égaux, la qualité épistémique des décisions et la responsabilité épistémique? Pour aborder ce problème, j’envisage le modèle de justification publique proposé par John Rawls, en particulier sa conception de la légitimité et de la justification des décisions publiques présentes dans sa théorie de la raison publique. J’insiste sur les éléments épistémiques de (...) la doctrine de Rawls concernant la justification publique, en particulier le rapport à la science dans le cadre de la raison publique. Je propose toutefois d’amender la description rawlsienne des raisons scientifiques publiques afin d’inclure un ensemble de raisons plus ancrées dans les besoins du monde réel, à savoir de considérer la légitimité d’un ensemble de conclusions scientifiques raisonnables, en tant que raisons justificatives publiques valides, sans se limiter à des conclusions hors de toute controverse. J’indique le problème que constitue l’attribution de légitimité au pluralisme raisonnable des raisons scientifiques pour une détermination probante des politiques. Ma solution consiste à considérer comme légitimes — parce que raisonnables — des décisions sélectionnées selon une procédure démocratique équitable. (shrink)

This paper extends Alan John Simmons?s conceptual distinction between Lockean and Kantian conceptions of legitimacy that he applied to the question of the legitimacy of states, to the issue of legitimacy of public decisions. I criticise the consent conception of legitimacy defended by Simmons, and I defend the Rawlsian version of the justificatory conception of legitimacy from his objection. The approach of this paper is distinctive because the two conceptions are assessed by investigating, using the method of reflective equilibrium, their (...) respective prescriptions concerning the treatment of antisocial personality disorder and epidemiologic measures. I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium does not support the consent conception. Considering the issues of treatment of APD and of epidemiologic measures, I argue that the consent conception of legitimacy is not well-equipped for the evaluation of norms that are not strictly self-regarding. This causes a deficit of prescriptions for relevant social responses. Further, by considering the case of responses to epidemics, I argue that such a conception can avoid harmful consequences only by recurring to additional, and independent, premises. This does not cause incoherence but reduces the coherence of a normative system. Finally, the consent conception is not equipped to support social cooperation in an optimal way, which has proved to be necessary in critical conditions, like a pandemic. On the other hand, I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium supports the Rawlsian version of justificatory conception of legitimacy, because of its advantages in handling the indicated issues. In addition, I maintain that this justificatory conception is respectful of freedom and equality of agents as moral self-legislators, and, thus, it is not vulnerable to Simmons?s main criticism. (shrink)