Year:

  1. On the Alleged Inconsistency in Van Inwagen’s Rebuttal of Evans’ Argument.Petr Dvořák - 2021 - Studia Neoaristotelica 18 (1):3-26.
    The paper attempts to interpret P. van Inwagen’s refutation of Evans’ argument that there cannot be vague objects and defend it against the charge of inconsistency raised by Radim Bělohrad. However, such an interpretation is not without a cost. Therefore another interpretation of van Inwagen’s example of the Cabinet is offered which evades Evans’ charge of inconsistency against indeterminate identity as it does not need the notion at all.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Hurtado de Mendoza on the “Moral” Modality.Miroslav Hanke - 2021 - Studia Neoaristotelica 18 (1):65-93.
    One of the prominent debates of post-Tridentine scholasticism addressed probability, often expressed by the term “moral”, originally motivated by the epistemology of decision-making and the debates on predestination and “middle knowledge”. Puente Hurtado de Mendoza, an Iberian Jesuit and the author of one of the earliest Jesuit philosophy courses, entered this debate in the early-seventeenth century. This paper presents his 1610s and 1620s analyses of different forms or degrees of evidence, certainty, and necessity or impossibility, addressing the commonly-used trichotomy of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Are We Responsible for Laughing?Mauricio Lecón - 2021 - Studia Neoaristotelica 18 (1):95-112.
    In his Commentary on Aristotle’s De Anima, Francisco Suárez offers a rich account of the psychology and physiology of laughter. Among other claims, he asserts that laughter is a voluntary act, without giving any further explanation. The aim of this paper is to glean from his texts a philosophically compelling argument for this claim. I will claim that for Suárez laughter is a commanded act of the will, since it somehow needs the will’s consent to be elicited. This kind of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Respects of Dependence and Symmetry.Michele Paolini Paoletti - 2021 - Studia Neoaristotelica 18 (1):31-68.
    In this article I discuss several apparent counterexamples to the asymmetry of ontological dependence. These counterexamples were introduced in discussions about grounding, but they can affect every theory of ontological dependence. I show that, if one adopts metaontological pluralism (i.e., the view according to which there are many dependence relations), one has some advantages when it comes to defending the asymmetry of dependence. In Section 1, I introduce metaontological pluralism and my own version of it, which is based on Respect-of-Dependence (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues