Gregory Bateson is well known for defining information by stating “In fact what we mean by information – the elementary unit of information – is a difference which makes a difference…” This conceptual perspective has the merit of simplicity and generality. Simplicity, in addressing the complexity of information. Generality, in seeking applicability to any and every field of human experience. The purpose of this paper is to focus the applicability of this conceptual approach by Bateson and use it to perform (...) a calculation of taking the difference between two grey-level digital images that are shifted one relative to the other. The digital images take the place of the field of view that a human being would have access through her sense of vision at two different spatial/temporal instances. The results show that it is possible to highlight the edges of the objects under scrutiny, as well as to highlight other differences within the object. Bateson’s “difference that makes a difference” would seem to provide a first step in the elusive meaning making process of humans. (shrink)

El artículo procura mostrar las razones por las cuales no puede considerarse que la ética aristotélica sea determinista. De este modo, critica los argumentos de tres intérpretes que defienden el determinismo aristotélico: Alfredo Gómez-Muller, Theodor Gomperz y D.J. Furley, con el fi n de mostrar que la ética del Estagirita no está fundamentada en la necesidad sino en la convención, que el carácter no está totalmente determinado por naturaleza y que una vez éste se ha formado Aristóteles sí concibe la (...) posibilidad de cambio, si bien para ello se necesita mucho más que la mera intención. Con este análisis se pretende mostrar, entonces, más allá de la polémica particular con los intérpretes, que la ética aristotélica trata de explicar el mundo humano en su complejidad y riqueza y, por tanto, no puede considerarse determinista. (shrink)

Peirce’s idea of an unlimited community has been usually analyzed from its role in science and the normative ideal of truth. However, it is essential to understand the role of the community of inquiry in light of the other normative sciences, aesthetics and ethics, since according to Peirce, any endeavor to know that is not guided by the esthetical ideal of admirable per se should not be considered as proper science, but as a power tool to benefit some elite. This (...) article aims to analyze Peirce’s idea of community of inquiry in light of sentimentalism and the normative sciences in order to evidence that such community is not elitist, but open, insofar as it is also lured by the summum bonum and the admirable per se. Finally, we provide a more organic reading of Peirce’s work, opening the way to consider possible consequences of this position from an ethical and political perspective. (shrink)