Es gibt Eigenschaften, die in ihren empirischen Vorkommnissen gradativ sind, wie z.B. die Eigenschaften, etwas zu wissen und mächtig zu sein] d.h. man kann mehr oder weniger wissen, jemand ist mächtiger oder weniger mächtig als sein Gegenüber usw. usf. Dieser Aufsatz versucht Eigenschaftsexemplifikationen im Bereich von empirischen (Minima und) Maxima an Beispielen von Macht und Wissen dahingehend zu analysieren, ob sie tatsächlich dieselben Eigenschaften wie die durch Standardbeispiele aus dem "mittleren Bereich" definierten (Begriffe von) Eigenschaften betreffen. Es werden Argumente für (...) die Auffassung vorgelegt, im (Grenz-)Bereich der Minima und Maxima (wenigstens der Beispieleigenschaften) gebe es Fälle, wo es sich nicht (mehr) um dieselbe Eigenschaft handeln kann. Paradox formuliert: Es gibt Eigenschaften, deren Maxima (oder Minima) nicht mehr dieselbe Eigenschaft sind. (shrink)

Es gibt Eigenschaften, die in ihren empirischen Vorkommnissen gradativ sind, wie z.B. die Eigenschaften, etwas zu wissen und mächtig zu sein] d.h. man kann mehr oder weniger wissen, jemand ist mächtiger oder weniger mächtig als sein Gegenüber usw. usf. Dieser Aufsatz versucht Eigenschaftsexemplifikationen im Bereich von empirischen (Minima und) Maxima an Beispielen von Macht und Wissen dahingehend zu analysieren, ob sie tatsächlich dieselben Eigenschaften wie die durch Standardbeispiele aus dem "mittleren Bereich" definierten (Begriffe von) Eigenschaften betreffen. Es werden Argumente für (...) die Auffassung vorgelegt, im (Grenz-)Bereich der Minima und Maxima (wenigstens der Beispieleigenschaften) gebe es Fälle, wo es sich nicht (mehr) um dieselbe Eigenschaft handeln kann. Paradox formuliert: Es gibt Eigenschaften, deren Maxima (oder Minima) nicht mehr dieselbe Eigenschaft sind. (shrink)

This book began with my edition of the anonymous treatise. A translation and notes seemed essential if the material of the treatise was to be understood. It then seemed that Chapter 5 of Heytesbury's Rules for Solving Sophismata, on which the treatise was based, should also be included. My translation of the Heytesbury treatise is based on a fifteenth-century edition, supplemented by readings from a few of the better manuscripts. (A critical edition from all the manuscripts, of which Chapter 5 (...) will be mine, is now in progress under the supervision of Paul Spade, but only a few insignificant changes in the translation should be necessitated by the completed edition. ) An examination of related materials seemed reasonable, and these included Heytesbury's commentator Gaetano, as well as a chapter from a treatise by Johannes Venator (in an edition in progress provided by Francesco del Punta). It seemed unnecessary to publish Gaetano's and Venator's related works in this volume, but all their departures from Heytesbury and the anonymous treatise are noted here. I have not examined other works in the tradition in any detail. I owe a great deal to my teacher, Norman Kretzmann, not only as regards the edition and translations, but also as regards the notes, study and introduction. The referees of the typescript (to me unknown) made unusually thorough criticisms and suggestions to which I have paid close attention. The book is far better for my having done so. (shrink)

Este trabajo fue pensado a modo de homenaje a Antoni Domènech, quien nos legó un Programa de Investigación sobre “las raíces históricas y conceptuales del republicanismo democrático clásico”, también valedero para el momento actual del modo de producir capitalista en el que nos encontramos al inicio de la tercera década del siglo XXI. Nos ocuparemos i) de fundamentar y mostrar la viabilidad de una Renta Básica, entendida como resguardo de un mínimum de existencia social para todos, que permitiría garantizar una (...) universalización de la libertad republicana; y también ii) abordaremos el tema de la justificación de una Renta Máxima, entendiendo que la acumulación de riqueza y, por ello mismo, de poder económico y político de los muy ricos, atenta contra el deber fiduciario de las repúblicas democráticas de garantizar una “vida normal” para todos sus habitantes. This article is envisaged as a homage to Antoni Domènech who bequeathed us a Research Programme on “the historical and conceptual origins of classical democratic republicanism”, which is also valid for the phase of the capitalist mode of production we are presently facing at the beginning of the third decade of the twenty-first century. Our aims are 1) to establish and demonstrate the viability of a basic income, which is understood as safeguarding a minimum of social existence for everyone, and that would guarantee the universalisation of republican freedom; and 2) to tackle the question of justifying a Maximum Income, in the understanding that the accumulation of wealth, and hence of the political and economic power of the very rich, is an assault against the fiduciary duty of democratic republics to guarantee a “normal” life for all citizens. (shrink)

En este artículo, me propongo exponer algunas dificultades relacionadas con la posibilidad de que la Teoría de Modelos pueda constituirse en una Teoría General de la Interpretación. Específicamente la idea que sostengo es que lo que nos muestra la Paradoja de Orayen es que las interpretaciones no pueden ser ni conjuntos ni objetos. Por eso, una elucidación del concepto intuitivo de interpretación, que apele a este tipo de entidades, está condenada al fracaso. De manera secundaria, muestro que no hay algún (...) supuesto conjuntista que sea imprescindible para que surja la mencionada paradoja: sólo se necesita que las interpretaciones sean objetos. Voy a argumentar que si las interpretaciones son objetos, tal como lo supone la posibilidad de cuantificar sobre las mismas para poder dar una caracterización satisfactoria de consecuencia lógica, la au-toaplicación (como un caso de aplicación de los recursos semánticos de la teoría de modelos para encontrar una interpretación con máxima generalidad) es imposible. Finalmente, discuto cada una de las dos soluciones que el propio Orayen imaginó frente a su paradoja, y muestro que cada una posee diferentes dificultades.In this paper, I intend to present some problems to construe the Model Theory as a Theory of Interpretation. Specifically, I am going to defend that, according to the Paradox of Orayen, interpretations can not be neither set nor object. Thus, an explication of the intuitive concept of interpretation that appeals to these types of entities will be condemned to failure. Secondary, I will show that there is not any like-set assumption indispensable to get rise to that paradox: only all is needed is the assumption that interpretations are objects. I am going to argue that if interpretations are objects, as it is assumed by the possibility of quantifying over interpretations in order to offer an satisfactory characterization of logical consequence, self-application (as a case of application of semantics resources of the Model Theory for finding a interpretation with absolute generality) is not possible. Eventually, I will discuss both of the solutions provided by Orayen to his paradox and I will support that both have different difficulties. (shrink)

En este artículo, me propongo exponer algunas dificultades relacionadas con la posibilidad de que la Teoría de Modelos pueda constituirse en una Teoría General de la Interpretación. Específicamente la idea que sostengo es que lo que nos muestra la Paradoja de Orayen es que las interpretaciones no pueden ser ni conjuntos ni objetos. Por eso, una elucidación del concepto intuitivo de interpretación, que apele a este tipo de entidades, está condenada al fracaso. De manera secundaria, muestro que no hay algún (...) supuesto conjuntista que sea imprescindible para que surja la mencionada paradoja: sólo se necesita que las interpretaciones sean objetos. Voy a argumentar que si las interpretaciones son objetos, tal como lo supone la posibilidad de cuantificar sobre las mismas para poder dar una caracterización satisfactoria de consecuencia lógica, la au-toaplicación (como un caso de aplicación de los recursos semánticos de la teoría de modelos para encontrar una interpretación con máxima generalidad) es imposible. Finalmente, discuto cada una de las dos soluciones que el propio Orayen imaginó frente a su paradoja, y muestro que cada una posee diferentes dificultades.In this paper, I intend to present some problems to construe the Model Theory as a Theory of Interpretation. Specifically, I am going to defend that, according to the Paradox of Orayen, interpretations can not be neither set nor object. Thus, an explication of the intuitive concept of interpretation that appeals to these types of entities will be condemned to failure. Secondary, I will show that there is not any like-set assumption indispensable to get rise to that paradox: only all is needed is the assumption that interpretations are objects. I am going to argue that if interpretations are objects, as it is assumed by the possibility of quantifying over interpretations in order to offer an satisfactory characterization of logical consequence, self-application (as a case of application of semantics resources of the Model Theory for finding a interpretation with absolute generality) is not possible. Eventually, I will discuss both of the solutions provided by Orayen to his paradox and I will support that both have different difficulties. (shrink)

In this paper, the theories of the civitas maxima (universal state) in the work of Christian Wolff (1679–1754) and Michael Christoph Hanov (1695–1773) are investigated. Topics are the layers of international law, the concept and constitution of the universal state, utopian elements, the ontological status of the universal state, conversion of other states, and migration. As a critical counterpart, the idea of nation is explored in these authors as well as in the political theories of romanticism, namely in Adam Müller (...) (1779–1829) and Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834). (shrink)

RESUMO Uma das críticas mais contundentes ao argumento de Hume contrário ao status a priori ou logicamente verdadeiro da máxima causal - a de que todo evento deve ter uma causa - é a de Anscombe. Ela critica a passagem de Hume da contingência das associações causais particulares - que este evento deva ter esta causa - para a contingência de qualquer causa - que este evento tenha que ter alguma causa. Meu objetivo é defendê-lo da sua crítica, argumentando que (...) o raciocínio de Hume depende de premissas anteriores do “Tratado da Natureza Humana”, particularmente da sua filosofia da percepção e da sua filosofia do tempo. A apreciação dessas premissas torna o seu argumento mais interessante e menos vulnerável às considerações de Anscombe. ABSTRACT One of the most incisive criticisms of Hume’s argument against the causal maxim - that every event must have a cause - a priori or logically true status comes from Anscombe. She criticizes Hume’s inference from the contingency of particular causal associations - that this event must have this cause - to the contingency of any cause - that this event must have any cause. My aim is to defend him from her criticism, arguing that Hume’s reasoning depends on earlier premises of the “Treatise of Human Nature”, particularly its philosophy of perception and philosophy of time. An appreciation of these premises makes his arguments more interesting and less vulnerable to Anscombe’s considerations. (shrink)

This article studies the reception of Christian Wolff's theory of the civitas maxima by Hermann Friedrich Kahrel (1719-1787) and Michael Hanov (1695-1773). According to his previous work mentioned in the article (n. 2), the author considers the concept of civitas maxima as a methodological innovation. It is the normative fiction of a presumed rational consensus of mankind and of the states. As the article tries to show, this concept was misunderstood, not only by the enemies of Wolff but also by (...) his followers. Kahrel considered the consensus of mankind and of the states a tacit factual consensus. The innovative idea of a presumed normative consensus was thereby lost. Hanov interpreted the civitas maxima as a civitas dei in the sense of Leibniz. He transformed the normative idea of a presumed consensus into a fact of metaphysics and natural theology. Nevertheless, he introduced a diachrone dimension into the concept of civitas maxima which he sees as an infinite sequence of all generations of mankind. This anticipates Kant's integration of cosmopolitanism in a certain concept of history. Kahrel and Hanov however misconceived Wolff's idea of a normative fiction of reason by its reduction to a factual reality, be it natural or metaphysical. They thereby are representative for a common misunderstanding of Wolff's theory that also leads to an inadequate critique. (shrink)

En este trabajo se presenta un aspecto de las posibles relaciones entre “historia” y “acción” en la obra de Kant. Contra lo que usualmente es sostenido en la literatura, la obra de Kant parece mostrar, a partir del aspecto que se analiza aquí, una conexión íntima con algunos de los presupuestos básicos de la concepción hegeliana de la acción, que fundan la sensible concepción social que éste tiene de ella.

O presente artigo visa explicar o conceito kantiano de máxima. Seu propósito é aduzir uma interpretação capaz de identificar as diferentes funções deste conceito na filosofia de Kant. Além disso, o autor explora as consequências da sua análise na esfera da solução da antinomia da faculdade de julgar teleológica na terceira Crítica. No cerne desta antinomia está a alegação de Kant, segundo a qual toda a “aparência” (Anschein) de conflito entre as máximas mecânica e teleológica provém da confusão de (...) um princípio da faculdade de julgar reflexiva com um princípio da faculdade de julgar determinante. (shrink)

The existence and uniqueness of a maximum point for a continuous real—valued function on a metric space are investigated constructively. In particular, it is shown, in the spirit of reverse mathematics, that a natural unique existence theorem is equivalent to the fan theorem.

Se identifica el argumento de que la teoría de que hay propiedades computacionales suficientes para propiedades mentales es una teoría o falsa o vacía, ya que las propiedades computacionales no son empíricamente descubriles, intrínsecas ni causales, como sí lo son las propiedades mentales. Es un argumento que se puede destilar de los problemas que John Searle imputa a la ciencia cognitiva computacional, pero encuentra su correlato antecedente en el argumento que Max Newman utilizó para refutar el estructuralismo físico de Bertrand (...) Russell. Sin embargo, se utiliza la teoría computacional elucidada por la máxima pragmática para argumentar que la ciencia cognitiva computacional no está sujeta a la crítica de Searle, aunque haya sido exitosa la crítica al estructuralismo físico. (shrink)

O objetivo deste ensaio é apresentar uma análise sucinta dos reflexos dos argumentos de Durkheim sobre educação no corpo da Lei de Diretrizes e Bases daEducação Nacional nº 9394/96. Arquiteto de um paradigma clássicopara a sociologia, que se irradia alimentando outros paradigmas de teóricos degrande envergadura, que o sucederam, Émile Durkheim conferiu àSociologia uma base empírica, com métodos próprios de investigação, demonstrando que os fatos sociais – seu objeto de estudo – teriam características próprias, que os distinguiriam dos estudados pelas (...) demais ciências. Considero que fiz uma aproximação tímida, a partir de leituras preliminares, que revelaram um universo teórico complexo, com uma vasta gama de conceitos enredados, e além disso um fascínio que torna difícil interromper as leituras. O texto reflete leituras das obras Educação e Sociologia e Divisão do Trabalho Social, bem como de comentadores, como Quintaneiro e Aron .The purpose of this essay is to present a brief analysis of the reflections ofDurkheim's arguments about education in the Law of Directives and Basis ofNational Education nº 9394/96. It was with Emile Durkheim , the architect of a classic paradigm for sociology, that radiates to otherparadigms of major theorists, who succeeded him, that sociology came to be considered a science, with an empirical basis and its own methods of research; he showed that its object of study, social facts, would have characteristics that distinguish it from those studied by other sciences. I believe that I done a timid approach, from first readings, that revealed a complex theoretical universe, with awide range of concepts, and a fascination that makes it difficult to stop the readings. The referential reflects the readings of Education and Sociology and The Division of Labour in Society and commentators, as Quintaneiro and Aron. (shrink)