Aristotle is reportedly held to have been a Moderate Realist in that he would maintain that a concept derives from an act of grasping a mind-independent universal object that exists somehow inside of the many different things which the concept is predicated of. As far as a universal is independent of mind, it would stand for the proper object of a concept that subsumes a given number of things as its own instantiations. But we claim that Aristotle rejected such a view and instead did perceive and comprehend universality as a feature of thought rather than as a feature of reality in its own right. As showed in the chapters of Topics regarding the so-called logic of comparison (with the support of Albert the Great’s commentary), each predicate can be more or less consistent with the attribute of the subject of which it may be predicated. Both essential and accidental attributes assume a definite degree of being related to the degree of belonging to substance. Unlike particular things, the universality of a concept is to be understood always in comparison with another concept according to a hierarchy of predicates in terms of universality degree arranged by comparative terms such as ‘more’ (μἂλλον), ‘less’ (ἧττον), and ‘likewise ’ (όμοίως). What is really mind-independent are the truth conditions which make a universal true when exclusively referring to a set of things identically meant by the same predicate whose universality is given by the place occupied in the hierarchy of predicates.

A logical reading on Aristotle’s Organon discovers some inconsistencies in the text which have to be solved by reducing them to metaphysical decisions of the author, if they are not just identified as deficiencies in the exposition that should be corrected. The present article tries to display a line of reading paying attention to those so-called inconsistencies, in an attempt to understand them as specific steps in Aristotle’s research. In order to this goal it focuses on the exposition procedure of the Aristotelian figures: the use of variables, whose introduction by Aristotle has been celebrated all over logical tradition. An analysis of the distinctive and internal features in this procedure will allow us to link Aristotle’s logos research and the “being qua being” investigation, and to determine also - though in a negative way - the connection between this reading and the logical-traditional one on Aristotle’s Organon.

Berkeley’s general tenet about immaterialism is presented and discussed. I examined apart the several theses that concur to the immaterialist theory. After that, the general argument is presented and discussed. In particular, I stress Berkeley’s assumption that a world without matter and a world with matter would be indistinguishable from the point of view of (i) the content of perceptions, (ii) natural science (viz. Newtonian mechanics). I stress that this assumption depends on a relative account of circular motion, generating the centrifugal forces, as Newton shows in his bucket experiment. In spite of the efforts by Leibniz and Huygens, such a relative account of rotational motion was never presented. So the thesis about the scientific and perceptual identity between worlds with and without matter remains a simple case of wishful thinking in need for a justification.

The article tackles with the role that Kantian notion of temperament plays within his theory of practical freedom. With this purpose, we will connect Kant’s approach to temperaments with the classical Greek approach to this principle of classification, in order to recognize in it the means to feel the passage of time and also the conditions of our relation to the world, that is, a physiological-empirical background for the exercise of freedom that, without being moral, shelter contents which reason will only try to reform, without expecting to silence it entirely. Our final goal is to extract relevant observations to answer adequately to Kant’s question What is Man?

This paper aims to analyze Kant’s concept of Klugheit and how it relates to morality. For Kant, this concept does not belong to the field of morality as it is, according to him, an interested act, therefore only capable of hypothetical imperatives. In this sense, prudence generates at most one’s own happiness, but not necessarily goodness. On the other hand, we reason that prudence plays an important role in promoting man’s moral improvement towards the exercise of virtue. Prudence only holds good, therefore, if understood from a Kantian anthropological point of view.

Le projet d’une Anthropologie Philosophique en tant que philosophie fondamentale defini par Helmuth Plessner, se base sur la catégorie d'excentricité: l’homme occupe une place à la fois centrée et décentrée, soit en tant qu’être au monde, soit dans le rapport à son corps, tantôt vécu comme identité personnelle, tantôt usé en tant qu’instrument. Cette dualité fondamentale de la condition humaine et de son existence dialectique mène à une compréhension de l’expressivité en tant que double. Ou bien l’expression suit une voie indicative (par le langage, les gestes et la mimique) quand l’homme est son corps, ou bien, quand le corps est usé en tant qu’instrument de réponse, l’expressivité devient opaque. L’article propose une lecture de ce point spécifique de la théorie de l’expression, thème central du livre de 1941, Rire et pleurer. Une étude des limites du comportement humain. Décrire la signification et le processus déclencheur du rire et du pleurer c’est donc saisir l’homme au sein même de son ambivalence.

In this paper, we explore the extent to which mountain huts and rules imposed on their users can provide metaphoric inspiration to the exploration of issues of an intergenerational justice. We indicate features made salient by the metaphor. We focus in particular on the content of an intergenerational golden rule and on cleronomic justice (Sect. 1). We also explain why the absence of a warden matters (Sect. 2). Other absent features make salient other dimensions that are central to intergenerational justice. Special attention is granted to two of them: the “genesis” relationship among successive generations and the problem of population change across generations (Sect. 3).

The philosophical point of view of Rawls is here analysed; and how Rawls’s philosophical position implies an epistemological cut with the classical conceptions that were joining the social contract to a determined natural idea of man or of society. In his proposal, the idea of Justice, in a society, is established in the fact that men accomplish a social pact fireely in itself, with another reasonable men, using various goods, and possessing equal politic rights. Rawls prefers not to choose the disjunctive “freedom or equality”; but for the option enunciated like “freedom and justice”. Equality is not a value as such in itself, yet contingent upon the idea of Justice. Nevertheless this justice from his social point of view is a politic justice. This is constituted freely for the associates, with equal rights, in a pact. His conception is not revolutionary in order to solve injustices right now historically established, but a progressive conception that utilizes the freedom to advance toward a fair equality, and here is now examined.

This article debates the philosophical reach of Pessoa’s writings. As a matter of fact, Pessoa’s Archive contains several projects for philosophical books, essays, small productions and dialogues. Thus, this article tries to demonstrate, through the analysis of the unpublished documents, that the philosophical dimension of this author’s work is not circumscribed to the philosophical references present in the poetry and fictions of Fernando Pessoa.

A comunicação e uma noção axial que articula o sistema de Leibniz e elucida a lógica imanente ao evolver do seu pensamento, designadamente no plano da metafisica. De facto, na sua fase inicial, a metafísica leibniziana revela a dificuldade em articular o primado do indivíduo com a exigência de vínculo comunitário entre os seres. O princípio de compossibilidade enquanto requisito de autoconstituição do ente actual, a teoria da noção completa de um indivíduo e a teoria da expressão respondem ao intento de pensar o indivíduo como perfil do universal. A metafísica monadológica consuma o esforço de estabelecer a copertença originária entre a mónada singular e o universo de que faz parte. Por conseguinte, o autor demarca-se da interpretação da mónada como uma entidade solipsista, desligada do mundo e do outro, em especial na versão de A. Renault. O lugar do outro é o verdadeiro ponto de perspectiva no domínio prático, tal como no domínio da cognição. Efectivamente, o reconhecimento do outro é o traço característico pelo qual, segundo Leibniz, se faz a marcação do filósofo relativamente ao pensamento vulgar, sempre de algum modo afectado pelo espírito de seita ou de partido.

Leibniz is well known as an opponent of the theories of causation which have to support causal relationships between created substances. But he was also an opponent of occasionalism, theory that sustain all reality would be produced solely be God. Denying that God produces only substances, leaving totally dependent of those the production of their states, as the conservationists would want, Leibniz proposed a complex theory of divine concurrence to explain metaphysically the changes of states of substances through a causal participation between God and his creatures. This article proposes some suggestions to clarify the concept of divine concurrence, as a third option between occasionalism and mere conservatism.

O presente artigo visa demonstrar que o hermetismo foi uma corrente de pensamento presente (e influente) na modernidade seiscentista apresentando interpretações desta época em que tal tese é relevante, nomeadamente Frances Yates e Paolo Rossi. Este tema é desenvolvido a partir de um autor - Leibniz - do qual se destacam as ligações com o hermetismo, apresentando-se o seu diferendo com Ralph Cudworth, a propósito do tema das naturezas plásticas.

La fusion entre la logique et la dynamique déclenche chez G. W. Leibniz une réforme de la notion de substance qui altère profondément le rapport entre le Je et le temps. Prototype de la substantialité, miroir de Dieu et expression du Tout créé, le Je dirait beaucoup, notamment Être, Un, Même: la persistance d’un « sujet » logique, d’un « je ne sais quoi » de métaphysique et d’un « personnage » moral. Sous l’angle de la temporalité, le Je véhicule tous les temps possibles et réels, passés et futurs. Il est question donc d’une communauté poly- et pan-chronique qui propose une sorte de synchronie de la diversité temporelle dans la notion complète et dans la force primitive qui semblent ainsi s’incliner vers ou se déplier de l’Eternel.

The substantial vinculum is for Leibniz the relation where the simple substances (monads) join to create a compound from which a collective substantiality arises, and it is not the simple addition of individuals substantialities. The vinculum is essential, determinant for the compound, but not for the simple thing. The connective thing turns definitive in the compound thing, so that the ontology of Leibniz bets strongly for the simple thing, for the individual thing, as update of the infinitesimal thing.