A fronte del quotidiano rincorrersi di nuovi interrogativi che esigono una risposta dalla bioetica, si assiste alla difficoltà di trovare un solido fondamento al giudizio etico in bioetica. Si confrontano e si scontrano, infatti, teorie etiche tra di loro non sovrapponibili né conciliabili, che portano a soluzioni pratiche tra di loro divergenti e spesso, troppo spesso, dimentiche della centralità della persona umana. Edè proprio la riflessione sulla persona umana, con i suoi diritti, ma anche con i suoi doveri, secondo la (...) lettura del personalismo ontologicamente fondato, il filo conduttore dei contributi contenuti in questo volume...(Dalla quarta di copertina)- In sommario: La nuova genetica - La clonazione umana: aspetti tecnici e considerazioni - Le basi biologiche della sessualità - Natura e interpretazione dei disordini sessuali: l'omosessualità - I disorientamenti sessuali: il ruolo dell'educatore - La sindrome da immunodeficienza acquisita - Orientamenti metodologici nell'educazione sessuale. (shrink)

Some time ago I advanced on the pages of this journal a critique of the interpretation given by Jay L. Garfield and Mark Siderits (hereafter GS) of Nāgārjuna’s doctrine of the two truths (Ferraro, J Indian Philos 41(2):195–219, 2013.1); to my article the two authors responded with a ‘defense of the semantic interpretation’ of the Madhyamaka doctrine of emptiness (GS, J Indian Philos 41(6):655–664, 2013). Their reply, however, could not consider my personal understanding of Nāgārjuna’s notions of śūnyatā and dve (...) satye. My interpretation of these notions was in fact absent in the paper GS responded, and was only related in a second paper of mine (Ferraro, J Indian Philos 41(5):563–590, 2013.2), still unpublished at the time of GS’s drafting of their ‘defense’. Therefore, in the present rejoinder, I found it appropriate, rather than responding point by point to the passages of GS’s reply, to advance a comparison between the semantic interpretation and my ‘realist antimetaphysical’ understanding of Nāgārjuna’s thought. (shrink)

This article claims that the study of irregular migration may be a strategic research material for the development of an adequate understanding of contemporary society. The field, however, suffers not only from a lack of reliable empirical data, but also from endemic undertheorizing. The article shows how the attempt to develop an understanding of irregular migration from within a general theory of modern society has positive consequences both for the clarification of the problems and for the design of research programs (...) able to deal adequately with the phenomena. Particularly, it is argued that a theory of modern society centered on its form of differentiation may help to clarify both the political dimension of contemporary international mobility, the variety of irregular statuses existing in the foreign population of receiving countries, and the condition of inclusion and exclusion of irregular migrants. (shrink)

Porfirio constitutes an essencial tie in the transition of ancient thought into the Medieval. His writings (he takes in the Enneadas of Plotino and systematically comments the works of Plato and Aristotle), offer a unitary interpretation of both systems which have enormously influenced in the medieval philosophic tradition (Saint Augustine, Boecio, Thomas Aquinas, etc.), a tradition which may be presented as the different forms of Platonism aristotelized, or aristoteleanism platonized.

Este ensayo se centra en la democracia entendida como forma política, como constitución democrática. El concepto de poder del pueblo indica, por una parte, un poder absoluto al que someterse, y, por otra, tiende a negar la sumisión en cuanto tal. Los dos conceptos fundamentales de la constitución democrática, la soberanía del pueblo y la representación política , que surgen para mostrar cómo el poder es de todos, en realidad crean un hiato estructural que impide pensar en la dimensión política (...) de los ciudadanos. En la base de la aporía se encuentra el ideal de la libertad y la libertad incondicional del individuo, la cual se afirma mediante la negación de la relación de gobierno. Esta incondicionalidad de la voluntad se convierte en el elemento fundador de la racionalidad formal propia de la legitimación democrática. Sólo la conciencia de la centralidad de la cuestión del gobierno, incluso en el interior de la democracia y más allá de su dispositivo legitimador, puede mostrarnos la vía para repensar a los ciudadanos como sujetos capaces de acción política. (shrink)