Scielo RSS <![CDATA[Manuscrito]]> http://www.scielo.br/rss.php?pid=0100-604520140001&lang=pt vol. 37 num. 1 lang. pt <![CDATA[SciELO Logo]]> http://www.scielo.br/img/en/fbpelogp.gif http://www.scielo.br <![CDATA[<b>Contexts, non-specificity, and minimalism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452014000100001&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt Atlas (2007) argues that semantic minimalism (as defended by Cappelen & Lepore 2005) fails because it cannot deal with semantic non-specificity. I argue that thereis a plausible version of minimalism-viz., situated minimalism-which doesn't succumb to the non-specificity charge insofar as non-specificity can be dealt with at a postsemantic level. Thus, pragmatics plays no rolewhen it comes to determining the (minimal) proposition expressed. Instead, pragmatic and other extra-semantic considerations enter the scene in characterizing the situation vis-à-vis which the proposition is evaluated. For this reason a plausible form of minimalism must embrace a form of truth-relativism: a proposition is not universally true/false, but true/false only relative to a situation. I show how the position defended is not only (i) more cognitively plausible than either (semantic) minimalism as proposed by Cappelen & Lepore or the positions appealing to pragmaticintrusion into the proposition expressed, but is also (ii) in accordance with ordinary people's intuitions. <![CDATA[<b>General terms and rigidity: another solution to the trivialization problem</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452014000100002&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt In this paper I am concerned with the problem of applying the notion of rigidity to general terms. In Naming and Necessity, Kripke has clearly suggested that we should include some general terms among the rigid ones, namely, those common nouns semantically correlated with natural substances, species and phenomena, in general, natural kinds -'water', 'tiger', 'heat'- and some adjectives -'red', 'hot', 'loud'. However, the notion of rigidity has been defined for singular terms; after all, the notion that Kripke has provided us with is the notion of a rigid designator. But general terms do not designate single individuals: rather, they apply to many of them. In sum, the original concept of rigidity cannot be straightforwardly applied to general terms: it has to be somehow redefined in order to make it cover them. As is known, two main positions have been put forward to accomplish that task: the identity of designation conception, according to which a rigid general term is one that designates the same property or kind in all possible worlds, and the essentialist conception, which conceives of a rigid general term as an essentialist one, namely, a term that expresses an essential property of an object. My purpose in the present paper is to defend a particular version of the identity of designation conception: on the proposed approach, a rigid general term will be one that expresses the same property in all possible worlds and names the property it expresses. In my opinion, the position can be established on the basis of an inference to the best explanation of our intuitive interpretation and evaluation, relative to counterfactual circumstances, of statements containing different kinds of general terms, which is strictly analogous to our intuitive interpretation and evaluation, relative to such circumstances, of statements containing different kinds of singular ones. I will argue that it is possible to offer a new solution to the trivialization problem that is thought to threaten all versions of the identity of designation conception of rigidity. Finally, I will also sketch a solution to the so-called 'over-generalization and under-generalization problems', both closely related to the above-mentioned one. <![CDATA[<b>La paradoja de Fitch y los mundos epistémicos abiertos</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452014000100003&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt En este artículo, daré una solución a la paradoja de Fitch que se basa en el quiebre de la clausura epistémica. Mi enfoque será semántico, en la línea de Beall (2009). A diferencia de la propuesta de éste, mi sistema es lógicamente clásico, y relativamente conservador respecto a las afirmaciones sobre el conocimiento; todas sus desviaciones se basarán en la introducción de afirmaciones modales. Para dar lugar a ello, introduciré mundos posibles anormales (en esto, me acerco a Beall), pero además, mundos abiertos de dos tipos distintos que funcionarán como explicación de las desviaciones epistémicas de los agentes.<hr/>In this paper, I will provide a solution to Fitch's paradox which is based in the failure of epistemic closure. My approach will be semantical, following Beall (2009). Unlike his proposal, my system is logically classical, and relatively conservative with respect to statements about knowledge; all its deviations will be caused by the introduction of modal statements. In order to make this happen, I will introduce abnormal possible worlds (in this, I'm close to Beall), but also open worlds of two different kinds, which will explain the epistemic deviations of the agents. <![CDATA[<b>Indiscernibilidade e identidade em química: aspectos filosóficos e formais</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452014000100004&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt Neste artigo tratamos, de um ponto de vista formal e filosófico, com alguns conceitos que fazem parte da química usual. As teorias da química, e seus conceitos, normalmente são apresentadas de um ponto de vista informal (não axiomatizada), e isso pode trazer dificuldades filosóficas (embora a química propriamente - bem como também as outras disciplinas da ciência aplicada - pareçam não sofrer qualquer restrição quanto a isso). Aqui estaremos ocupados em um aspecto parti-cu-lar, que diz respeito à indiscernibilidade de alguns objetos básicos da química, tais como átomos, moléculas, bem como de seus componentes. Começamos com uma visão geral da identidade destes compostos e seus componentes a partir de uma perspectiva filosófica e, em seguida, mostramos em que sentido o conceito de identidade dos compostos químicos é problemático em relação ao conceito correspondente de identidade na lógica e matemática clássicas (que, como em geral é suposto, estão 'alicerçando' as teorias químicas). Argumentamos que, por um lado, a química parece supor que esses objetos básicos precisam ser 'idênticos' (indistinguíveis) uns aos outros (como enfatizado há muito tempo por John Dalton, como veremos.) Por outro lado, do ponto de vista formal, se a lógica subjacente à teoria atômica for a lógica clássica (que também é pano de fundo da matemática padrão), coisas idênticas devem ser a mesma coisa e logo 'colapsar' em apenas uma (e este não é o caso em química, uma vez que temos uma enorme quantidade de átomos e moléculas semelhantes, mas não apenas um). Esta aparente contradição pode ser tratada de várias perspectivas e, aqui, propomos o uso de uma teoria de conjuntos não-clássica (a saber, a teoria de quase-conjuntos) para alicerçar uma formulação axiomática de certas teoria químicas, mostrando como essa diferente base matemática pode nos levar a uma visão que está mais perto da química em si. Como esta teoria não é conhecida em geral, uma breve revisão se faz necessária. Por último, mostramos como podemos construir modelos matemáticos para átomos e moléculas utilizando esta teoria de conjuntos alternativa evitando, assim, o problema lógico acima mencionado, e discutimos um pouco da abordagem mereológica dos compostos químicos a partir dessa perspectiva quase-conjuntista.<hr/>In this paper we consider some concepts that are part of standard chemistry from a formal point of view. Usually, concepts and theories of chemistry are presented in an informal way (not in an axiomatic way), and this move may present some philosophical diffculties (although chemistry itself - so as the other disciplines of applied science - does not seem to suffer with these diffculties). Here, we shall concentrate in the indiscernibility of some basic objects dealt with in chemistry, such as atoms, molecules, and their components, and we shall deal with their formal counterparts too. We begin with a general view about the identity of such elements and of their components, and then we show why the notion of identity of chemical objects is problematic with respect to the notion of identity of standard logic and mathematics (which by hypothesis underlies chemical theories). We suggest that, on the other hand, chemistry seems to suppose that some of these basic objects must be 'identical' (indistinguishable) from one another (as emphasized long time ago by John Dalton, as we shall see). On the other hand, from a formal point of view, if the underlying logic of atomic theory is classical logic (which is also the background for standard mathematics), identical things must be one and the same thing and, therefore, must collapse in just one thing. This apparent contradiction can be dealt with from different perspectives, and here we propose the use of a non-standard set theory (namely, quasi-set theory) to ground an axiomatic formulation of certain chemical theories, showing that such a move may lead us to a view closer to what says. Since this theory is not well known, a brief revision is necessary. Finally, we show how is it possible to consider mathematical models for atoms and molecules by using quasi-set theory, thus avoiding the logical problem mentioned above, and we discuss a little a mereological approach to chemical compounds by considering this quasi-set theoretical view. <![CDATA[<b>A relação entre ética e direito na filosofia política de Kant</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452014000100005&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=pt This article discusses the relationship between law and ethics in Kantian political philosophy. Unlike the dominant interpretation, I attempt to show that, in order for politics to achieve its goals, good will must be present. Two theses are defended here: first, that there is no gap between the political theses of the 1780s and those of the 1790s regarding an abandonment of the need for good will in the field of politics, i.e., the good will still remains a necessary condition for carrying out a republican constitution. Against an exclusively liberal interpretation, the second thesis argues that Kantian republicanism allows the state to take institutional measures to ensure the moral enlightenment of its citizens.<hr/>Este artigo discute as relações existentes entre direito e ética na filosofia política kantiana e, ao contrário da interpretação dominante, procura mostrar que a boa vontade precisa estar presente para que a política possa alcançar plenamente seus objetivos. Nesse sentido, defende-se aqui duas teses: primeira, que não há uma ruptura das teses políticas da década de oitenta com as teses políticas da década de noventa no sentido de um abandono da necessidade de uma boa vontade no campo da política, a qual é condição necessária para a realização de uma constituição republicana; segunda, contra uma interpretação exclusivamente liberal, defende-se que isso implica que o republicanismo kantiano permite que o Estado assuma medidas institucionais para um esclarecimento moral de seus cidadãos.