Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

The meanings of utterances and thoughts are commonly regarded in philosophical semantics as abstract objects, called «propositions», which account for how different utterances and thoughts can be synonymous and which constitute the primary truth-bearers. I argue that meanings are instead natural properties that play causal roles in the world, that the kind of «One over Many» thinking underlying the characterization of shared meanings as abstract objects is misguided and that utterances and thoughts having truth-values in virtue of their meanings does not entail that meanings themselves are truth-bearers.  

This article establishes a dialogue around the concept of truth presented in Leonardo Polo’s thought and three contemporary thinkers. First, this article will perform an analysis of the french thinker Michel Foucault through his work "Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison". Second, it will describe the main points of confluence with the book "Faith of the demons (or atheism surpassed)[1]" written by the french philosopher Fabrice Hadjadj. Third, it will analyze the book "The twelve rules" written by the canadian psychologist Jordan Bernt Peterson   [1] Téngase en cuenta que en el momento de redacción del presente artículo el libro de Fabrice Hadjadj con título original “La foi des démons (ou l’atheisme dépassé)” todavía no ha sido traducido al inglés.

The Dionysian is one of the fundamental concepts of Nietzsche’s thought, presenting itself in diverse configurations at different stages of his philosophy. In order to understand this development, it is essential to determine exactly the genesis of this concept. For that, we begin by analysing the relationship between the Dionysian and Schopenhauer’s philosophy. Next, we deal with the meaning of the Dionysian in the book in which it is first presented, The Birth of Tragedy. Finally, we face up to the transformation that the concept of the Dionysian undergoes in Nietzsche’s mature work.

The emergence of Einstein's theory of relativity in the early 20th century sparked debate about the validity of Kantian philosophy. The positivist Schlick argued that it was refuted, since it was inextricably linked to Newton's physics and the concepts of absolute space and time. The Neo-Kantians Natorp and Sellien defended Kant's validity based on the difference between philosophy and science. Cassirer and Reichenbach advocated a modified neo-Kantianism based on constitutive principles. And Einstein and Carnap rejected both pure Kantianism and positivism by embracing epistemological holism.

In this article we analyse the intrinsic limits of notions such as "human dignity" and other cross-cultural analogues in the light of the inescapable asymmetry imposed by the inherent rules of inclusion, exclusion and hierarchy of all language. In this framework, we analyse the exceptionality of human dignity for the very concept of human rights. On this basis, we argue that it is imperative to keep the privileges we recognise for human animals distinct from the rights we recognise for other non-human animals, without arguing to the detriment of the latter.  Finally, within the framework of epistemological and linguistic analysis, we recognise the paradoxical and inescapable character of human rights, which "violently" impose an order of meaning that, ultimately, seem to be based on the exclusive will of the legislator.