26 APhEx num 26, anno 2022

The Anthropocene is a theoretical proposal for the denomination of the current geological epoch, in which the human species is regarded as a new "force of nature". This contribution aims to present, firstly, the philosophical debate elaborated on this concept, and then to proceed with the analysis of the humanity-nature dualistic logic, present both in the notion of Anthropocene and in the ongoing ecologic crisis. This will make it possible to underline the constructive value of a reflection on the Anthropocene concerning the understanding of human nature in an era characterized by anthropogenic environmental changes.

This article aims to deal with the problem of function pluralism in biology. The debate on function pluralism involves two conflicting sides: between-discipline pluralism and within-discipline pluralism. The majority of philosophers of biology are between-discipline pluralists. According to them, different theories of biological function – the selected effects theory and the causal role theory – are appropriate to different branches of biology; the selected effects theory is the most appropriate theory for evolutionary biology, while the causal role theory is the most appropriate theory for physiology – e.g., anatomy, neuroscience, and developmental genetics. On the contrary, within-discipline pluralism holds that we should seek out a plurality of functions inside any branch of biology. More precisely, according to within-discipline pluralists, selected effects functions and causal role functions can coexist within the same field. In this paper, I will introduce arguments both in favour and against between-discipline pluralism. Afterwards, I will exhibit how the arguments provided against between-discipline pluralism motivate within-discipline pluralism. Finally, I will develop an argument that may be of help to prove the case of within-discipline pluralism.

Ronald Dworkin (1931-2013) has been one of the most influential among political and legal philosophers of our time. This profile offers a critical and diachronic reading of his main theses in the field of jurisprudence: the first is the rights thesis; the second is the thesis of the law as interpretation; the third is the thesis of the law as a branch of political morality.