Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2020) XXII/1

Scarica il FullText

CONTENTS / SOMMARIO


Monographica I.
ANTI-SPECIESISM BETWEEN SCIENCE AND LAW


Colombo Raffaella

Anti-Speciesism between Science and Law

Andrews Kristin

Ethical Implications of Animal Personhood and the Role for Science

Biuso Alberto Giovanni

Per una etoantropologia

Burgat Florence

Donner des droits aux animaux, une exigence de la raison

Grioni Merli Michele

Per una liberazione animale?

Nicolini Coen Cosimo

Condizioni di possibilità dei nostri obblighi nei confronti degli animali non umani

Colombo Raffaella

Una regione di dissomiglianza

Piazzesi Benedetta

La sofferenza animale come problema per la scienza

Mormino Gianfranco

Una superiorità schiacciante. La comparazione tra l’uomo e gli altri animali


Focus I.
SU WALTER BENJAMIN


Herrera Ruiz Juan Carlos

Pensando el fascismo desde Walter Benjamin

Raciti Andrea

Il fantoccio e il nano. Sullo stato di eccezione in Walter Benjamin


Focus II.
L’UMANO IN DISCUSSIONE


Redaelli Roberto

Divenire uomo. La duplice dimensione dell’umano in Windelband e Rickert

Russo Marco

Il futuro di una tradizione: l’umanesimo come sfida del Terzo Millennio


Symposium I.
Gianfrancesco Zanetti, Filosofia della vulnerabilità. Percezione, discriminazione, diritto


Ansuántegui Roig Francisco Javier

Sentidos, Percepción, Vulnerabilidad. En torno a Filosofia della vulnerabilità de Gianfrancesco Zanetti

Barranco Avilés María Del Carmen

Los sentidos de la vulnerabilidad. Sobre ""Filosofia della vulnerabilità"" de Gianfrancesco Zanetti

Diciotti Enrico

""La percezione e i problemi della vulnerabilità""

Gazzolo Tommaso

Esercizi di estesiologia giuridica

Lo Giudice Alessio

Ascolto e giudizio. Sulla costruzione dello straniero morale a partire dalla filosofia della vulnerabilità di Gianfrancesco Zanetti

Pastore Baldassarre

Vulnerabilità situata e risposte alle vulnerazioni

Rigo Enrica

Una filosofia della vulnerabilità per stare con il problema

Zanetti Gianfrancesco

Repliche ai miei critici


Symposium II.
Rocco Ronchi, Il canone minore. Verso una filosofia della natura


Adinolfi Massimo

Di un possibile equivoco, nella medesima direzione

Cusinato Guido

Pensare il mostruoso. Un dialogo con Rocco Ronchi

Leoni Federico

Politica e mistica. Su Il canone minore di Rocco Ronchi

Polidori Fabio

Come un respiro

Poma Iolanda

Di alcuni motivi nel canone minore di Rocco Ronchi

Rasini Vallori

Afferenze. Plessner, Weizsäcker e il canone minore

Recalcati Massimo

Qualche nota critica sul Lacan “minore” di Ronchi

Ronchi Rocco

A proposito del Canone minore. Risposte agli amici


Varia.

Corigliano Fabio

L’eredità inespressa. Una nota sul “fantasma” di Leibniz

D'urso Francesco

Logica e storia: l’attualismo giuridico di Arnaldo Volpicelli

García Ferrer Borja

Una dictadura invisible. Genealogía e impacto del sufrimiento psíquico en la sociedad de mercado

Maffettone Pietro, Muldoon Ryan

On the Normative Relevance of Systemic Risk

Marzocca Ottavio

Beni comuni e ragione economica. Sulla proprietà e sull’abuso

Pongiglione Francesca

Is It All a Matter of Selfishness? Towards the Formulation of Moral Blame for Anti- Environmental Behavior

Vergani Mario

Vulnerabilità. Premesse fenomenologiche delle categorie giuridiche nel pensiero di Levinas

Croce Michael

Teorie dei vizi. Un’analisi critica

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 38
  • Publication
    Teorie dei vizi. Un’analisi critica
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2020)
    Croce, Michael
    This paper offers a critical analysis of the current debate in vice theory. Its main aim is to pro-vide the reader with the conceptual and methodological tools to navigate the discussion among reliabilist, responsibilist, and obstructivist approaches to moral and epistemic vices. After a brief exploration of the reasons underlying the recent flourishing of vice theories (§2), the re-sponsibilist account is introduced (§3) and several critical remarks are offered to ensure that this view can accommodate the cases of malevolent and indifferent individuals (§4). The two following sections are devoted to a critical discussion of vice-reliabilism (§5) and Quassim Cas-sam’s obstructivism (§6). The conclusive section (§7) provides reasons to favor vice-responsibilism over vice-reliabilism and Heather Battaly’s pluralist approach, and sheds light on the innovative features of an obstructivist reading.
      185  779
  • Publication
    Vulnerabilità. Premesse fenomenologiche delle categorie giuridiche nel pensiero di Levinas
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2020)
    Vergani, Mario
    The article aims at analysing the relevant presence of juridical categories in Levinas’s Philosophy and at reconducting them to their phenomenological premises. The essay is divided in four parts: 1. justice, right and law; 2. the collapse of the law; 3. explanation thanks to the biblical figure of Ritzpa Bath Ajà; 4. conclusions about the levinasian contribution to the studies on vulnerability. For Levinas, vulnerability represents the phenomenological premise to think the collapse of the law, when right is exposed to what it cannot contain, to the significance of the justice.
      194  462
  • Publication
    On the Normative Relevance of Systemic Risk
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2020)
    Maffettone, Pietro
    ;
    Muldoon, Ryan
    The social world is permeated by risk exposure, and especially systemic risk, that is, risk we cannot really hedge against or protect ourselves from. Systemic risk is determined by the basic structure of a social system and affects the kind of choices we are able to make in our lives. We argue that when systemic risk is ‘too low’ society becomes stagnant as it does not allow for pro-cesses of creative destruction that, according to a long tradition of economic thinking, are at the core of what allows for growth, and thus progress. In the same way, when levels of systemic risk are too low, the range of option risks that individuals can decide to bear is itself too low and thus hampers their self-respect. At the same time, we will argue that when levels of systemic risk are too high, society runs the risk of marginalizing the potential contributions to innovation and growth of a large part of its members, for when there is too much systemic risk, too much of one’s life is uncertain, and thus investing in one’s future becomes less important. Excessive levels of systemic risk entail a lesser ability to pursue one’s conception of the good.
      194  331
  • Publication
    Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2020) XXII/1
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2020)
      154  3271
  • Publication
    Is It All a Matter of Selfishness? Towards the Formulation of Moral Blame for Anti- Environmental Behavior
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2020)
    Pongiglione, Francesca
    The moral evaluation of actions that disregard climate change, in individual as well as public ethics, is complex. A clear moral judgment itself is difficult to reach in both contexts, as we are far from paradigm moral cases where specific people provoke harm to easily identifiable others. However, for people to seriously engage in climate change mitigation, it has to be clear why it is wrong not to do so. There is therefore a need to frame moral responsibility for anti-environmen-tal behavior using language and concepts that are understandable to a broad public. This paper will argue that the concept of selfishness, properly construed, is the most appropriate tool for describing and morally evaluating human behavior that disregards climate change. A specific consequentialist definition of selfishness will be provided to this purpose. Some objections to framing the environmental decision in this way will be raised in public as well as individual ethics. In the public sphere, moral deliberations are complicated by the conflict between the rights of the present generation and those of future ones. In individual ethics, the inconsequentiality of individual emissions calls into question the very existence of a moral imperative to act pro-envi-ronmentally. The paper will thus investigate the grounds on which we can hold accountable pol-icy makers who refuse to take action on climate change, focusing on the concept of future dis-counting. With regard to the individual dimension, a proposal will be advanced on the basis of a non-superfluous causal contribution to collective-impact cases. In both contexts, the paper will eventually argue that anti-environmental actions can be defined as selfish according to the defini-tion provided.
      216  131