Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2017) XIX/1

Scarica il FullText



Leonardi Emanuele, Pisani Giacomo

Basic income. Guest editors' preface

Leonardi Emanuele, Pisani Giacomo

Materiali preparatori. Note di contesto e questionario

Leonardi Emanuele, Pisani Giacomo

Il reddito di base contro la nuova logica dello sfruttamento

Coin Francesca

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Lucarelli Stefano

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Marazzi Christian

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Morini Cristina

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Murra Emanuele

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Pennacchi Laura

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Romano Onofrio

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Romano Roberto

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Tripodina Chiara

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Vertova Giovanna

Potenzialità e limiti del reddito di base: risposte al questionario di Etica & Politica

Pisani Giacomo, Vattimo Gianni

Il reddito di base come condizione di libertà. Riflessioni conclusive

Carrizosa Prieto Esther

La renta básica ciudadana en el ordenamiento jurídico español. Una propuesta desde el ámbito jurídico

Cavaliere Anna

Una battaglia fuori moda

Gallo Lassere Davide

Après la loi travail: le revenu social garanti dans les quartiers populaires

Howard Neil

Basic income and the anti-slavery movement


Grigoletto Simone

Supererogation and the limits of moral obligations. Guest editor's preface

Archer Alfred

Forgiveness and the limits of duty

Aurelio Michael Stephen G.

"The step from duty to charity”. John Rawls on the natural duty of mutual aid and the possibility of supererogation in a just and fair society in “A theory of justice”

Benn Claire

Supererogatory spandrels

Grigoletto Simone

Why proximity matters for the concept of supererogation

Mellema Gregory

Supererogation, moral effort, and the limits of obligation

Naumann Katharina

Self-perfection, self-knowledge, and the supererogatory

Valera Luca

When supererogation is supererogatory. A case of medical ethics


Maffettone Pietro

Rawls’ duty of assistance: a defence and re-elaboration

Magris Aldo

La creazione: perché dal nulla e non piuttosto da qualcosa?

Slongo Paolo

Bergson: obbligazione e ordine ne “Le due fonti della morale e della religione”

Fanciullacci Riccardo

Possibilità e limiti di una teoria critica dell’alienazione



Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics is an open access philosophical journal, being published only in an electronic format. The journal aims at promoting research and reflection, both historically and theoretically, in the field of moral and political philosophy, with no cultural preclusion or adhesion to any cultural current. Contributions should be submitted in one of these languages: Italian, English, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish. All essays should include an English abstract of max. 200 words. The editorial staff especially welcomes interdisciplinary contributions with special attention to the main trends of the world of practice. The journal has an anonymous double peer review referee system. Three issues per year are expected. The copyright of the published articles remain to the authors. We ask that in any future use of them Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics be quoted as a source. All products on this site are released with a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5 IT)


The Editors of Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics have taken every possible measure to ensure the quality of the material here published and, in particular, they guarantee that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely, and that all papers have been reviewed by unprejudiced and qualified reviewers. The publication of an article through a peer-review process is intended as an essential feature of any serious scientific community. The decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on the paper’s relevance, originality and clarity, the study’s validity and its relevance to the mission of the journal. In order to guarantee the quality of the published papers, the Editors encourage reviewers to provide detailed comments to motivate their decisions. The comments will help the Editorial Board to decide the outcome of the paper, and will help to justify this decision to the author. If the paper is accepted with the request of revision, the comments should guide the author in making the revisions for the final manuscript. All material submitted to the journal remains confidential while under review. Once the author receives a positive answer, he/she should send the final version of the article since proofs will not be sent to him/her. E&P will publish the paper within twelve months from the moment of the acceptance, and the author will be informed of the publication. The journal is committed to such standards as originality in research papers, precise references in discussing other scholars’ positions, avoiding plagiarism. E&P takes these standards extremely seriously, because we think that they embody scientific method and are the mark of real scholarly communication. Since Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics is devoted solely to scientific and academic quality, the journal neither has any submission charges nor any article processing charges. The following guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors


EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, is the publisher of the peer reviewed international journal Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential step of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher. Authors need to ensure that the submitted article is the work of the submitting author(s) and is not plagiarized, wholly or in part. They must also make sure that the submitted article is original, is not wholly or in part a re-publication of the author’s earlier work, and contains no fraudulent data. It is also their responsibility to check that all copyrighted material within the article has permission for publication and that material for which the author does not personally hold copyright is not reproduced without permission. Finally, authors should ensure that the manuscript submitted is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.


Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics is a peer-reviewed journal, and Authors are obliged to participate in our double blind peer review process. Authors must make sure that all and only the contributors to the article are listed as authors. Authors should also ensure that all authors provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.


Both the Referee and the Author remain anonymous throughout the “double blind” review process. Referees are selected according to their expertise in their particular fields. Referees have a responsibility to be objective in their judgments; to have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, with respect to the authors and/or with respect to the research funders; to point out relevant published work which is not yet cited by the author(s); and to treat the reviewed articles confidentially.

Editors hold full authority to reject/accept an article; to accept a paper only when reasonably certain; to promote publication of corrections or retractions when errors are found; to preserve anonymity of reviewers; and to have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept. If an Editor feels that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, they will declare it to the other Editors. The other Editors will select referees and make all decisions on the paper.


Members of the Editorial Board ensure the monitoring and safeguarding of the publishing ethics. This comprises the strict policy on plagiarism and fraudulent data, the strong commitment to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed, and the strict preclusion of business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. Whenever it is recognized that a published paper contains a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report, it will be corrected promptly. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it will be retracted. The retraction will be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.


Past issues with download and visitors statistics for each article are provided here:


Riccardo Fanciullacci (Venezia)

Pierpaolo Marrone (Trieste)


Elvio Baccarini (Rijeka)

Roberto Festa (Trieste)

Giovanni Giorgini (Bologna)

Edoardo Greblo (Trieste)

Fabio Polidori (Trieste)


Enrico Marchetto (Trieste)


A. Agnelli † (Trieste), A. Allegra (Perugia), G. Alliney (Macerata), S. Amato (Catania), M. Anzalone (Napoli), D. Ardilli (Modena), F. Aronadio (Roma), G. Azzoni (Pavia), F. Bacchini (Sassari), E. Berti (Padova), M. Bettetini (Milano), P. Bettineschi (Venezia), P. Biasetti (Padova), G. Bistagnino (Milano) R. Caporali (Bologna), A.A. Cassi (Bergamo), G. Catapano (Padova), M. Cossutta (Trieste), L. Cova (Trieste), S. Cremaschi (Vercelli), G. Cevolani (Modena), R. Cristin (Trieste), U. Curi (Padova), G. De Anna (Udine), P. Donatelli (Roma), P. Donini (Milano), M. Faraguna (Milano), M. Ferraris (Torino), L. Floridi (Oxford), R. Frega (Bologna), S. Fuselli (Verona), A. Fussi (Pisa), C. Galli (Bologna), R. Giovagnoli (Roma), P. Kobau (Torino), E. Irrera (Bologna), E. Lecaldano (Roma), L.A. Macor (Oxford), E. Manganaro (Trieste), G. Maniaci (Palermo), R. Martinelli (Trieste), F.G. Menga (Tübingen), R. Mordacci (Milano), V. Morfino (Milano), B. de Mori (Padova), M. Pagano (Vercelli), G. Pellegrino (Roma), V. Rasini (Modena-Reggio Emilia), M. Reichlin (Milano), M. Renzo (Stirling), A. Rigobello (Roma), P.A. Rovatti (Trieste), S. Semplici (Roma), A. Schiavello (Palermo), A. Sciumè (Bergamo), M. Sgarbi (Venezia), F. Toto (Roma), F. Trabattoni (Milano), F. Trifirò (London), M.S. Vaccarezza (Genova), C. Vigna (Venezia), P. Vignola (Guayaquil) S. Zeppi † (Trieste).


J. Allan (New Zealand), K. Ballestrem (Germany), T. Bedorf (Germany), G. Betz (Germany), W. Block (USA), M. Byron (USA), S. Chambers (Canada), J. Coleman (UK), C. Cowley (Ireland), W. Edelglass (USA), C.L. Geshekter (USA), A. Kalyvas (USA), J. Kelemen (Hungary), F. Klampfer (Slovenia), M. Knoll (Turkey), C. Illies (Germany), D. Innerarity (Spain), A. Lever (Switzerland), H. Lindahl (Netherlands), J. Marti (Spain), M. Matulovic (Croatia), J. McCormick (USA), N. Miscevic (Croatia), A. Moles (Hungary), L. Paulson (France), A. Przylesbski (Poland), J. Quong (USA) V. Rakic (Serbia), A. Schaap (UK), B. Schultz (USA), N. Tarcov (USA), D. Webb (UK), J.P. Zamora Bonilla (Spain).


B. Accarino (Università di Firenze), A. Altobrando (China University of Politics and Law, Pechino) A. Allegra (Università per Stranieri, Perugia), S. Amato (Università di Catania), P. Bettineschi (Università di Padova), S. Blancu (LUMSA, Roma), M. Ballistreri (Università di Torino), M. Bettetini (IULM, Milano), C. Canullo (Università di Macerata), R. Caporali (Università di Bologna), G. Cevolani (IMT, Lucca), F. Ciaramelli (Università di Napoli, Federico II), A. Cislaghi (Università di Trieste), R. Cristin (Università di Trieste), G. De Anna (Università di Udine), P. Donatelli (Università di Roma, La Sapienza), A. Fabris (Università di Pisa), S. Ferrando (Université de Strasbourg), A. Fussi (Università di Pisa), C. Gerbaz (Università di Rijeka), B. Giovanola (Università di Macerata), G. Grandi (Università di Padova), L. Greco (Università di Oxford), M.L. Lanzillo (Università di Bologna), G. Maniaci (Università di Palermo), R. Martinelli (Università di Trieste), F. Menga (Università di Tubinga), F. Miano (Università di Roma, Tor Vergata), M. Monaldi (Università di Trieste), R. Mordacci (Università San Raffaele, Milano), B. De Mori (Università di Padova), G. Pellegrino (LUISS, Roma), U. Pomarici (Università della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”), V. Rasini (Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia), C. Rofena (Università Ca’ Foscari, Venezia), A. Schiavello (Università di Palermo), P. Šustar (Università di Rijeka), M. Trobok (Università di Rijeka), F. Turoldo (Università Ca’ Foscari, Venezia), M. Vaccarezza (Università di Genova), S. Zanardo (Università Europea di Roma).

E&P è indicizzata in / E&P is indexed on


Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 31
  • Publication
    Possibilità e limiti di una teoria critica dell’alienazione
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017)
    Fanciullacci, Riccardo
    This paper explores the possibilities and limits of the category of “alienation” taken as the cornerstone of a critical theory of society, as it has been recently rehabilitated in philosophical literature (R. Jaeggi, S. Haber et al.) Firstly, it reconstructs the main features that any theory of alienation attributes to the alienated condition. Beisdes, it introduces a criterion to distinguish between these theories, those for which the alienated condition has among its essential features a certain reference to the subjective experience of loss and those for which this experience is not essential. After showing how Marx’s theory of alienation, despite some ambiguous wording, belongs to the second group, I try to prove that the theories of the second group use the word “alienation” in a way that does not betray its original inspiration and its common uses. At this point, I formulate an epistemological constraint for the theories recognizing a pivotal role to the experience of loss: they must take into account the supposedly alienated subjects and address themselves to them as a second persons. Once clarified the extent to which it is possible to develop a consistent theory of alienation, finally I offer some reasons for taking seriously such a theory in relation to the tasks of social critique.
      382  1730
  • Publication
    Bergson: obbligazione e ordine ne “Le due fonti della morale e della religione”
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017)
    Slongo, Paolo
    In “The Two Sources of Morality and Religion”, Bergson seems to conceive religion as a wide motion aiming to ‘compensation’, counterbalancing the intelligence dangers. Religion ensures group cohesiveness and reveals its function responding to the closed society self-preservation demands, but it can annichilate the vital movement nourishing social dynamics.
      681  536
  • Publication
    La creazione: perché dal nulla e non piuttosto da qualcosa?
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017)
    Magris, Aldo
    In this paper I offer a survey on the different patterns of the narrative on creation in the mythological cosmogonies of ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece and a sketch of God’s creative act according to the Bible, along with an analysis of some of the textual and theoretical problems involved in. I show how the inquiry about an absolute Beginning of the world is contradictory, and that reality is better explained by a Principle than by an absolute Beginning.
      400  3641
  • Publication
    Rawls’ duty of assistance: a defence and re-elaboration
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017)
    Maffettone, Pietro
    This paper examines Rawls’ duty of assistance (DOA). It argues that some of the major criticisms that have been levelled against the DOA are based on a mischaracterisation of Rawls’ position in ‘LP’. The paper also argues that what many of Rawls’ critics have failed to appreciate is not how little Rawls’ DOA asks well-ordered peoples to do, but rather how much. The paper suggest that, taken at face value, the latter is in fact is too much to ask and much more than we can realistically achieve or allow ourselves to attempt. Finally, the paper provides a sketch of how to reconceptualise the DOA in a way that both addresses the aforementioned objection and, at the same time, is compatible with ‘LP’s general framework.
      341  477
  • Publication
    When supererogation is supererogatory. A case of medical ethics
    (EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2017-04-28)
    Valera, Luca
    In this paper I analyze critically real cases of actions, often deemed “supererogatory” in the context of bioethics and medical ethics, in order to assess whether it is appropriate to classify them in this way. More specifically, I try to discuss the moral legitimacy of a consequence of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), i.e., the freezing of the so-called supernumerary embryos, and their “adoption”, focusing on the possibility of it being a supererogatory action. The hypothesis of this paper is that we often misuse “supererogation” to describe actions that do not have a clear moral connotation, since it is offered as a “shortcut” to resolve moral issues without clearly defining the issues at stake. In order to determine whether “embryo adoption” can be defined as “supererogatory”, indeed, we have first to assess its morality and then get back to the definition of supererogation given by Heyd. Once acknowledged that embryo adoption is not a supererogatory action, I conclude with some anthropological and ethical considerations about this bioethical solution. Furthermore, I suggest that the misuse of supererogation, far from helping the development of an ethical theory, should create a kind of moral dichotomy among ordinary and extraordinary (heroic) way of acting. In these regards, ethics does not need any heroism or sanctity. Too many times, thus, supererogation is supererogatory, especially in the field of bioethics.
      320  246