Lorenzo Peña

Orayen proposes some kind of intensional approach in philosophy of logic, with meanings playing a central role in implementing the notion of logical truth. Orayen regards Quine as his main interlocutor. The major topic gone into through the book is logical form, validity and logical truth. As an outgrowth, Quine's operationalist view of language receives an extensive coverage and discussion. The investigation into the notion of logical truth and validity leads to a critical assessment of the relevantist challenge to the classical conception. This critical notice casts doubt on Orayen's defence of analyticity as a requirement for logical truth

La filosofía analítica ha contribuido a esclarecer la cuestión de los dilemas morales, sobre todo gracias a la utilización de la lógica deóntica. Vienen aquí examinados los debates recientes en el seno de dicha corriente filosófica sobre los conflictos de obligaciones.. Se pone de manifiesto cuán difícil es admitir conflictos- morales sin pagar el precio de aceptar contradicciones verdaderas. Pero, a la inversa de lo habitual en quienes sostienen esa tesis, el artículo, en vez de pronunciarse en contra de que haya conflictos morales, trata de mostrar que sí los hay y, a tenor de ello, aboga por el reconocimiento de contradicciones verdaderas en la vida moral. Tales contradicciones pueden entenderse en el marco de una metafísica a la vez gradualista y aspectualista.

This essay belongs to a series of papers whose aim is to show that some differing accounts of relations in contemporary philosophy are flawed because they resort to what can be labelled `hylomorphism'. Some standard difficulties of Aristotelianism reappear in these analytical approaches. All of them resort to «form» as playing the role of `«ctualizing» a given «matter» by making it into another entity. In these accounts the actualizing or structuring form lacks the quality it bestows upon the matter it clings to. The puzzle lies in those forms' baffling slipperiness; for they cannot be meant or intended outside their role of actualizing or informing some matter. But, when we point to their playing such a role, we cannot mean or intend the form itself, but only the informed matter -- or, if you please, the result of its being thus informed. For some approaches, a problem also arises concerning matter itself, one closely resembling Aristotelian problems with prime matter -- problems which have prompted some interpreters to deny that Aristotle posited any such entity Foot note 1_1. What in these approaches plays the role of Aristotelian matter, when taken «prior to» or outside of its being «informed» by a form, lacks sufficient self being and endowment with qualities and ontological profile to be an entity directly meant as such. Such a problem e.g. affects Tractarian «objects», which are both form and content, but which can be meant as neither separately. It follows that their ipseity always eludes us and evades being meant or signified. As we are about to see, a similar problem affects Bergmann's new ontology