Francisco Díaz Montilla

In this work we will argue that legal reasoning is best understood as an instance of defeasible reasoning. So, it is important to distinguish between defeasible and not defeasible rule of inference. Perhaps the paradigmatic example is modus ponens. Given a legal rule R, R has the following form: A →B, where A refers to a factual condition and B refers to a legal consequence. So, if A holds, then B is the case. But in some situations, exceptions can arise, and this means that B only holds probably. So, there are not conclusive modus ponens in law, defeatable.

Se aplicó el asistente de prueba Tree Proof Generator (TPG) para determinar la corrección lógica de la primera vía tomista sobre la existencia de Dios, así como la corrección de algunas relaciones conceptuales en metafísica modal (necesidad y posibilidad), en epistemología (conocimiento) y en la formulación estructural del árbol de Porfirio. La investigación procura no solo abordar las tesis en cuestión desde el punto de vista computacional, sino que ofrece un marco reflexivo sobre tres condiciones necesarias para una filosofía asistida por computadora; en tal sentido, la investigación se compromete con la idea de que la filosofía es análisis conceptual y argumentación, que pensar filosóficamente no supone un privilegio epistémico o cognitivo y que se requiere de un lenguaje formalmente especificable para ‘hacer’ filosofía.

This work seeks to answer the question of whether the Internet is epistemically secure. The problem is approached from a double path (i) analytical (a priori, logical-philosophical) and (ii) empirical. For the first, the treatment is based on the logic of justification; while the second, in a survey in which respondents answer on the use and assessment of the information offered by the internet. The argument presented is as follows: If epistemic security requires the exercise or implementation of epistemic virtues and those practices by the user are weak, then the Internet is not epistemically secure. Based on the established results, it is concluded that the internet is not epistemic safe and some risks that this entails are discussed.