Jorge García

The aim of this study was to evaluate the neuromuscular response to an agility and repeated sprint ability test according to the level of competition in futsal players. A total of 33 players from two elite teams and one amateur team participated in the study. The participants completed an agility t-test, a 30 m-speed test, and a RSA test. A countermovement jump test and a tensiomyography test of the rectus femoris and biceps femoris of both legs were carried out before and after the tests. RSA test revealed better sprint times in elite players compared to amateurs in the seven bouts, as well as in the 30 m sprint and in the agility test. In conclusion, elite players showed greater performance in the RSA test, in the 30 m tests and in the agility test compared to amateur players. The contractile properties were not a key factor in the RSA performance of the futsal players.

This paper examines the points of disagreement between Petrus Camper and J. W. von Goethe regarding the existence of the inter-maxillary bone in humans as the link between man and the rest of nature. This historical case illustrates the fundamental role of aesthetic judgements in scientific discovery. Thus, I shall show how the eighteenth century discovery of the inter-maxillary bone in humans was largely determined by aesthetic factors—specifically, those sets of assumptions and criteria implied in the aesthetic schemata of Camper and Goethe. I argue that the relevance of scientifically ascertainable morphological properties that count as evidence for the existence of bona fide anatomical structures depend on the aesthetic schema adopted by the communities assessing the classification. At the same time, I propose and explain mechanisms by which aesthetic considerations might determine the acceptability of empirical claims about the world. Based on the reconstruction of the arguments of Camper and Goethe, I conclude that aesthetic considerations play a substantive role in both the generation and preliminary evaluation of scientific hypotheses. This paper suggests a complementary relation between the mediation of aesthetic criteria in theory choice and in scientific discovery in that while aesthetic considerations in theory choice lead to conservatism; in the context of discovery they often lead to innovation.

RESUMEN Este artículo aborda la violencia como problema filosófico desde dos enfoques de pensamiento ubicados en latitudes geo-históricas distintas. En primer lugar, se presenta a la Escuela de Frankfurt, a través de la obra Dialéctica de la ilustración (1947). En segundo lugar, desde América Latina se expone la Filosofía de la Liberación, a la luz de Enrique Dussel en los planteamientos de su obra El encubrimiento del otro: el origen del mito de la modernidad (1994). Ambos discursos articulan un análisis crítico del fenómeno de la violencia, diagnosticando los síntomas degradados del proyecto civilizatorio de la Modernidad. ABSTRACT This article addresses violence as a philosophical problem from two approaches to thinking located in different geo-historical latitudes. First, the Frankfurt School is presented, through the Dialectic work of illustration (1944/1947). Secondly, from Latin America the Philosophy of Liberation is exposed, in the light of Enrique Dussel and the expositions of his work The invention of the Americas: Eclipse of "the Other" and the Myth of Modernity (1994). Both speeches articulate a critical analysis of the phenomenon of violence, diagnosing the degraded symptoms of the civilization project of Modernity.

Durante los siglos XVII y XVIII el mundo hispánico asistió a un debate acerca de la defensa de la conquista de América y la administración de los territorios americanos de la Monarquía española. Desde el pensamiento y desde la política no faltaron quienes elevaros críticamente la voz en demanda de una narrativa que situara en su justo término la Historia compartida por los españoles de ambos hemisferios frente a las acusaciones de otras potencias rivales europeas. En esta polémica, la defensa del indígena americano resultó clave. Como súbditos del rey, fueron objeto de reflexiones por parte de españoles peninsulares y americanos, que destacaron su continuada protección legislativa.

Este artículo aborda la violencia como problema filosófico desde dos enfoques de pensamiento ubicados en latitudes geo-históricas distintas. En primer lugar, se presenta a la Escuela de Frankfurt, a través de la obra Dialéctica de la ilustración (1944/1947). En segundo lugar, desde América Latina se expone la Filosofía de la Liberación, a la luz de Enrique Dussel en los planteamientos de su obra El encubrimiento del otro: el origen del mito de la modernidad (1994). Ambos discursos articulan un análisis crítico del fenómeno de la violencia, diagnosticando los síntomas degradados del proyecto civilizatorio de la Modernidad.

Background No studies have been conducted in Mexico to ascertain what ethical problems doctors working at hospitals deal with. This article aims to describe the ethical conflicts most commonly identified by Mexican internists and the importance they attribute to each of these conflicts. Methods Voluntary survey to the members of the Internal Medicine Association of Mexico. Results Responses were submitted by 347 internists. Half of those face ethical conflicts almost always or frequently. The most commonplace and relevant conflicts are those resulting from the clinical relationship (communication, confidentiality, informed consent, assessment of mental capacity, decisions involving incapacitated patients, and conflicts with family members), and secondly those problems related with the end of life (palliative care, withholding or withdrawing treatment, and “No CPR orders”). To resolve conflicts they seek support through protocols, Institutional Ethics Committees (IECs), and consultations with colleagues and, occasionally, with bioethics experts. Protocols and IECs are the tools most in demand among them. Conclusions 1) the most frequent and relevant conflicts are those caused by the clinical relationship, above all those due to doctor–patient communication, and secondly those due to problems which arise at the end of life; 2) though nearly all of them have doubts about how to resolve conflicts, the vast majority are satisfied with the way in which they do so; 3) to deal with conflicts, they seek support mainly in protocols, IECs, and consultation with colleagues; and 4) in order to resolve them better, what they most demand are protocols and IECs, but also bioethics consultants.

Appearing in English for the first time, this book comprises two of Ortega’s most important works, ¿Qué es conocimiento? and the essay “Ideas y creencias.” This is Ortega’s attempt to systematically present the foundations of his metaphysics of human life and, on that basis, to provide a radical philosophical account of knowledge. In so doing, he criticizes idealism and overcomes it. Accordingly, this book goes well beyond a treatise on epistemology; in fact, as understood in modern philosophy, this discipline and its questions are shown to be derivative and, in that sense, they are transcended here by Ortega’s systematic effort. Written during the time of his maturity, these works are representative of his fruitful and radical period. Both ¿Qué es conocimiento? and “Ideas y creencias” are equally decisive not only for the understanding and radical completion of Ortega’s work, but also for their relevance to the work of continental philosophers during the same period and for years to come