Joseba Pascual-Alba

This paper aims to provide a minimalist meta-philosophical elucidation of ‘scientific pluralism’. I try to do so by pursuing its ‘lowest common denominator’, which I identify as inclusiveness. Although the term ‘scientific pluralism’ implies some unity among pluralists, no clear criteria exist for defining what constitutes a pluralist. As the primary characterisations are constructed negatively by opposing other viewpoints, it is essential to consider the positive aspect of the concept for a more precise and complete understanding. My primary objective here is to clarify and expand on the idea of ‘scientific pluralism’ by adopting a positive perspective. To accomplish this, I will adhere to the following steps: (1) I shall begin by introducing the topic and discussing the issue of the plurality of pluralisms; (2) I will subsequently highlight key examples of general scientific pluralisms, as they explicitly delineate themselves against “monism” and “relativism” (reconceptualised as ‘continuism’ and ‘discontinuism’); (3) Drawing upon the latter and what Kellert, Longino & Waters (Kellert, Scientific Pluralism 2006) refer to as the “pluralist stance”, I will advocate for inclusiveness as the ‘lowest common denominator’ of current scientific pluralisms. This will provide us with a means to adopt a positive stance, characterised by the acceptance of scientific multiplicity while including the opportune partial continuities and discontinuities; finally, (4) I will present concluding remarks.

In this article, I explore the connection between Feyerabend’s overarching anarchism and Ian Hacking’s “anarcho-rationalism,” as presented in his “styles project.” Both philosophers primarily discussed the scientific method in relation to the unity of science. I first analyze Feyerabend’s notion of anarchism by examining his central theses against the unity of method and the unity of science. I then delve into Hacking’s methodological approach to “styles of reasoning” and highlight his pluralist contribution to the issue of the unity of science. Finally, I establish the connections and differences between Feyerabend’s and Hacking’s anarchisms. Feyerabend’s anarchism was initially internalist but overarching and had several tensions. My thesis is that Hacking not only is genuinely influenced by the early Feyerabend but also follows that internalist path by integrating rationalism with anarchy, thus embodying what I call “well-tempered anarchism.”

(ESP) Recensión del libro "Los ingenieros de Franco. Ciencia, catolicismo y Guerra Fría en el Estado franquista". Barcelona: Crítica, 2017, 317 páginas. La investigación principal de Lino Camprubí, nos ofrece una historia de la transformación del territorio español desde el punto de vista de las ciencias y las tecnologías. Constituye un ejemplo de constatación de la imbricación entre ciencia, tecnología y economía política –sin olvidar la religión. El libro muestra cómo el régimen franquista utilizó la ciencia y tecnología a su alcance para la (re)construcción del país, pero también cómo esos mismos ingenieros construyeron la España franquista. // (ENG) Review of the book "Los ingenieros de Franco. Ciencia, catolicismo y Guerra Fría en el Estado franquista". (Franco's Engineers. Science, Catholicism and Cold War in the Francoist State) Barcelona: Crítica, 2017, 317 pp. The main research of Lino Camprubí, offers a history of the transformation of the Spanish territory from the point of view of science and technology. It constitutes an example of the verification of the imbrication between science, technology and political economy -without forgetting religion. The book shows how the francoist regime used the science and technology at its disposal for the (re)construction of the country, but also how those same engineers built Franco's Spain.

(ESP) Éste artículo tiene como objeto hacer una re-exposición de la teoría política de Baruch Espinosa (1632-1677) a la luz de su ontología –entendida ésta como una ontología materialista. Por lo tanto, se hará una interpretación materialista de la teoría política éste filósofo, desde un acercamiento al «Materialismo Filosófico» de Gustavo Bueno –específicamente, desde su filosofía política, como «materialismo político». Para esto, exploraremos brevemente ciertas ideas de su Tratado Político –teniendo en cuenta, desde luego, la Ética y el Tratado Teológico-Político. Lidiaremos con ideas como «derecho natural», «Estado» o «Libertad», u otras ideas que irán saliendo a través de estas y que junto a la construcción de unas, dialécticamente criticará y destruirá otras –como «Pueblo», «Voluntad», «monarquía absoluta» etc. (ENG)("The Political Ontology of Spinoza") The aim of this article is the reexposition of Baruch Spinoza's (1632-1677) political theory, in the light of his ontology –understood as a materialist ontology. Therefore, we will make a materialist interpretation of the political theory of this philosopher, from an approach to Gustavo Bueno's «Philosophical Materialism» –specifically, from his political philosophy, as a «political materialism». For that goal, we will briefly explore certain ideas from his Political Treatise –of course, with the help of other works, like the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and the Ethics. We will deal with ideas like «natural law», «State», «Freedom», and other ideas that may arise from those and in which construction, they dialectically criticize and destroy others –v.g., «People», «Will», «absolute monarchy» and so on.