Mateo Arias Velez

Dado que las teorías son léxicos cuyos términos no pueden traducirse asertivamente, la relación existente entre ambas sería de inconmensurabilidad, pero ¿dicho supuesto se extiende a las generalizaciones simbólicas de una teoría? Para dar respuesta a esta cuestión en los términos de la propuesta de la inconmensurabilidad local tal como la concibe Thomas Kuhn, en este artículo se comienza analizando qué términos de las formulaciones de la física clásica y la física einsteniana son conmensurables o inconmensurables, para poder examinar luego la incompatibilidad en las generalizaciones simbólico-matemáticas de las teorías en cuestión. Se concluye que ambas teorías son inconmensurables tanto en su taxonomía conceptual como en el ámbito matemático.

Martin Nowak (2011; 2013) proposes five mechanisms for biological cooperation: kin selection, direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, net reciprocity, and group selection, which should explain every altruistic behavior. To test this, this paper presents two cases of adoption and alloparental care from two bonobo mothers to orphans outside of the group (Tokuyama et al., 2021). These cases demonstrate that none of the mechanisms proposed by Nowak accomplishes to explain altruistic behavior altogether. Finally, this paper challenges the assumptions that underlie Nowak’s theory to conclude that the explicative insuffici e ncy of these assumptions prevents us from giving an account of biological cooperation in cases of animal adoption.

The aim of this paper is to affirm that the Machiavellian Hypothesis of Social Thinking by Michael Tomasello is wrong. For that, I show critics to four fundamental points of this hypothesis. First, the claim that non-human primates cannot attributes false belief to other in cooperative contexts (ToM). Second, that they do not feel empathy to others out of their group. third, that they do not have fairness sense and finally, that they do not have joint intentionality. The paper concludes that scientific evidence refuses that non-human primate’s cognition has evolved in a competitive context to look for food and that is why his thinking is exclusively selfish and competitive. Thus, it is not possible to defend the Tomasellos’ hypothesis.