Megan Fernandez

In this article, we present results from a literature review of intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values of nature conducted for the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, as part of the Methodological Assessment of the Diverse Values and Valuations of Nature. We identify the most frequently recurring meanings in the heterogeneous use of different value types and their association with worldviews and other key concepts. From frequent uses, we determine a core meaning for each value type, which is sufficiently inclusive to serve as an umbrella over different understandings in the literature and specific enough to help highlight its difference from the other types of values. Finally, we discuss convergences, overlapping areas, and fuzzy boundaries between different value types to facilitate dialogue, reduce misunderstandings, and improve the methods for valuation of nature's contributions to people, including ecosystem services, to inform policy and direct future research. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences.

Bioethics emerged as a discipline in the 70s of the last century. One of its main objectives has been to analyze clinical cases that pose moral problems. This analysis is generally carried out by a multidisciplinary group, the Health Care Ethics Committee, which is comprised of ethical experts or healthcare providers assisted by a facilitator, depending on the context. Different methodologies are used in these situations. The deliberative method, in its various configurations, is the most widely used in many Committees. Identify whether the deliberative method is included in regulated undergraduate and postgraduate teaching; analyze whether a single model can be identified or whether there is heterogeneity in the proposals. A bibliographic review was carried out, following the scoping review method. With respect to the first objective, there is no evidence on the teaching and use of the deliberative method in the Faculties and Schools of Medicine and Nursing, the emphasis is placed on training oriented to the resolution of clinical cases and a certain deliberative proposal is developed from them, more pragmatic than ethical-philosophical. In relation to the second objective, differences are observed between the two most prevalent schools (D. Gracia and B. Molewijk), with the model proposed by Gracia being used more in the Spanish-speaking world, and Molewijk's model in the English-speaking world. It can be seen that D. Gracia's proposal is more philosophical and Molewijk's more pragmatic. Finally, it is considered pertinent to further disseminate the deliberative method and its advantages, as well as its potential for bioethics education.

Bioethics emerged as a discipline in the 70s of the last century. One of its main objectives has been to analyze clinical cases that pose moral problems. This analysis is generally carried out by a multidisciplinary group, the Health Care Ethics Committee, which is comprised of ethical experts or healthcare providers assisted by a facilitator, depending on the context. Different methodologies are used in these situations. The deliberative method, in its various configurations, is the most widely used in many Committees. Identify whether the deliberative method is included in regulated undergraduate and postgraduate teaching; analyze whether a single model can be identified or whether there is heterogeneity in the proposals. A bibliographic review was carried out, following the scoping review method. With respect to the first objective, there is no evidence on the teaching and use of the deliberative method in the Faculties and Schools of Medicine and Nursing, the emphasis is placed on training oriented to the resolution of clinical cases and a certain deliberative proposal is developed from them, more pragmatic than ethical-philosophical. In relation to the second objective, differences are observed between the two most prevalent schools (D. Gracia and B. Molewijk), with the model proposed by Gracia being used more in the Spanish-speaking world, and Molewijk's model in the English-speaking world. It can be seen that D. Gracia's proposal is more philosophical and Molewijk's more pragmatic. Finally, it is considered pertinent to further disseminate the deliberative method and its advantages, as well as its potential for bioethics education.

En este artículo se va a estudiar la relación que existe en Leibniz entre verdad eterna, razón soberna y libertad divina. Si la razón soberana se puede constituir como juez supremo es porque contiene unas verdades eternas que Dios no ha creado sino que pertenecen a la misma esencia divina. Estas verdades en cuanto esencias, tienden a existir en la medida de su perfección, pero no existirán necesariamente, sino que Dios las pone en la existencia mediante un acto libre. Ante la posibilidad de pensar que Dios pudiera verse obligado a elegir aquello que mejor, Leibniz sostendrá que Dios elige crear siempre lo mejor en un primer decreto máximamente libre y voluntario. de este modo el resto de sus elecciones son también máximamente libres y racionales

El legado científico filosófico de Max Born, al estar vinculado a la conocida como interpretación ortodoxa de la mecánica cuántica o interpretación de Copenhague, ha sido entendido desde el marco de una filosofía de la ciencia de corte instrumentalista, considerando su interpretación probabilística de la función de onda como la más clara defensa de una postura indeterminista acausal. Frente a este orden de cosas, este artículo pretende lograr dos objetivos. El primero consiste en mostrar cómo la interpretación de Born, a pesar de instaurar de forma definitiva el indeterminismo en el ámbito de la física elemental, no implica el abandono de una explicación causal de los fenómenos físicos. El segundo trata de defender la posibilidad de reivindicar una interpretación "realista" de la labor científica a partir de la noción de "invariantes observaciones" que Born propone, conciliando el aspecto dual de la realidad elemental en favor de su carácter corpuscular y analizando la aporética noción de "probabilidad objetiva" que su interpretación instaura. Max Born's philosophic and scientific legacy is related to the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is known as the Interpretation of Copenhague. Therefore Born's statistical interpretation has been considered as defending a positivist philosophy of science. Opposing this idea, this article is intended to face two main questions. The first one deals with the fact that Born's interpretation of wave function, although it settles indeterminism, does not imply the abandonment of causal explanations of physical phenomena The second one is aimed at showing how is it possible to defend a "realistic view" of scientific labour making use of the notion of "invariant observationals" that leads to the reconciliation of wave and corpuscular theories.