Suchergebnisse

The present work aims to point out some possible tasks for the Karl-Otto Apel´s discourse ethics today. Such tasks may concentrate on the need for a theory of the institutionalization of practical discourse, as a form of socially realized practical rationality. The question that has to be answered is what frame conditions should be found in the discourse so that it can be put into practice and what political-institutional effects it can produce in the context of really existing institutions. Starting with Gehlen and Luhmann -although to a lesser extent-, Apel interprets institutions as systems of self-affirmation that, on the one hand, free the subjects from the burden of action, but, on the other hand, limit or determine the consensual-argumentative rationality of discourse. The functional coercions (Sachzwänge) of the institutions configure a field of action and a type of rationality that, according to Apel, should be under the control of institutionalized discourse as a rational public sphere (Öffentlichkeit). The relationship between the ideal normative criteria of the institutionalized practical discourse and the existing institutions must be interpreted as a non-surmountable dialectical tension or intertwining. If this interpretation is correct, the discourse ethics, as a critical theory of society, cannot be understood as an application without more ideal normative criteria to the historical reality or adaptation of that reality to ideal criteria in its vertical sense, but as a mutual horizontal correlation.

The present work aims to point out some possible tasks for the Karl-Otto Apel´s discourse ethics today. Such tasks may concentrate on the need for a theory of the institutionalization of practical discourse, as a form of socially realized practical rationality. The question that has to be answered is what frame conditions should be found in the discourse so that it can be put into practice and what political-institutional effects it can produce in the context of really existing institutions. Starting with Gehlen and Luhmann -although to a lesser extent-, Apel interprets institutions as systems of self-affirmation that, on the one hand, free the subjects from the burden of action, but, on the other hand, limit or determine the consensual-argumentative rationality of discourse. The functional coercions (Sachzwänge) of the institutions configure a field of action and a type of rationality that, according to Apel, should be under the control of institutionalized discourse as a rational public sphere (Öffentlichkeit). The relationship between the ideal normative criteria of the institutionalized practical discourse and the existing institutions must be interpreted as a non-surmountable dialectical tension or intertwining. If this interpretation is correct, the discourse ethics, as a critical theory of society, cannot be understood as an application without more ideal normative criteria to the historical reality or adaptation of that reality to ideal criteria in its vertical sense, but as a mutual horizontal correlation.

Discursive ethics or communicative ethics were born in the seventies fathered by K.O. Apel and J. Habermas, and today they are widely known; it is a current of such life and vigour that its very creators have engaged in lively polemics. This paper, starting from K.O. Apel' s texts, attempts to explore in what measure this discursive ethics provides philosophical foundations for political democracy and to determine the basic elements necessary for the construction of a universal ethics. ; La ética discursiva o ética comunicativa nace en los años setenta de nuestro siglo de la mano de K.O. Apel y J. Habermas y hoy en día se encuentra ampliamente difundida; hasta tal punto se trata de una corriente llena de vida, que entre sus mismos creadores se producen vivas polémicas. En el artículo se intenta, a partir de los trabajos de K. O. Apel, mostrar en qué medida esta ética discursiva fundamenta filosóficamente una democracia política y puede precisar los elementos básicos necesarios para la construcción de una ética universal.

My current transition to a PhD in Education, with the theme: "Artificial intelligence applied to the systematization of pedagogical experiences for the strengthening of collective work"; leads me to approach the issue for this occasion, but from other disciplinary approaches, such as the vision of the Philosophy of Law, Ethics and Politics. Even though Argentina is still in what we could call an evangelizing stage of these topics, there are already many expressions of the thought of people with intellectual prestige that refer to Artificial Intelligence (AI) as "something" that is already among us, generating a great technological revolution with diverse manifestations such as the suppression of certain professions as we know them today; change of work methods; of forensic practices and other practices. And it is this "something" that we must try to define, delimit and above all measure quantitatively in terms of morality. ; Mi actual tránsito por un Doctorado en Educación, con el tema: "Inteligencia artificial aplicada a la sistematización de experiencias pedagógicas para el fortalecimiento del trabajo colectivo"; me lleva al abordaje de la cuestión para esta ocasión, pero desde otros enfoques disciplinarios, como la visión de la Filosofía del Derecho, la Ética y la Política. Si bien Argentina, se encuentra aún, en lo que podríamos llamar una etapa evangelizadora de estos temas, ya abundan expresiones del pensamiento de personas con prestigio intelectual que refieren a la Inteligencia Artificial (IA o AI) como "algo" que ya está entre nosotros, generando una gran revolución tecnológica con manifestaciones diversas tales como la supresión de ciertas profesiones tal y como las conocemos hoy en día; cambio de métodos de trabajo; de prácticas forenses y demás praxis. Y es ese "algo" el que tenemos que intentar definir, delimitar y sobre todo medir cuantitativamente en términos de moralidad.

Una nueva ética ecológica avanza haciendo frente a la inoperatividad de la ética utilitarista a fin de evitar la proclividad hacia un suicidio ecológico. Este va más allá de un suicidio colectivo porque es también un homicidio intergeneracional y un ecocidio interespecífico. El artículo recoge siete principios de esta nueva ética ecológica y están basados en aportaciones tales como el triángulo empatía - altruismo - cooperación evidenciado por las investigaciones en neurociencias; el proceso de adaptación de la ética pública con la ampliación de la comunidad moral a futuras generaciones, comunidades bióticas y abióticas; el concepto de "velo de la ignorancia específica" como principio regulador de las relaciones sociales justas según señala John Rawls; o el principio de responsabilidad ante el imperativo tecnológico acuñado por Hans Jonas. ; A new kind of ethics, ecological, is advancing to confront the incapacity of utilitarian ethics to avoid the tendency towards ecological suicide.This goes beyond collective suicide because it also involves intergenerational murder and interespecific ecocide. This article gathers seven principles of this new ecological ethics, based on contributions such as the triangle "empathyaltruism-cooperation" made evident by research in neuroscience,the process of adapting public ethics by including the future generations in the moral community, abiotic and biotic communities; the concept of "veil of specific ignorance" as the regulating principle of social relations as pointed out by John Rawls; or the principle of accountability related to the technological imperative coined by Hans Jonas.

A new kind of ethics, ecological, is ad­vancing to confront the incapacity of utilitarian ethics to avoid the tendency towards ecological suicide. This goes beyond collective suicide because it also involves intergenerational murder and interspecific ecocide. This article gathers seven principles of this new ecological ethics, based on con­tributions such as the triangle "empathy-altruism-cooperation" made evident by research in neuroscience, the process of adapting public ethics by including the future generations in the moral commu­nity, abiotic and biotic communities; the concept of "veil of specific ignorance" as the regulating principle of social re­lations as pointed out by John Rawls; or the principle of accountability related to the technological imperative coined by Hans Jonas. ; Una nueva ética ecológica avanza haciendo frente a la inoperatividad de la ética utilitarista a fin de evitar la proclividad hacia un suicidio ecológico. Este va más allá de un suicidio colectivo porque es también un homicidio intergeneracional y un ecocidio interespecífico. El artículo recoge siete principios de esta nueva ética ecológica y están basados en aportaciones tales como el triángulo empatía - altruismo - cooperación evidenciado por las investigaciones en neurociencias; el proceso de adaptación de la ética pública con la ampliación de la comunidad moral a futuras generaciones, comunidades bióticas y abióticas; el concepto de "velo de la ignorancia específica" como principio regulador de las relaciones sociales justas según señala John Rawls; o el principio de responsabilidad ante el imperativo tecnológico acuñado por Hans Jonas.

Mi actual tránsito por un doctorado en Educación, con el tema "Inteligencia artificial aplicada a la sistematización de experiencias pedagógicas para el fortalecimiento del trabajo colectivo", me lleva al abordaje de la cuestión para esta ocasión, pero desde otros enfoques disciplinarios, como la visión de la filosofía del derecho, la ética y la política. Si bien Argentina se encuentra aún en lo que podríamos llamar una etapa evangelizadora de estos temas, ya abundan expresiones del pensamiento de personas con prestigio intelectual que refieren a la inteligencia artificial (IA o AI) como "algo" que ya está entre nosotros, generando una gran revolución tecnológica con manifestaciones diversas, tales como la supresión de ciertas profesiones tal y como las conocemos hoy en día; cambio de métodos de trabajo, de prácticas forenses y demás praxis. Y es ese "algo" el que tenemos que intentar definir, delimitar y sobre todo medir cuantitativamente en términos de moralidad. ; My current transition to a PhD in Education, with the theme: "Artificial intelligence applied to the systematization of pedagogical experiences for the strengthening of collective work"; leads me to approach the issue for this occasion, but from other disciplinary approaches, such as the vision of the Philosophy of Law, Ethics and Politics. Even though Argentina is still in what we could call an evangelizing stage of these topics, there are already many expressions of the thought of people with intellectual prestige that refer to ArtificialIntelligence (AI) as "something" that is already among us, generating a great technologicalrevolution with diverse manifestations such as the suppression of certain professions as we know them today; change of work methods; of forensic practices and other practices. And it is this "something" that we must try to define, delimit and above all measure quantitatively in terms of morality. ; Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

The lecture engages the debate concerning the relation between politics and ethics. Ethics is the guardian of good practice and policy the guardian of the quality of life in the community. The author discusses their mutual historical development paying special attention to two dates. First in 1789, when the Bastille was demolished and the Republic founded with a slogan of ethical content ("Liberty, Equality, Fraternity"), but only in order to control it. The second date is 1989, the year in which the Berlin Wall fell, constitutes a turning point and the dominance of ethics over politics promoted by the triad: democracy, accountability, and human rights, which undoubtedly belong to the highest value. The problem with this is that ethical values can be used in an ideological way. In the final section, the Christian position on the proper relationship between ethics and policy and vice versa is discussed. ; The lecture engages the debate concerning the relation between politics and ethics. Ethics is the guardian of good practice and policy the guardian of the quality of life in the community. The author discusses their mutual historical development paying special attention to two dates. First in 1789, when the Bastille was demolished and the Republic founded with a slogan of ethical content ("Liberty, Equality, Fraternity"), but only in order to control it. The second date is 1989, the year in which the Berlin Wall fell, constitutes a turning point and the dominance of ethics over politics promoted by the triad: democracy, accountability, and human rights, which undoubtedly belong to the highest value. The problem with this is that ethical values can be used in an ideological way. In the final section, the Christian position on the proper relationship between ethics and policy and vice versa is discussed.