Depuis 1959, Pierre Parlebas tente de développer une éducation physique scientifique centrée sur la personne qui se meut et non plus sur le mouvement produit ou observé. La pierre angulaire de ce virage copernicien est un concept plein de résonances sémiologiques: la conduite motrice, entendue comme « organisation signifiante du comportement moteur ». En fait, sa proposition pédagogique est toujours allée de pair avec un projet épistémologique dont le noyau dur est une sémiologie de la motricité, c¿est à dire une « semiotricité ». Si l¿action motrice est le fer de lance de l¿éducation physique la sémiotricité, c¿est le fer de lance de la praxéologie motrice. Cinquante ans après son démarrage, nous proposons revisiter les fondements de cette conception de l¿éducation physique qui reste aujourd¿hui révolutionnaire. La sémiologie de la motricité est née sous l¿égide de la Sorbonne du milieu du XXe siècle. Les principes du sémiologie linguistique de Saussure inspirent les concepts et les modèles de « un champ du signe discordant » qui bénéficie également des contributions d¿autres auteurs pertinents du moment. Cependant, à cette époque, le pragmatisme et la sémiotique américains étaient bien connus. Une question se pose aussitôt: à quoi ressemblerait une sémiotricité triadique? Les processus de communication praxique déclenchent phénomènes d¿anticipation et préaction motrices basés en une continuelle interprétation des intentions d¿autrui. Paradoxalement, autant ces phénomènes communicatifs que les signes propres des situations ludomotrices (les praxèmes et les gestèmes) peuvent être plus facilement conçus et analysés avec un modèle plus complexe, voire triadique, que nous aimerions partager avec sémioticiens et praxéologues.

This paper aims, above all, to invite a direct reading of the article that Charles S. Peirce published in 1908 with the title ¿A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God.¿ More than a century after its original publication, that article by Peirce has not lost its relevance: its careful reading continues to provide a lot to think about. To this end, my presentation is organized in six sections: 1) introduction; 2) presentation of ¿A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God¿; 3) the notion of reality; 4) the heart of the ¿Neglected Argument¿; 5) contemporary discussion: a response to Oya (2021); and 6) conclusion.

En este artículo se reflexiona sobre la importancia de la formación filosófica del profesorado a la luz del pragmatismo deweyano. El educador ocupa para Dewey un lugar privilegiado, pues es el agente principal del crecimiento humano y del progreso social democrático, lo que requiere, por su parte, una reflexión constante acerca de los fines y los medios que dirigen sus prácticas. Puesto que el crecimiento de la experiencia se logra a través de la participación, uno de los objetivos clave de la tarea docente es el potenciar los hábitos que permitan la colaboración de mujeres y varones de distintas etnias. Dewey invita a reflexionar sobre la importancia de la formación filosófica del profesorado para guiar la educación hacia fines morales y sociales, lo que es indispensable para una regeneración educativa y democrática.

The authors introduce Emma Goldman and John Dewey and translate into Spanish three letters between them from 1938, focused on the role of the Communist Party in Russia and in the Spanish civil war.

The principle of tolerance characteristic of vague predicates is sometimes presented as a soft rule, namely as a default which we can use in ordinary reasoning, but which requires care in order to avoid paradoxes. We focus on two ways in which the tolerance principle can be modeled in that spirit, using special consequence relations. The first approach relates tolerant reasoning to nontransitive reasoning; the second relates tolerant reasoning to nonmonotonic reasoning. We compare the two approaches and examine three specific consequence relations in relation to those, which we call: strict-to-tolerant entailment, pragmatic-to-tolerant entailment, and pragmatic-to-pragmatic entailment. The first two are nontransitive, whereas the latter two are nonmonotonic.

Substructural approaches to paradoxes have attracted much attention from the philosophical community in the last decade. In this paper we focus on two substructural logics, named ST and TS, along with two structural cousins, LP and K3. It is well known that LP and K3 are duals in the sense that an inference is valid in one logic just in case the contrapositive is valid in the other logic. As a consequence of this duality, theories based on either logic are tightly connected since many of the arguments for and objections against one theory reappear in the other theory in dual form. The target of the paper is making explicit in exactly what way, if any, ST and TS are dual to one another. The connection will allow us to gain a more fine-grained understanding of these logics and of the theories based on them. In particular, we will obtain new insights on two questions concerning ST which are being intensively discussed in the current literature: whether ST preserves classical logic and whether it is LP in sheep's clothing. Explaining in what way ST and TS are duals requires comparing these logics at a metainferential level. We provide to this end a uniform proof theory to decide on valid metainferences for each of the four logics. This proof procedure allows us to show in a very simple way how different properties of inferences (unsatisfiability, supersatisfiability and antivalidity) that behave in very different ways for each logic can be captured in terms of the validity of a metainference.

Building on early work by Girard (1987) and using closely related techniques from the proof theory of many-valued logics, we propose a sequent calculus capturing a hierarchy of notions of satisfaction based on the Strong Kleene matrices introduced by Barrio et al. (Journal of Philosophical Logic 49:93-120, 2020) and others. The calculus allows one to establish and generalize in a very natural manner several recent results, such as the coincidence of some of these notions with their classical counterparts, and the possibility of expressing some notions of satisfaction for higher-level inferences using notions of satisfaction for inferences of lower level. We also show that at each level all notions of satisfaction considered are pairwise distinct and we address some remarks on the possible significance of this (huge) number of notions of consequence.

En este artículo se describen de un modo sumario las raíces de la filosofía analítica en el empirismo lógico del Círculo de Viena, se da noticia breve de su desarrollo y se muestra su reciente renovación pragmatista. Finalmente se hace un balance de los mejores logros de la filosofía analítica para el siglo XXI frente al empobrecedor naturalismo cientificista dominante en buena parte de la filosofía norteamericana actual. De acuerdo con esto, la exposición está dividida en cuatro secciones: 1) una primera dedicada al positivismo lógico de las primeras décadas del pasado siglo; 2) la segunda destinada a hacer una rápida historia de la filosofía analítica; 3) en la tercera se muestra la renovación pragmatista de la filosofía analítica; y 4) una parte final en la que se hace un balance de los mejores resultados de esta tradición de pensamiento para este siglo.

In a recent paper, Barrio, Tajer and Rosenblatt establish a correspondence between metainferences holding in the strict-tolerant logic of transparent truthST(+)and inferences holding in the logic of paradoxLP(+). They argue thatLP(+)isST(+)'s external logic and they question whetherST(+)'s solution to the semantic paradoxes is fundamentally different fromLP(+)'s. Here we establish that by parity of reasoning,ST(+)can be related toLP(+)'s dual logicK3(+). We clarify the distinction between internal and external logic and argue that whileST(+)'s nonclassicality can be granted, its self-dual character does not tie it toLP(+)more closely than toK3(+).

This text describes the scientific production of Professor Wenceslao Castanares, noting specifically his contribution to the knowledge of the works of Charles Sanders Peirce. Wenceslao Castanares -ahead and above anyone else- was the key person in discovering Peirce's thought in the Hispanic world. Not only did he get to know him, but he contributed decisively to the understanding of the Peircean works and to the development of the questions that Peirce's thought posed in many different areas. The authors review the human profile, the essential contributions and assess in detail the importance of this professor's legacy.

This contribution describes summarily Peirce's five European trips and highlights some of the documental findings related with those journeys done by the members of the Group of Peirce Studies in the University of Navarra, Spain, during the last two decades. Up to April of 2019 we have transcribed, translated into Spanish, annotated and uploaded to the website of the Group more than 170 letters and another 413 documents related with Peirce's five European journeys and with his relationship with some 36 European and 18 American correspondents. The links to some of the images available online on the website are also provided.

En este artículo se estudia, en primer lugar, la noción de signo de Peirce para tratar de caracterizar después el signo artístico como representación. Después se desarrollan algunas consideraciones sobre la obra de arte como signo que como tal conlleva tres elementos: experiencia, expresión e interpretación. Finalmente se concluye que la belleza requiere para Peirce un peculiar equilibrio, la conjunción imaginativa de lo sensible y lo razonable en un signo artístico; requiere además la expresión de algo que trasciende lo sensible; requiere, en tanto signo, de una interpretación que no es exacta y que implica crecimiento. Requiere, por último, amor, pues el artista solo alcanzará lo bello cuando sea guiado por el ágape y a través de la abducción vaya actualizando y armonizando posibilidades, creando nuevos signos que den forma a lo que no la tiene, cuando ame lo que hace y se exprese libremente.

A book devoted to predication from a philosophical point of view, which deals with the main problems on the topic: the nature of predication, the history of the notion, the role of the copula, the role of names, the ontology of propositions, the syntactic and semantic analysis of propositions, the pragmatics of saying, the connection between logic and ontology. Two rival paradigms are distinguished, the Aristotelian and the Fregean analysis of predication, and the impression is transmitted that the Fregean one has some limits and might be refined. The most promising orientations in this book are: the attention paid to ontological questions, the search for alternatives to the dominant paradigm, and, in sum, the sense that there is something special in the act of "saying".