Abortion in public reason

What abortion laws a liberal political community ought to have? Much has been said about the moral problem of abortion, but there has not been yet (to my knowledge) a fully articulate account of the bearing of the competing answers to this ethical problem on liberal public reason. The first part of my project consists in a critical review of the different attempts to solve the various philosophical puzzles, both metaphysical and moral, posed by the abortion problem. Why is it wrong to kill beings like you and me? By answering this question we shall gain a better insight into those properties we have that give us such strong reasons against killing beings like us. Here we face a tremendous philosophical diffuculty, for it is not possible to determine what the robustest account of the wrongness of killing is without dealing with deeper metaethical and metaphysical problems. Indeed, consequentialist and nonconsequentialist moral theories differ in what it is that makes an action morally wrong -is it just the outcome of the action as compared with the outcomes of its alternatives? Or is it something else? Also, what are we essentially? Is the foetus merely our precursor? Then killing a foetus is relevantly similar to contraception. Or is the foetus one of us? If so, when we kill it, are we depriving it of a future as valuable as ours? Perhaps the relation of identity (the fact that it is its future as opposed to someone else's) doesn't matter. That may be because the foetus is an aggregate of biological and psychological facts and perhaps aggregates are not substances. Or maybe it is a substance but only psychological realtions matter, not personal identity. The second part of my project has to do with the different status these metaphisical and ethical positions ought to have in liberal public reason. Though this is the part in which most research is still needed, my own intuition is that, given the depth of the philosphical views in competition, restrictive abortion laws ought to be considered unrespectful to citizens' autonomy.

Els marges del pensament polític contemporani

La crisi i esfondrament del pensament metafísic heretat de la modernitat deixa la filosofia contemporània davant d'un nou paradigma on el coneixement s’ha de construir prescindint de tota identitat i fonamentació. El meu projecte s’estableix com un recorregut descendent que parteix d’un àmbit concret, com és el del problema de la manca de fonamentació en la filosofia política contemporània, per arribar a la veritable arrel del problema general que no és altre que la mateixa naturalesa del llenguatge filosòfic. El punt de partida és la pregunta sobre la possibilitat d’una filosofia política en termes postmetafísics. La filosofia política, atrapada entre les forces de la tirania unitària del concepte metafísic i la dissolució pràctica en pro de la realitat instrumental, traça ponts cap a l’estètica i la deconstrucció, que tenen com a corol•lari final qüestionar-nos els propis límits del pensament polític. El concepte d’impolític és una sortida deconstructiva a aquest atzucac. Des d’Esposito, Rancière, Nancy, però sobretot Massimo Cacciari, he aprofundit en el paradigma postmetafísic que origina aquesta negació política de la pròpia política, política com els seus límits, relació com a distància i identitat com a silenci. És evident que la clau de volta és l’herència i recepció contemporània de Nietzsche i la seva crítica a la transcendentalitat moderna en el sí de l’elaboració d’un coneixement en un naufragi constant pel fracàs de la síntesi que anhela. És aquesta herència la que ha possibilitat aquest pensament negatiu contemporani, el del joc wittgensteinià, la deconstrucció del valor que queda convertit en el seu propi marge (Derrida). Definim així no només una comunitat política basada en la incommensurabilitat dels seus membres alhora buits de contingut (Musil), sinó un model de llenguatge que és el seu propi silenci, un llenguatge en contínua lluita contra sí mateix. El meu projecte és una relectura d’aquesta veritat no identitària on el concepte de diàleg pren una importància cabdal. La filosofia de la música aquí es presenta com un terreny fèrtil d’eines conceptuals a l’hora de desenvolupar-ho. La música és el llenguatge negatiu que només troba possibilitat en la seva pròpia impossibilitat de contingut sintètic. Més enllà de les referències obligatòries a chönberg i Adorno entre altres, el camí iniciat per Bergson amb la introducció de la temporalitat a la discussió obra la porta al paper de l’esdveniment en aquest discurs sobre la impossibilitat. Tornant a la filosofia, on el propi llenguatge filosòfic es defineix ja com a impossible, l’esdeveniment reobre l’antiga tensió entre l’escriptura i la paraula viva, veritable fonament del problema, i vèrtex de la possibilitat d’aquesta filosofia impossible.

Mundo común, feminismo y mitología

[spa]Desde la década de 1970 el feminismo ha significado una de las profundizaciones críticas m.s productivas del legado del pensamiento político de la modernidad. El presente artículo atiende al cuestionamiento de las modernas nociones de libertad y comunidad políticas que Linda Zerilli ha llevado a cabo en su lectura de Hannah Arendt y de Ludwig Wittgenstein. A partir de ah. y de la reciente querella en torno al diformismo sexual, se muestra la necesidad de repensar la relación entre teoría y praxis más allá de la concepción moderna, presente en buena parte de la teoría feminista contemporánea. [eng]Since the 1970s feminism has signified one of the most productive critical reconsiderations of modern political thought legacy. This article examines the questioning ofmodern notions of political freedom and political community that Linda Zerilli has undertaken in her reading of Hannah Arendt and Ludwig Wittgenstein. On this basis and on criticism of sexual dimorphism, the article shows the need to rethink the relationship between theory and praxis beyond itsmodern conception, a feature present in much of contemporary feminist theory.

Water scarcity, social power and the production of an elite suburb: the political ecology of water in Matadepera, Catalonia

This article investigates the history of land and water transformations in Matadepera, a wealthy suburb of metropolitan Barcelona. Analysis is informed by theories of political ecology and methods of environmental history; although very relevant, these have received relatively little attention within ecological economics. Empirical material includes communications from the City Archives of Matadepera (1919-1979), 17 interviews with locals born between 1913 and 1958, and an exhaustive review of grey historical literature. Existing water histories of Barcelona and its outskirts portray a battle against natural water scarcity, hard won by heroic engineers and politicians acting for the good of the community. Our research in Matadepera tells a very different story. We reveal the production of a highly uneven landscape and waterscape through fierce political and power struggles. The evolution of Matadepera from a small rural village to an elite suburb was anything but spontaneous or peaceful. It was a socio-environmental project well intended by landowning elites and heavily fought by others. The struggle for the control of water went hand in hand with the land and political struggles that culminated – and were violently resolved - in the Spanish Civil War. The displacement of the economic and environmental costs of water use from few to many continues to this day and is constitutive of Matadepera’s uneven and unsustainable landscape. By unravelling the relations of power that are inscribed in the urbanization of nature (Swyngedouw, 2004), we question the perceived wisdoms of contemporary water policy debates, particularly the notion of a natural scarcity that merits a technical or economic response. We argue that the water question is fundamentally a political question of environmental justice; it is about negotiating alternative visions of the future and deciding whose visions will be produced.