Jorge J. E. Gracia

Ethical dilemmas in oncofertility: an exploration of three clinical scenarios.

As an emerging interdisciplinary field, oncofertility bridges oncology, reproductive endocrinology, and infertility with the goal of expanding reproductive options for women with cancer. Oncofertility is currently gaining significant attention from professionals in many related fields and is undergoing considerable scrutiny in part because of the many compelling ethical dilemmas it raises. To illustrate some of the dilemmas providers face, and make suggestions for clinical care, this chapter presents three clinical scenarios encountered in medical practice. An increased awareness of the complex problems involved should help prepare clinicians for some of the challenges posed by this rapidly expanding discipline.

The transcendentals in the middle ages: An introduction

Although most predicates may be truthfully predicated of only some beings, there are others that seem to apply to every being. The latter, including ‘being’ itself, were known as the transcendentals in the Middle Ages and gave rise to the much disputed “doctrine of the transcendentals”. This article explores the main tenets of the doctrine and the difficulties that they face, the reasons why scholastic authors were interested in these issues, and the origins of the doctrine.

A political argument in favor of ethnic names: Alcoff’s defense of ‘Latino’

Should ethnic names be used at all? If so, which ethnic names should be used for particular ethnic groups? And how can the use of ethnic names in general, and of some ethnic names in particular, be justified? These questions are attracting increasing attention in the United States. A few years back, they were completely ignored. Indeed, if one scans the pertinent literature, one finds very few social scientists concerned with them.1 Current population pressures in the United States, however, have brought attention to issues of ethnicity among sociologists, psychologists, and anthropologists, although philosophers continue to have little to do with these issues.2 Still the attention is often centered on particular ethnic groups and their names, and for good reasons; these ethnic groups pose serious challenges to the country in general. Among these, perhaps the one that has received most attention recently is the group often referred to as ‘Hispanics’ or ‘Latinos’.3 In philosophy, even this area has received scant attention.4 The general questions raised above can be formulated in this case as: should names such as ‘Hispanics’ or ‘Latinos’ be used? Which of these two names is more appropriate for the ethnic group in question? And, how can the use of ‘Hispanics’ or ‘Latinos’ be justified? Elsewhere I have presented a thorough analysis of the arguments that can be mustered against the use of (1) ethnic names in general, or (2) ‘Hispanics’ and (3) ‘Latinos’ in particular, but I followed it with a familial-historical defense of the use of ‘Hispanics’.5 My view has been criticized by several philosophers for a variety of reasons, to which I have tried to respond.6 However, none of these criticisms has involved a defense of the use of ‘Latinos’. This is what Alcoff provides in her article, ‘Latinos vs. Hispanics: the Politics of Ethnic Names’. The arguments she

Scotus's Conception of Metaphysics: The Study of the Transcendentals

The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries saw considerable speculation concerning the proper conception of metaphysics. The controversy centered around three topics: its proper object of study, its proper method, and its proper aim.1 Much of the discussion was inspired by Aristotle.2 The different and ambiguous formulations Aristotle had presented concerning these three topics in the Metaphysics, together with the commentaries on them by Averroes, Avicenna, and other Islamic authors, constituted the background against which these discussions took place and, to a great extent, provided the motivation for them.3 Indeed, many of the views defended by various scholastic authors could be directly traced to Aristotelian texts or those of his Islamic commentators. Scotus was no exception to this as is evident from the fact that his most important and detailed statements concerning this topic are contained in the Quaestiones subtilissimae super libros Metaphysicorum Aristotelis.4 Still, the analysis Scotus provides is novel and separates him from the views of his contemporaries. In this article, I present a brief discussion of a fundamental aspect of Scotuss position: his view concerning the object of metaphysics. In addition, I indicate what I take to be an important contribution his position makes to the controversy concerning the nature of the discipline.

Notes on Ortega's Aesthetic Works in English

Robert McClintock has already called attention to the poor state of the works in English of Jos6 Ortega y Gasset.1 He has pointed out, first, the lack of proper introductions explaining the origin, gestation, and, in short, relation of the works to the circumstances surrounding them and, second, the fact that there has been no systematic and comprehensive effort to render Ortegas thought into English. Instead, certain works divorced from their context have been translated and

Hispanic/Latino Identity

Preface.1. What Should We Call Ourselves?2. Whats in a Name? The Relation of Names to Identity and Ethnicity. 3. What Makes Us Who We Are? The Key to Our Unity and Diversity. 4. An Illustration: Hispanic Philosophy. 5. Where Do We Come From? Encounters, Inventions, and Mestizaje. 6. The Search for Identity: Latin-America and Its Philosophy. 7. Foreigners in Our Own Land: Hispanics in American Philosophy. Conclusion. Notes. Bibliography. Index of Names. Index of Subjects.

Sociological Accounts and the History of Philosophy

Professor Martin Kusch has invited me to prepare an overall commentary on this collection of essays. The invitation was prompted, I believe, by his desire to have, in the good Anselmian tradition, a rival point of view to that generally accepted in the volume. The point of view of the volume is that the history of philosophy makes sense only if it is presented in its context, although by context different authors mean different things. Some refer particularly to sociological factors — they see the history of philosophy as the product of social forces — whereas others emphasize cultural, political, and biographical phenomena. These factors include, in Kusch’s own words, ‘professional interests, struggles over professional chairs, wars, and mentalities.’ All the authors who have contributed to the volume reject a history of philosophy which ignores the context where it took place, but none goes so far as to reject the usefulness of philosophical analyses in understanding it.

Does Philosophy Tolerate Christening? Thomas Aquinas and the Notion of Christian Philosophy

The notion of Christian philosophy was a matter of substantial discussion for both Christian philosophers and Christian theologians in the twentieth century.1 Indeed, even non–Christian philosophers from time to time have taken an interest in it. The decade of the 1930s was the period of greatest activity with respect to this issue. Etienne Gilson, Jacques Maritain, Maurice Blondel, and other Roman Catholic philosophers in particular engaged in a controversy which lasted for several years. The debate quieted down somewhat since then, but it is by no means died.3 This may be in part the result of Gilson’ s pervasive influence in Christian circles. After the publication of the History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages and The Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas in the mid–fifties, his view has slowly gained support among Thomists and other Christian thinkers to the extent that now the expression “Christian philosophy” is commonly used in philosophical discourse.4 In the United States, Christian presses regularly turn out texts on “Christian philosophy” and in Europe and Latin America very few Christian philosophers object to the use of the expression, although explicit clarification of its meaning is seldom given.5 Moreover, since Gilson and other reputable Thomists, such as Pieper and Maritain, have been responsible to a great extent for the popularization of this term, it is usually taken for granted that its use or abuse is warranted by Thomas’ thought.

Minorities and the philosophical marketplace

This article argues for two theses. The first is that many of the sociological factors endemic in the philosophical community function as barriers to the recruitment of members of minority groups in the profession and to their functioning as public intellectuals. The division into familial groups, the fights for security and success, and the weakness of the federal organization of the American Philosophical Association all contribute to these barriers. The second is that sociology has a place in philosophy, even though it should not be confused with it. This means that philosophers need to consider social phenomena.

Response to the critics of Hispanic/Latino Identity: Tahafut Al-Tahafut

Let me make clear from the start that I truly have enjoyed what my critics have had to say, particularly because they have helped me see many things I did not see with clarity before. I have learned many important lessons, and I hope the discussion of my view has helped them as well to see more clearly into the murky issues of ethnicity. Despite the subtitle I have given my response, I see my task here not so much as an apologetic one of destroying my destroyers in order to save my hide, but as an attempt to deepen further our understanding of the philosophical problems being discussed and the possible solutions to them. I am grateful, then, to the participants in this forum for having taken the time to prepare their comments with the obvious care that they have. The criticisms that have been made concern primarily two of the seven chapters of the book: Chapters 3 and 7. This is probably as it should be, for Chapter 3 presents the main thesis concerning ethnic identity in general and Hispanic identity in particular, and Chapter 7 deals with the place of Hispanics in American philosophy. The former chapter is the heart of the book, and the latter is of particular interest to American philosophers. Yet, there are many other controversial issues I discuss and theses I defend. For example, I deal with the question of ethnic names in general and the proper ethnic label to be used in connection with Hispanics/Latinos in particular. I present a metaphysical framework of identity, and I introduce a new conception of mestizaje (i.e. miscegenation). I also make historical claims about Hispanic philosophy and develop a historiographical scheme to deal with the search for identity that has been so popular in Latin American philosophy for the past 50 years. So, readers who feel left out, because they suspect the