UPF Digital Repository
Guides
Recent Submissions
En los últimos años se ha renovado el interés por la primera obra publicada de S. Kierkegaard: El concepto de ironía, en constante referencia a Sócrates (1841) fruto de su tesis de magisterio. En la presente exposición remarcaremos el interés teológico de esta obra, que quiere confrontar las figuras históricas de Sócrates y Cristo para mostrar sus diferencias. Para ello Kierkegaard debe depurar a Sócrates de toda herencia platónica, y a Cristo, de toda herencia romántica. De ahí que la ironía socrática sea releída por Kierkegaard desde el humor cristiano, en una profunda confrontación con la ironía romántica. A este respecto es determinante la herencia de Schelling, quien elaboró una filosofía de la Revelación, verdadera ciencia histórica y positiva, centrada en el concepto nuclear de 'persona'. Dicha teoría es patente en la cristología kierkegaardiana, que entiende a Cristo como alfa y omega, como centro insuperable de la Historia, en contraposición a la concepción pneumatológica de Hegel, quien la concibe como un avance imparable del Espíritu, en su camino hacia la autoconciencia. Este papel central de la cristología ¿verdadera doctrina de la encarnación que supone el rechazo de la ironía como pura negatividad absoluta, mero final sin verdadero inicio, y a cuya luz refulge el carácter positivo y concreto del humor cristiano queda fuertemente subrayado por la alusión final del texto al comentario de Martensen a los Poemas nuevos de J. Heiberg, en el que se unen, de un modo diáfano, encarnación y resurrección.
(2026) Pérez-Borbujo Álvarez, Fernando (2026-02-07) Broner, Fernando; Cortina, Juan J.; Schmukler, Sergio L.; Williams, Tomas
This study examines the heterogeneity of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) perpetrators by distinguishing IPV specialists, whose violence is limited to partners, from IPV generalists, who also target non-partners, and comparing both to non-IPV violent offenders. Using comprehensive administrative records from Catalonia, we analyzed the complete criminal histories (1990-2019) of all individuals convicted of IPV between 2010 and 2015, alongside a 10 % sample of non-IPV violent offenders. A strict definition classified only one-quarter of IPV offenders as generalists, highlighting the impact of definitional choices on prevalence and offender profiles. Trajectory analyses identified five patterns of violent offending. IPV specialists were concentrated in late-onset, low-rate, short-duration trajectories, consistent with situational, relationship-bound violence. IPV generalists were more likely to follow early-onset, high-rate, long-duration trajectories resembling chronic violent offenders, but increasingly focused on partners with age. Differences in trajectories were only modestly explained by prior non-violent offending, suggesting that antisocial predispositions shape the target of violence more than its developmental pattern. Gender did not influence trajectory prevalence but strongly predicted the likelihood of targeting partners versus others, reflecting the interaction of patriarchal norms, situational factors, and individual predispositions in differentiating IPV specialists and generalists from other violent offenders. Overall, IPV perpetrators are heterogeneous in trajectories, offence patterns, persistence, and gender, underscoring the value of integrating typological and developmental perspectives and informing differentiated, context-sensitive interventions.
(2026) Rodríguez Menés, Jorge; Pavlopoulos, Dimitris; Rovira Sopeña, Martí; Van Damme, MaikeIn Kelsen's very influential account, legal validity is the specific mode of existence of legal norms. For this reason, legal validity entails legal applicability and legal bindingness. The chapter intends to show that these notions should be distinguished. It starts with the notion of membership to a legal system: which are the criteria to identify certain norms as belonging to a legal system? Several issues are relevant here, for instance, is the efficacy a necessary condition of membership of legal norms to legal systems? In which sense the authorization of another legal norm N2, also a member to the legal system LS, is a criterion of membership of a legal norm N1 to a legal system LS? And, is this authorization only a formal authorization or a material authorization too? Secondly, the notion of applicability is introduced: in legal practice there are applicable norms that are not members of a legal system, we can think on foreign legal norms, which are not part of the domestic legal system, but applicable in virtue of conflict of laws rules. Finally, the notion of bindingness of legal norms is presented. This notion refers to the question of justified normativity. In which conditions are legal norms apt to provide us reasons for action? Moreover, is legal normativity linked in some sense to robust normativity?
(2024) Moreso, Josep Joan; Ródenas, ÁngelesThis chapter is devoted to analysing the various uses of the a fortiori argument in legal reasoning. It argues that (i) while the a fortiori argument as usually presented in legal contexts is not logically valid, it is an enthymematic argument (and logically valid once its presupposed premises are all made explicit); (ii) there is reason to think that the nature of such presuppositions is pragmatic, and that expressions such as ‘a fortiori’, ‘all the more’, ‘with stronger reason’, ‘even less’, and so on, function as pragmatic presupposition triggers; and (iii) although the comparison between the source and the target of an a fortiori argument is sometimes drawn through a scalar property that allows for the introduction of relations of transitivity and asymmetry, this is not always the case; there are a range of non-scalar and possibly incommensurable properties that can validate the argument, all related to the normative relevance of the comparison.
(2025) Moreso, Josep Joan