Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle Reading App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your email address or mobile phone number.
I was born in 1954 in the Vila Seropedica, near to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. I studied medicine. Afterwards I gained my MS in philosophy at the UFRJ and my PhD at the University of Konstanz (Germany). Since 1992 I have worked in the UFRN (Natal), secluded in the beautiful Northeastern of Brazil, though always in contact with the international philosophical discussion through many grants taken at the universities of Konstanz, Munich, Berkeley and Oxford. Even if dealing with contemporary analytic philosophy, I reject much of the mainstream philosophy. Most of my work was written in Portuguese. Two relevant books are "The Philosophical Inquiry" (Lanham: UPA, 2002), on the nature of philosophy, and "Paisagens Filosóficas (Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro, 2012), which is a collection of papers on a diversity of philosophical problems. My main philosophical papers are "A Metadescriptive Theory of Proper Names" (Ratio, 2011), "A Perspectival Definition of Knowledge" (Ratio, 2010), "Free Will and the Soft Constraints of Reason" (Ratio 2006), and "The Sceptical Deal with our Concept of External Reality" (Abstracta 2009). Extended versions of these papers can be found in my main published book, "Lines of Thought: Rethinking Philosophical Assumptions" (Cambridge Scholars Publishers, 2014). Most of my work can be read, at least in draft form, in my "blog":
This book is an innovative metaphilosophical work. Its main thesis is, that philosophy might be a kind of anticipation of science. The author manages to develope this thesis without falling into a scientist or positivist view of the nature of philosophy. He achieves this aim by defining science as a consensualizable public knowledge", following John Ziman. By contrast, philosophy must be a non-consensualizable public inquiry", and this isn't a scientist or positivist view. The idea that philosphy is a conceptual analysis is integrated to this general account: most of philosophy must be a conceptual analysis and a non-consensualizable inquiry anticipating science. As a systematic work, the book is a very fine argumentative achievement.
Was this review helpful to you?