Gonzalo Puente Ojea's critic to Gustavo Buenos

GONZALO PUENTE OJEA’S CRITIC TO GUSTAVO BUENOS
Name:
Grade Course:
Tutor’s Name:
(8, July, 2011)
Gonzalo Puente Ojea’s critic to Gustavo Buenos
Philosophical materialism of good is a part of a long scholarly tradition that has a lot of derivation from Aristotelian that have been appearing hampered by the metaphysical view through the interpretation of the otology. Matter that is a concept of transcendental (MT) is at the height of a peculiar version that emanated from Aristotle.
Well, philosophical ontology get rid of a simplistic interpretation of monistic materialism as absolute evil. It cannot be assumed the reductionist principle has taken a center stage that do not automatically create explanation of the circumstantial dynamic and evolution of each layer of matters. Materialist monism is increasingly supported and accelerated by the contemporary scientific knowledge that usually negates philosophical dualism of substances. This has been put in place by the scholastic tradition, topped by the Descartes and the dogma from the Christian community, and openly claimed the positivity of pluralism phenomenological matter. This is well thought of and makes it to be admired for the philosophical traditions of scholasticism are derived from it. It also places it in an anti-positivist and in a speculative attitude that leads to transcendental philosophy. He sits closer to the terms of precedent. Objective idealism of Kant and the constructivism that is of very high trends in philosophy of science, however influenced strongly by the Hegelian dialectic version.
According to Gustavo Buenos, the idea of matter can be understood in terms of critical process regressive. He also says that instant matter is conceived as an entity or groups of entities that are capable of being considered in them that would fall in metaphysics. In his opinion, if the positive nature is known, then, its physical constituents and the legality of its movement will help us abandon the field of speculative ideas. This is regarded in the fundamental ontological knowledge and the devote of all our efforts towards the nature of radical ontic facticity that makes the contribution of all theoretical and practical tools that offers scientific methods to observe, detect and verify the world reality. Through this endless task, it is capable of investigating facts that thematize always in the light of working hypothesis in model building and building theory. All this can be noted from the sensory and the perceptual abilities of humans. The approach is mostly idealistic and therefore, metaphysical. Understanding the concept of the transcendental as attributed to the construction of the idea of matter ontological general. This idea construct a negative regression can be understood only from the contents it portrays. However, this regression passes rights through mediation of an ego. This can be defined as the process in which an actual exercise of the regression of this set of generic materials up to the idea of general ontological term.
This position which is philosophical despite all the reservations that it attempts to introduce good especially the desire to distance itself from the substantialization that falls in Aristotle separate fro any concept of the matter as substantia universal generative. Therefore, Gonzalo found it as idealistic as it is equal against the grain and has superfluous and metaphysical subjectivist ontological reinterpretation of the actual process of the energy-matter. He Gonzalo argues that, “in its factual journey from the "vacuum" quantum-which is not really "empty" - up mental phenomena as neurophysical structures. Positivism has its ontology, epistemology and their corresponding domains, which are neither confused nor oppose each other, but they are required to mutual consistency, as evidenced by eminent scientific materialists in many areas of knowledge.”
He criticizes
According to his criticism, he argues that one can be ontologically monistic reductionist, however, that does not exempt one from being shocked from Good and his school while epistemologically pluralistic. It seems excessive for one to make a theory useful taxonomological qualifying and closing scientific discipline in it specifity which brings bout ideological fruitful to obstruct the path towards materialist ontological monism. The realities re then many and they bring about contradiction and inconsistency rather than a clear ...