Latin American Philosophy: Salazar Bondy, Zea and Science and Faith For Jesus Eurico Miranda Regina
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul
Originally published in Journal of Philosophy 9.1 (1997-1998): 29-44
(Universidad Católica Blas Cañas, Chile)
In http:/ / www.robertexto.com/archivo13/filos_latinoam.htm
I
INTRODUCTION Since the end of the 60's, Latin American philosophy began to express a philosophy of liberation. It is important to show how the proposal of the philosophy of liberation, and in particular the prospect of the Argentine philosopher is part of a philosophical tradition American emancipation. This study will consider specifically the extent to which it performs through its specific proposal of a critical thinking and liberation, the realization of the positions taken by other authors, notably Augusto Salazar Bondy and Leopoldo Zea, compared to a genuine Latin American thought. In this TARC "measure" the thought of Argentina, and Enrique Dussel especially in light of the American philosophical tradition, it is assumed the fundamental question of the authenticity and originality of Latin American philosophy, which has been debated, not only today but as in other Latin American philosophical process periods.
II DEFINITION HISTORICAL
The now famous book Is there a philosophy of our America? Salazar Bondy made a critical assessment of Latin American philosophical thinking (Salazar 131). During the historical process this task reached a level of considerable expansion and development, albeit in a very special sense. The notes in different institutions, professorships, university departments, societies and associations of specialists, philosophy how regular activity in virtually all Latin American nations. What was a possible activity and product perishability, with little effect for some time, today is a stable activity, with sufficient resources to ensure their survival and progress, increasing its penetration in the life of the community. Also today there is a serious and thorough discussion about the nature and the possibility of philosophy in Latin America is discussed at conferences and seminars throughout the continent.
Within the distinctive features of philosophical thought mentioned by Salazar Bondy are two kinds: "factual" and "negative" (Salazar 131).
For the characters "factual", it appears that there are five or relevant: first, a similar pattern with the same pattern of development history in all countries of this continent, second pair the influences of other national philosophies Latin American philosophical thought, and thirdly, the parallel evolution with exogenous determinants, ie, the development of Latin American philosophy parallels the process of European thought and changes with the same sequence to change this; fourth, the philosophy is always tied to certain areas of cultural, fifth, Latin American philosophy started from scratch after the conquest, as the tradition of Indian thought was not incorporated into the process Latin American philosophy. For
characters negative identifies three: first, the sense imitative of reflection, Latin Americans adopted philosophic currents of foreign thought, and second, an open and unrestricted to accept almost any type of theoretical product from the great centers of Western culture, third, the absence of a trend methodological feature, which is a theoretical and ideological inclination unjustifiable.
From these characteristics of Latin American philosophical thought, Salazar Bondy argues that deficiencies prevail over the gains of the philosophical concerns. With this statement points to the fact that in Latin America is given a big problem at the level of culture: it is found that there is a problem of authenticity of the man in this part of the world. Thus, Latin Americans live an inauthentic existence prevails in many communities and mystification and fiction about reality itself, in other words, we live on the conscious level as culture models are not suitable to their social and existential . These models, says Salazar Bondy, operate as "myths" that prevent both recognize the true situation of his community and lay the foundations for a true construction of the historical identity of Latin American self.
A critical assessment of such Latin American philosophical thought, to understand in all its dimensions, it is necessary to compare this with the famous book The Latin American philosophy as a philosophy with no more than Leopoldo Zea, which also offers a critical assessment of Latin American thinking.
In the second chapter, Zea recalls that the first Latin American thinkers aspired to cultural creation, and from it emerged a series of national philosophies (Zea 32). But this was done by imitating the spirit and attitude of European philosophers, the spirit that had enabled such fruits. For Zea, the great philosophical systems Europeans came the spirit of competition, but simply an attitude toward reality, historical-cultural problems which had forced them to reflect, to think, in short, to philosophize.
But he said Zea, the history of philosophical ideas in Latin America offers a horizon, which is not in any way inferior to that offered by the history of European ideas and philosophies, but simply different. Different because it is an expression of human experience that corresponds to a situation where the European man. Zea wonder if you can consider this form of the Latin American philosophy as alienating. He shows that in the history of philosophy from Plato to Comte, thinkers have been concerned to make powerful attempts to justify a social order or to change it. To Zea, philosophizing in Latin America has often made such an operation: the philosophy was undoubtedly borrowed to Europe, but then focused consciously or unconsciously, to solve problems that concern us. This is no less philosophy, but simply different. Philosophy in Latin America, said Zea, followed the line of thought in the West, by ensuring that the emerging philosophies of Europe instruments of political concerns.
For Zea, Latin America is already aware of his initial lack of authenticity, from the fact that it uses foreign philosophies to create his own ideology and its political order. He adds that, being conscious, knows what he has done in those philosophies. Zea intends to show the way by which the original inauthenticity is passed to the authenticity of assimilation. In short, it tends to a position that has to inform the Latin American philosophical thought, not as inferior to Western European, but simply as different. Zea
unlike Salazar Bondy, does not consider the European philosophy and foreign to us, and that Latin America as well as the rest of the world, has been the subject of joining the European world. This philosophy is in many ways similar and part of that practiced in Latin America. The European has a philosophy that its purposes philosophy is presented as universal, but in fact was an expression of European domination. However, our thinkers makes this philosophy, to assume and make it their own, a truly universal philosophy. Here shows Zea, is the crux of the authenticity and originality that both philosophers seem to worry the American.
Enrique Dussel's position on the critical assessment of Latin American philosophical thinking is somewhat different. This author does not stop long to make a critique of the American philosophical tradition, or to find there something inspirational or some element as a basis for his philosophy of liberation. As Dussel seeks inspiration directly from the Greek Judeo-Christian tradition, modern and contemporary Western Europe. Dussel The attempt is to establish the basic philosophy of liberation from the "other" on the periphery of Latin America, where it is inserted. There is now in the works consulted Dussel as explicit concern at the history of ideas.
second in the appendix of the book Philosophy of Liberation in Latin America called "The philosophy of liberation in Argentina: emergence of a new philosophical generation", are some elements that we consider relevant for critical thinking of philosophical thinking in Latin America. Dussel does not make a comprehensive historical and critical review from the discovery, as did Salazar Bondy and Leopoldo Zea, although some subsequent studies have attempted to address this shortcoming. The focal points of this critique of Dussel relate more to the situation of philosophy in Argentina, so only by analogy can be extended to Latin America.
Dussel critical analysis comprises three stages, which he calls ontic moment, when ontological and metaphysical moment. When
ontic Dussel notes that in the nineteenth century, due to the peculiar situation of agriculture in Argentina together with European immigration, there is a first effort of industrialization along the port cities, where there was a European-style proletariat in the neo-colonial dependent industry. For Dussel, which has in terms of philosophical thinking, linked to this industrialization is the presence of positivism, allied to some socialist theory, rooted in the petty bourgeoisie port of an anti-conservative and anti-traditionalist. This is expressed in the thought of José Ingenieros that being liberal in economics, it becomes more than a mere proposal of a typical modern European bourgeois moral discipline. Dussel said that these proposals follow a reaction Korn antipositivist Alberdi. One more liberal and a more conservative, but Dussel both respond to it initially bourgeois oligarchy of Buenos Aires.
Francisco Romero is for Dussel quite obviously, the philosophical support of the anti-positivist position, based on a theory of objects and schelleriana Kantian inspiration, but fails to overcome the ontic level modern European subjectivity. Dussel does not exist for all the aforementioned philosophical cycle, criticizing the system as a whole. As the current philosophy increasingly university-European philosophy, Dussel that fails to interpret the reality.
The ontological time. In the first part of the twentieth century, rose Dussel notes that important figures in Argentina ontology, not in the port cities but inside, in Cordoba, as opposed to the interests of the "pampa." Dussel as figures highlights that despite not being part of the oligarchy doctoral Cordoba, Carlos Astrada and Nimio of Anquin (with splendid philosophical training in Germany, studying with Heidegger the first and second with Cassirer) assume an ontological status.
Dussel shows the philosophical way of departing from "being", criticizing J. Engineers, Korn, Astrada and Romero. Astrada, Dussel says, part of a commitment to popular government after pass a declaration Marxist Anquin Thomistic movement adheres to revitalize traditional after armed groups of the extreme right. For Dussel either end up taking Hegelian thought by the passage of Kantianism to ontology first and then Hegel Heidegger. During this period, complete Dussel, ontological criticism is still abstract and universal. As in Hegel, ontology in these thinkers is finally closed as a system and we do not see a systematic practice, beyond the ontological gap that can open into a new more just order, Dussel concludes.
The metaphysical moment. For Dussel, after those two relevant moments of philosophical Argentina, and from the Government of Gen. Ongania (1966), it was forming a new generation philosophy. For this new generation, which includes Dussel, not only looking for a university and educational reform, but also wants to find a gap to overcome Heidegger's ontology, Hegel and European. This new generation, see Dussel, wants to go beyond Anquin Astrada and thus is placed in a certain way against it, but recognizing it done for them.
This movement, Dussel says, has been calling since 1973 "Philosophy of Liberation" and thematized the philosophical and political question, in the sense that there is no national liberation front of the empires of the center, without social liberation of the oppressed classes. This philosophy, Dussel emphasizes, first carries out critique of the notion accepted by the philosophy of being (sein), as from Hegel, Husserl and Heidegger, "being" is the foundation (Grund) and the "being" the difference ( unterschied).
Dussel concludes that basically it is a philosophy of identity that must be overcome, going beyond the very reason for being understanding of the whole area where the first ethical-political exteriority. He ends his criticism by saying that philosophy Dussel Latin American liberation tries to rethink the whole philosophy from the other, the oppressed, the poor, non-being, the barbarian, which makes no sense.
III CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION
can be noted that these three concepts have had an important contribution to the discussion of the "American philosophy" but there are certain difficulties that are permanently in the different studies on a genuine philosophy: great issues not yet resolved are those of authenticity, Westernization and own categories of thought. Highlight some points of conflict.
known is the thesis Salazar Bondy that during the almost five centuries, Latin American philosophical thinking has been clearly inauthentic: it has been pretending to be something other than what it is, or what could be, or has lived alienated from the cultural and social reality, so the mystification of historical entity, its own self has prevailed. The Western European model before, the U.S. today, from recognizing the true situation of Latin American communities and lay the foundations of genuine building of your own being.
why should philosophy designed to connect theory with historical reality all lived and operated in such a way that by use efficient and prudent use of historical resources available, consider the various areas of American life projected into the future. Salazar Bondy relates to overcome this lack of authenticity, to overcome underdevelopment and domination, so that philosophy must be the result of this momentous historical change. This philosophy itself, in contrast to the views advocated and adopted by the major power blocs today, being present in the history of his time and ensuring its independence and survival, can partner with a culture that is self-recognition.
Leopoldo Zea's response is certainly different, part of a historical analysis more complex by which Latin American philosophy appears making philosophies that emerged in Europe with tools that help them solve their social and cultural problems. These forms are not reflections of imported something that is alien and inauthentic. Leopoldo Zea said that in Latin America, the philosophy changed from original inauthenticity to authenticity of assimilation. In this sense, there simply to do philosophy, America will follow. Zea concludes, the concern of this philosophy is to simply philosophy, which in Latin America will be "American", she says his famous speech, will be "no more philosophy," that is what is required to latinomericana philosophy and the philosophers.
Enrique Dussel's position on overcoming the inauthenticity of existing Latin America and its own proposal for a philosophy of liberation, based on core categories that are not new, but are endowed with new contents to the classic debate between Salazar Bondy and Zea. The Method of Philosophy of Liberation Dussel presents a proposed analectical being placed by him as a different time of the dialectical method. The draft release and overcome the lack of authenticity in Dussel, there is an extension of the system (unambiguous), but his recreation from provocation or disclosure of the other (Analects). This process is critical Dussel actual current dominant system at various levels. It is a liberating rupture and destruction. For Dussel, the theoretical and practical improvement inauthentic situation of Latin American philosophy, is given through the metaphysical moments are: the political, educational, eroticism and antifetishism.
Dussel's contribution to the question of authenticity lies in two main points first, doing a critical job of all the Western European tradition from antiquity to today, in its most relevant. This fits within the Salazar Bondy position not simply accept Western philosophy for the cause of the inauthenticity of Latin American philosophy there, and second, not starting from scratch, but connecting to the western European philosophical tradition in the points that he believes are important data, such as those which contains elements of its core categories, looking at these points the solution to the problems of Latin American reality as advocated by Leopoldo Zea. However, the difficulty of conception is that not done full justice to the history of ideas as it has been worked by Arda, Roig and Cerutti.
The problem is Westernization The second question that lies at the heart of the debate on Latin American philosophy. Salazar Bondy has a clear position on the Western European tradition that has a dominating power that prevents the development of critical thought, one of the causes of the situation of alienation, and underdevelopment in Latin America, "the determining cause of inauthenticity, is the existence of a basic flaw in their society and culture. We live alienated by underdevelopment, coupled with the dependency and domination that is being submitted, as has always been "(Salazar 131), or as indicated more clearly: "Third World nations need to forge their own philosophy in contrast with the views defended y. assumed two major power blocs of our time and ensuring their independence and their survival "(Salazar 132).
This issue is treated differently by Leopoldo Zea: philosophy made to date in Latin America we are not strange (Zea 25). After describing the development process of Latin American philosophy as though it has known and scholars in their books, notes that at various times it had the characteristic attitude to take and adapt the European trends, adding that the Latin America would have to take account of the European philosopher. It is recommended to assume that Juan Bautista Alberdi, ie, select, adapt, expression of Western philosophy that best suits the needs of Latin America, its socio-cultural (Zea 43). In other words, says Zea, one must accept consciously, what was done in an unconscious way from the very beginning of the incorporation of Latin America to the western world history, from the time and began incorporating indigenous and , as Westerners, the continuation of that history in its history. It is noted that in Leopoldo Zea, Westernization in Latin America is a fact, and presented by him as an ideal that can not be ignored (Zea 43).
Enrique Dussel's position can be summarized in two points different. First, Dussel in his Philosophy of Liberation in Latin America, clearly expresses the situation of thinking in this part of the world is otherwise alienated and alienating. At the beginning of his work, the part about "Geopolitics and Philosophy", Dussel shows clearly that Latin America is on the periphery of totalizing scheme. And be on the periphery is considered as an instrument of philosophy dominating center. Today this center is dominating North America, but previously was Europe. There is a historical situation of domination and dependence since the discovery of the new continent, from the period of colonization pair up neocolonialism of today.
philosophy of liberation, as Enrique Dussel, theoretically and practically wants to join those seeking to change this situation that has been made in Latin America. Dussel's philosophy of the periphery of the oppressed, the dominated and directed the center, the dominant and subversive critical message. With these assumptions, we see that Dussel position to criticize Western European philosophical tradition. It does this in his book Method for a philosophy of liberation. There in the first four chapters, Dussel have "destructive work" of the Western ontological tradition, from Aristotle to the times modern, culminating with the analysis of the thought of Emmanuel Levinas considered insufficient, but overcomes the modern European philosophy.
Secondly, Enrique Dussel's position on the Westernization of philosophical thinking in Latin America is implicitly assumed but critically. On the other hand, like Zea, believes that Latin American philosophy can not start from scratch: the philosophy of liberation is not intended to be a philosophy that denies the entire European philosophical tradition but it surpasses it in terms of dialectical ontology makes a masking ideology concealing the social reality and is useful to the great centers of power. Dussel's position, though not very clear, is supporting a project and pedagogical praxis of liberation, in short, is to establish a cultural revolution. This educational revolution that is opposed to the concept "banking" of the learner. For Dussel, this project is not made by teachers or by intellectuals, but it is already present in the consciousness of the people. Is a priori metaphysical revolutionary process, which tends to be from a long popular struggle, not only intellectually. For Dussel, is from the revolutionary workers of culture, man of the people that does not leave the village, but has a critical consciousness that will lead people to their full cultural affirmation. Dussel concludes that until they get formed in the praxis of critical consciousness of popular leaders, all education is elitist and domineering.
Consider the question of the categories. FE Peters says in his dictionary of Greek philosophical terms, that the categories "are more general ways as a subject can be described." This topic has been discussed also by American thinkers. For Salazar Bondy "Our philosophy with its peculiarities, has been a thought inauthentic and imitative in substance" (Salazar 131). It involves her "instead of producing their own ideas adopted interpretive categories and values \u200b\u200bof others ", so it is" impossible to give new life and empower them as a source of suitable projects to their salvation history "(Salazar 131). The challenge then will be" immersed in the historical substance of our community for it's livelihood values \u200b\u200band categories that positively express and reveal their world "(Salazar 126).
Peruvian philosopher is convinced that this search for a strict theoretical need not mean anything in the divorce practice. A strict philosophy - which in any case deemed necessary, "can become genuine Latin American thought, provided the theory and practice are conceived and executed with the proper manner of our being, according to our guidelines and categories requires that the social reality to reach a theoretical level at which categories are established, are positive and thus reveal the world which we live and build their lives. Zea
is not entirely in agreement regarding the "status" 'of the categories in the Latin American philosophy. Zea Wondering: You may consider this purported alien form of philosophy? The Latin American philosophy perform an operation similar to the great philosophical systems made by great philosophers of the tradition. For Zea what they did was "multiple expressions of ideologies speaking of the individual and his relationship with the community, which is also natural expression "(Zea 114).
This has to do with the need to make a strict philosophy, but this is not something clear," Rigorous for what? "Asks Zea-Why use a technique that does not own or simply to join the Western world as a great piece of technical machinery?" (Zea 42). The Latin American thought has been characterized by the focus on particular issues, a concrete reality, which is not simply logical or methodological, this means that the relevance of the categories should be raised otherwise. The Latin American Philosophy has been characterized as being compromised and little concern for adhering to the strict canons of philosophy. Our philosophers have faced the reality simply trying to solve the urgent problems that required: it is "philosophize, pure and simple philosophy to solve our problems, human problems in a particular way, that belongs to everyone" (Zea 43).
Dussel's position is different from the two mentioned above: in his book Philosophy of Liberation in Latin America, raises a metaphysical formulation capable of meeting the practice of releasing only a glimpse of part of the post-Hegelian European critics of the left, and can only arise from the current practice of oppressed peoples, women raped by patriarchal ideology and domesticated son: only from this criticism from the "other", and "outside" may prove liberating categories (Dussel XX).
Dussel seems, to establish the central categories of his philosophy of liberation, in line with what recommended Salazar Bondy, in terms of the need to "dive into the historical substance of our community to look into it the livelihoods of values \u200b\u200band categories that express a positive and disclose to the world "(Dussel 81). However, it should be noted that the categories of Dussel are not new, but that has been collected from the Jewish tradition, Christian and European, modern and contemporary.
can be observed that Dussel's thought there are two distinct aspects: first your thinking comes from foreign categories, part of a Jewish tradition (which has nothing to do with Latin America, indigenous), does not value the indigenous religion in theological discourse. Your God is "the biblical God of the Christians." On the other hand, categories are open to pluralism and cultural change cultural revolution is possible and necessary, and values \u200b\u200bof popular culture.
One might wonder if Dussel does not fall into a new alienation. Apparently not, since its proposal in thought and philosophy of liberation, aims to overcome the European and western philosophical tradition and is a starting point for Latin American man, still depressed and not considered by the dominant European philosophy.
But in front of Salazar Bondy draft a question arises: Dussel is concerned about the creation of new categories in what would be, in our opinion, the defining moment of Latin American philosophy? In view of this study seems not: the predominant concern of Dussel as a point of departure and arrival of his philosophy is the periphery, the non-being, nothingness, which should recognized, are still categories outside of the classical Greek tradition. In short, the reflection which Dussel, is on the Latin American reality though foreign categories.
can conclude this point by saying that Dussel matches Zea projects and Salazar Bondy in two stages: first, when thinking seeks to establish an original and authentic from severe categories, such as arises from the requirement to make Salazar Bondy Latin American philosophy: second, when he reflects on the Latin American reality as intended Zea, establishing a philosophy which is nothing more and nothing less than the existing ones, but giving a new interpretation. But the thought Enrique Dussel is in some way, then the European tradition, which he said his philosophy would be an improvement from the time of the dialectical method analectical.
The question one may legitimately ask is what is the role of philosophy in this process of liberation from alienation and domination suffered by the people of Latin America?
Latin American Philosophy Salazar Bondy's proposal should become the clear consciousness of their status as peoples depressed, in a thought can trigger and promote the process overcomes this condition. One can see that what we proposed Bondy for Latin American philosophy is a "'destructive task." Destroyer of its current identity as alienated thought and reality is alienated context. In this task, Latin American philosophy must remove the prejudices, myths, idols and to reveal the subjugation as a people and their depression as a human being.
Zea's position agrees with that of Bondy in the main, in the sense that Latin American philosophy was developed from a situation of alienation. But remember, in their different jobs in the history of philosophical thought in Latin America there have been moments of authenticity that are relevant and should be considered. The task of philosophy It's a philosophy that has become conscious of itself and also seeking ways to overcome this condition. In this sense it is a philosophy of action that identifies and shows potential, which aimed at undermining the very essence of man, has been underestimated.
can say that Dussel's proposal essentially agrees with what was proposed Bondy and Zea. What makes the first is a philosophical proposition, not only with the aim of theorizing the future plans to release peripheral but to go further, because his philosophy becomes a global ethic of otherness.
The Philosophy of Liberation Dussel has a twofold contribution in the framework of the Latin American tradition analyzed by Bondy and Zea: first, to destroy a Western ontology and European places Latin America in a negative situation of non-being, which requires disposing of large ghosts and myths of traditional classical philosophy, and secondly, by proposing a new order in which man oppressed Third World Latin American and even the center, is released from dominating and alienating praxis.
The emergence of this debate aims to understand a new generation of philosophers who are breaking into the Third World, where the philosophy of liberation is reaching a significant impact. This new generation intended, from the philosophy of liberation, to rethink the whole philosophy from the other, the oppressed, the poor, non-being, the barbarian, the emptiness of "sense."
Works Cited
Dussel, Enrique. Method for a philosophy of liberation. Salamanca: Follow Me, 1974.
____. "The philosophy of liberation in Argentina: emergence of a new philosophical generation." The current philosophy in Latin America. Mexico: Grijalbo, 1976. Pp 55-62.
____. Philosophy of liberation. Mexico: Edicol, 1977.
Salazar Bondy, Augusto. Is there a philosophy of our America? Mexico: Twenty First Century, 1968.
Zea, Leopoldo. Latin American philosophy as a philosophy like that. Mexico: Twenty First Century, 1969.
Is your feedback here
