English Abstract This paper examines arguments made by the Argentinean philosopher Risieri Frondizi in his essay “On the Unity on the Philosophies of the Two Americas” regarding the legitimacy of unifying the philosophic traditions of the Americas. It argues that the present situation is much as it was in the 1950’s: the two largest philosophical communities of the Americas are still generally isolated from each other and the integration of these communities is a legitimate aspiration. The paper then examines the (...) concern, mentioned by Frondizi, that Pan-Americanism is political propaganda concealing U.S. imperialism in Latin America. It concludes that Frondizi’s arguments in favor of unifying American philosophies should encourage philosophers across the Americas to integrate the philosophical traditions of the Americas through a dialogue that explicitly addresses the United States’ history of anti-democratic actions in Latin America. Resumen en español Este articulo examina los argumentos formulados por el filósofo argentino Risieri Frondizi en su ensayo “Sobre la unidad de las filosofías de las dos Américas” con respeto a la legitimidad de la unificación de las tradiciones filosóficas de las Américas. Argumenta que la situación actual es tanto como lo fue en la década de 1950: las dos comunidades filosóficas más grandes de las Américas en general siguen siendo aislados unos de otros y la integración de estas comunidades es una aspiración legítima. Este articulo entonces se examina la preocupación, mencionada por Frondizi, que el panamericanismo es un tipo de propaganda política que oculta el imperialismo de EE.UU. en América Latina. Llega a la conclusión de que los argumentos de Frondizi en favor de unificación de las filosofías de las Américas deben fomentar los filósofos de las Américas para integrar las tradiciones filosóficas de las Américas a través de un diálogo que aborde explícitamente la historia de las acciones anti-democráticas en América Latina de los Estados Unidos. (shrink)

In the first part of my work I consider the false opposition between abstract universalism and cultural particularisms. I propose to dissolve it by means of a nomadic thought and take as an example of such thinking the work of Luis Villoro. The second part discusses the disagreement between Manuel Vargas and Robert Sánchez on philosophy as a cultural resource. The third part explores the genuine opposition between arrogant reason and porous reason.

Reflections by leading Latin American and African American philosophers on their identity within the field of philosophy.

The paper begins by criticizing the usual division of Latin America philosophy into three stages: founders, forgers and thecnicians. Then the history of philosophy in 20th in Mexico is narrated with the help of four maps that indicates the main positions and names. Towards the end, two kinds of lessons are drawn. The first is to promote the destruction of the vices of such a philosophy to regain its virtues. The second lesson comes from interpreting the metaphors of the previous (...) maps: we are victims of shipwreckes living in archipielagos and thus we may explore their transitions. (shrink)

Philosophizing the Americas establishes the field of inter-American philosophy. Bringing together contributors who work in Africana Philosophy, Afro-Caribbean philosophy, Latin American philosophy, Afro-Latin philosophy, decolonial theory, and African American philosophy, the volume examines the full range of traditions that have, separately and in conversation with each other, worked through how philosophy in both establishes itself in the Americas and engages with the world from which it emerges. The book traces a range of questions, from the history of philosophy in the (...) Americas to philosophical questions of race, feminism, racial eliminativism, creolization, epistemology, coloniality, aesthetics, and literature. The essays place an impressive range of philosophical traditions and figures into dialogue with one another: some familiar, such as José Martí, Sylvia Wynter, Martin R. Delany, José Vasconcelos, Alain Locke, as well as such less familiar thinkers as Arturo Alfonso Schomburg, Hilda Hilst, and George Lamming. In each chapter, the contributors find fascinating and productive matrices of tension or convergence in works throughout the Americas. The result is an original and important contribution to knowledge that introduces readers from various disciplines to unfamiliar yet compelling ideas and considers familiar texts from novel and prescient perspectives. Philosophizing the Americas stands alone as a representation of current scholarly debates in the field of inter-American philosophy. Contributors: Stephanie Rivera Berruz, Jacoby Adeshei Carter, Nadia Celis, Tommy J. Curry, Hernando A. Estévez, Daniel Fryer, James B. Haile III, Chike Jeffers, Lee A. McBride III, Michael Monahan, Adriana Novoa, Susana Nuccetelli, Andrea J. Pitts, Dwayne A. Tunstall, and Alejandro A. Vallega. (shrink)

Latin American philosophy has long been concerned with its philosophical identity. In this paper I argue that the search for Latin American philosophical identity is motivated by a desire for recognition that largely hinges on its relationship to European thought. Given that motivations are seldom easily accessible, the essay comparatively draws on Africana and Native American metaphilosophical reflections. Such juxtapositions serve as a means of establishing how philosophical exclusions have themselves motivated and structured how Latin American philosophy has understood its (...) own quest for philosophical identity. In closing, I gesture toward the possibilities of shifting the conversation away from what makes Latin American philosophy distinct toward one of praxis—what do we want Latin American philosophy to do. (shrink)

El objetivo de este artículo consiste en analizar la importancia y la relevancia del pensamiento de Carlos Pereda en la teoría de la argumentación, haciendo hincapié en su obra titulada Vértigos Argumentales, que tiene como propósito central la defensa de una razón enfática, no libre de incertidumbre, pero tampoco de objetividad. Teniendo en mente que la teoría de la argumentación de Carlos Pereda colinda con su concepción de racionalidad, el autor recurre al análisis de temas que se entrecruzan, tales como (...) las virtudes epistémicas, el concepto de racionalidad, una ética de la argumentación, etc. El artículo concluye con la concepción de la argumentación a partir del concepto de ‘práctica’, en donde se señalan los diferentes aspectos que deberían considerarse en la acción argumentativa. Se concluye que Vértigos argumentales formuló y desarrolló algunas intuiciones básicas que están presentes en el debate contemporáneo acerca de la argumentación y la virtud. (shrink)