1-The Status of Latin American Philosophy

Generally, there is no agreement among scholars about the philosophical status of the 'Latin American Philosophy', whether with respect to authenticity, identity, or scope. Stephanie Berruz describes such a state of affairs as follows,

Latin American philosophers have been deeply concerned with the status of Latin American philosophy; a concern phrased in the question: Does there exist a distinct Latin American philosophy? The question has garnered substantial attention, and philosophers and historians alike have heeded the call to respond. The responses largely engage the criteria by which to identify Latin American philosophy or take grave concern with the possibilities of its existence as an appropriate philosophical field. Although discussion about the search for philosophical identity have been ample, the motivations that structure the conversation are not always the focal point of discussion, a space where I contend some of the most fruitful analysis is found as Latin American philosophy continues to solidify as a field of study. (Stephanie Rivera Berruz. 2019. 'The Quest for Recognition: the Case of Latin American Philosophy').

From another side, Alejandro Vallega describes the unique situation of Latin America with respect to its philosophical identity as follows,

In Latin America the situation is different: The question that animates the very arising into existence and the path of Latin American thought is if there is Latin American philosophy, or if it is at all possible to speak of such a phenomenon. This is not due to a lack of culture or thought but rather to the distinct situation of the Latin American mind. Since Latin America's inceptive insertion into European history (1492), given its inseparability from the development of European modernity (as the very name "Latin America" itself indicates), to be an American, in its broad sense, has meant to be part of many histories, lineages, memories, and various forms of knowledge. Indigenous, Andalusian, Islamic, African, Jewish, criolla, ladina, mestiza, Guarani, Inca, Maya, Araucana: Latin America has as its origins a diversifying difference that calls not for a question of Being and for a single philosophy but for the articulation of that distinct play of concrete realities that are clumsily misrepresented under one name. Latin American philosophy, then, may be said to be philosophy by virtue of remaining philosophical, that is, by virtue of remaining with the very question of the possibility and existence of a thought that may articulate the density, distinctness, and fecundity of human experiences. (Alejandro Vallega. 2014. "Latin American Philosophy from Identity to Radical Exteriority", P.19).

Within this general perspective, David Gandolfo introduces in a broad sense, three possible answers to this question

First, one might construe Latin American philosophy to be whatever a philosopher in Latin America is doing. This answer is unhelpful since, for example, there is nothing particularly "Latin American" about a philosopher working on Kant at UNAM in a way that is no different than a philosopher in Berlin. Second, one could hold that the only authentic philosophy from the region is reflective thought untainted by exposure to outside (read: European) influences - this would restrict Latin American philosophy to indigenous and pre-Columbian thought. This answer, while popular in another area of the world that also had a long exposure to European colonialism, viz., Africa, has never gained a foothold in Latin American philosophy due to the deep-seated belief in the region that the region's identity is precisely a mixture of indigenous and European cultures.
The third possible answer to the question of what constitutes Latin American philosophy has been the one deemed worthy of pursuing. This answer holds that Latin American philosophy consists of using the tools and methods of philosophy to make sense of reality in Latin America. (David Ignatius Gandolfo. 2013. 'Liberation Philosophy').

Susana Nuccetelli presents a more sophisticated account of the different ways Latin American intellectuals have responded to this question. She presents three positions, strong universalists, weak universalists and distinctivists, as follows,

Latin American philosophers have understood and answered the question of concern here in a number of ways. Some endorse versions of 'SU' (strong universalism), according to which SU: All theories, methods and topics philosophy are universal. Given SU, no philosophical theory, method or topic is distinctively Latin American.
Other universalists embrace weaker theses that are in fact consistent with distinctivism. For example, WU. Some of the theories, methods and topics of philosophy are universal. Given WU: there is logical space for some such theories, methods, and topics to be distinctively Latin American in some sense.

Jorge Gracia has recently expounded a view which amounts to a form of weak universalism. On this view, Latin American philosophy is 'ethnic philosophy'.

Another example of weak universalism is my own 2002 proposal, which may be labeled an 'applied-philosophy' view. On this view, universalism and distinctivism are compatible, given that a philosophy is characteristically Latin American just in case it develops
1- original philosophical arguments, and
2- topics that are at least in part determined by the relation its proponents bear to cultural, social, and/or historical factors in Latin America.
Construed in this way, there is ample evidence of the existence of a characteristically Latin American philosophy in the works of Latin American thinkers - including both the 'amateur philosophers' and the professional ones - many of whom plainly score high in both originality and sensitivity to the cultural, social, and historical context.
At the same time, the applied-philosophy view agrees with universalism on one important point: that there are some issues, such as the problem of knowledge, the mind-body problem, and whether belief in God can be justified, that have a universal import grounded in the tradition of Western philosophy.

Distinctivists claim that,

D The theories, methods and topics of Latin American philosophy are characteristically Latin American.
Clearly, the term must pick out a certain virtue of philosophical theories, methods, and topics developed by Latin American philosophers, whether in Latin America or abroad. For distinctivism, the debate is not about whether a Latin American philosophy exists at all, but rather about whether an x Latin American philosophy exists - where 'x' stands for being original, authentic, autochthonous, and the like. (Susana Nuccetelli. 2013. 'Latin American Philosophy')

From another side, Jorge Gracia describes his ethnic view to the question of the identity of Latin American Philosophy as follows,

One possibility is to take them to reflect ethnic, rather than national, identities. Thus, "Spanish philosophy" and "French philosophy" become ethnic labels, which name and include the philosophical work of persons who do not necessarily belong to the same nation even though they belong to the same ethnic group. There are several reasons for the choice. First, it is a clear case of ethnic philosophy in the sense that I understand it here, insofar as there is no Latin American nation; second, there has been much discussion about the nature, and even existence, of Latin American philosophy. (Jorge Gracia. 2003 . 'Ethnic Labels and Philosophy: The Case of Latin American Philosophy')

Given these general outlines for the different answers to the problem in hand, an important question about the historical beginnings of the philosophical inquiry in 'Latin America' arises. According to Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, and Otavio Bueno,

The most pressing question(s) concerning the history of Latin American philosophy: When did it begin? Some have it that it was not until the socalled fundadores (founders) of the early twentieth century, often credited with initiating a 'normal' period of academic philosophy in the subcontinent. Others hold that philosophy began with the boom of nineteenth century Latin American positivism. But such cuts, if not biased, seem at best arbitrary. After all, there is evidence pointing to scholastic philosophy devoted to topics raised during the Conquest and three centuries of colonial ruling that followed - which qualifies, at least topically, for being Latin American. Moreover, the Maya and other pre-Columbian peoples left well-preserved texts that attest their philosophical concerns - which can also be found in the writings of early travelers and missionaries. (Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, Otavio Bueno (Ed's.). 2013. 'Introduction', in "A Companion to Latin American Philosophy", Wiley- Blackwell.)

With respect to the pre-Columbian era James Maffie presents the following reasons to support the proposal that philosophical inquiry existed before colonialism,

The indigenous peoples of what is now called "Latin America" enjoy long and rich traditions of philosophical inquiry dating back centuries before being characterized by their European "discoverers" as "primitives" incapable of or unmotivated to think philosophically. Pre-Columbian societies contained individuals who reflected critically and systematically upon the nature of reality, human existence, knowledge, right conduct, and goodness; individuals who puzzled over questions like "How should humans act?," "What can humans know?," and "What can humans hope for?"
Our understanding of Andean and Aztec philosophies is limited by the fact that we lack pre-contact primary sources written in their respective indigenous languages. Reconstructing pre-Columbian philosophies therefore involves triangulating from a variety of alternative sources. First, we have the ethnohistories of early indigenous, mestizo, and Spanish chroniclers. For Andean philosophy, these include the writings of Spaniards such as Pedro Cieza de Leon (1967), Juan de Betanzos (1996), and Bernabe Cobo (1990), and of indigenous Andeans such as Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala (1936) and Juan de Santa Cruz Pachacuti Yamqui Salcamaygua (1873). For Aztec philosophy, these include the writings of Spanish missionaries such as Bernardino de Sahagun (1953-82), Diego Duran (1971, 1994), and Alonso de Molina (2001). Second, we have Andean quipus or knotted-strings that were used for recording information, and Aztec pictorial histories, ritual calendars, maps, and tribute records. Third, in both cases we have archaeological evidence such as architecture, statues, pottery, jewelry, tools, and human remains. Finally, we have contemporary ethnographies of relevant surviving indigenous peoples, e.g.: Classen (1993), Isbell (1978), Seibold (1992), and Urton (1981) in the case of Andean philosophy; Sandstrom (1991) and Knab (2004), in the case of Aztec. (James Maffie. 2013. 'Pre-Columbian Philosophies').

Susana Nuccetelli supports this claim as follows,

An interesting problem regarding the origins of the discipline is created by written documents suggesting the existence of pre-Columbian philosophical thought. It has been argued that certain well-preserved texts are evidence of the existence of philosophical thought among the Maya and Aztec in the form of folk-cosmologies and reflections on problems of epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. Prominent among the existing documents are the Maya's Popol Vuh and their Books of Chilam Balam or Codices - though there is also evidence from Spanish chronicles of the New World.

Needless to say, pre-Columbian thought unfolds in ways that seem utterly alien to our standard conceptions of philosophy. But a strict compliance with such standards cannot be held as a necessary condition of being counted as philosophy. After all, it has been not uncommon in the history of Western philosophy to include as philosophy path-breaking works that also flout prevalent standards of format or content. One thinks immediately of the writings of Parmenides, Plato, and Wittgenstein.

Moreover, those who wish to exclude pre-Columbian thought from the history of Latin American philosophy cannot argue that such a thought raises issues we would now think not properly philosophical. For in that case the works of nearly all pre-Socratic Greek philosophers would have to be excluded too, since they raise questions that are in fact quite analogous to those in pre-Columbian folk-cosmologies. And, as in the case of Pythagoras, their answers were often also mixed up with myth and religion (see Nuccetelli, 2002).

On the other hand, as in the case of the relation between pre-Socratic thought and Western philosophy, pre-Columbian philosophical works have been taken to make up at least a proto Latin American philosophy - a claim that is consistent with holding that more contemporary philosophical methods are needed now to properly discuss the same issues. Among those who reject the parallel, some argue that only in the case of pre-Socratics there is some continuity in the method used. (Susana Nuccetelli. 2013. 'Latin American Philosophy').

The other form of philosophical inquiry that reflects genuine Latin American engagement with its historical and existential conditions is what is termed generally liberation philosophy. David Gandolfo describes this view as follows,

By the mid-twentieth century, most of Latin America was over a century into formal independence and yet found itself very much dependent upon economic, political, and social forces outside of its control. Philosophers began to reflect critically on what would constitute real independence, real progress. They became more concerned with the material, social, political, and economic conditions of the possibility of real independence and real progress. Latin American intellectuals began to conceive of the status quo, not as an absence of progress but as a presence of oppression, and the solution as a liberation from this oppression. In the region and all around the world grassroots movements for social change flourished as colonized and oppressed people began to demand and work for a different distribution of power. This was the praxis out of which philosophical considerations of liberation emerged. (David Gandolfo. 2013. 'Liberation Philosophy').

This position was strongly advocated by the well-known Mexican philosopher Leopoldo Zea. Alejandro Vallega describes Zea's motivations for such a position as follows,

Leopoldo Zea's most evident contribution to Latin American thought is his call for and recognition of the existence of a Latin American philosophy, and his doing so by calling for thought that arises in critical engagement with its historical and existential situation. Moreover, this turn toward the Americas anticipates in a way the philosophy of liberation by putting at its center the asymmetry in the concepts of identity between the conqueror and the conquered that results from the cultural and intellectual dependency of Latin Americans under European and American Western ideas of what counts as humanity and culture. Zea's response to the question of whether there is a Latin American philosophy is affirmative from the very start. This is because, as I have just indicated, to be American is to struggle with the question of identity, although under the asymmetry of coloniality.

Zea aims for a thought situated in the American circumstance, which, in taking up the European conceptual tradition from its own Latin American circumstance, may give new impulse to our encounter with universal problems such as time, God, and ethical human existence. The key to this situated universality is that for Zea conceptual philosophical thought is not an abstract activity but what one would call an historical hermeneutic experience. In and from the encounter with our singular historical situation, thought begins to take form. What may give us a place next to Western thought is that form discovered in the encounter with historical, singular, and ephemeral situatedness. (Alejandro Vallega. 2014. "Latin American Philosophy from Identity to Radical Exteriority").

However, other than these philosophical directions, philosophical studies performed in Latin American region can be viewed as a derivative of Western philosophy. Within this general framework, Jorge Gracia, and Manuel Vargas describe the status of philosophy in Latin America as follows,

Latin American philosophy has been both original and derivative. Much of its history involves work that is derivative of European philosophical figures and movements. At the same, time Latin American philosophy has produced important philosophers, original approaches to old philosophical problems, and formulations of new problems not already within the European philosophical tradition. Moreover, virtually all historical European philosophical traditions have been present in Latin America, as are most contemporary movements in the United States and Europe. Finally, there has been a significant interest in social concerns among Latin American philosophers, partly as a reaction to the social and economic circumstances of Latin America. This has led Latin American philosophical work to be comparatively more concerned with social issues than philosophy in, for example, the United States.(Jorge Gracia and Manuel Vargas, "Latin American Philosophy" )

Cited Works

Berruz, Stephanie Rivera. 2019. 'The Quest for Recognition: the Case of Latin American Philosophy', Comparative Philosophy Volume 10, No. 2 (2019): 61-83.
Gandolfo, David Ignatius. 2013. 'Liberation Philosophy', in Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, Otavio Bueno (Ed's.) "A Companion to Latin American Philosophy", Wiley-Blackwell.
Gracia, Jorge and Manuel Vargas, "Latin American Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
Gracia, Jorge J. E.2003 . 'Ethnic Labels and Philosophy: The Case of Latin American Philosophy', in Eduardo Mendieta (ed.) "Latin American Philosophy Currents, Issues, Debates", Indiana University Press p.57-67.
Maffie, James. 2013. 'Pre-Columbian Philosophies', in Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, Otavio Bueno (Ed's.) "A Companion to Latin American Philosophy", Wiley-Blackwell.
Nuccetelli, Susana. 2013. 'Latin American Philosophy', in Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, Otavio Bueno (Ed's.) "A Companion to Latin American Philosophy", Wiley-Blackwell.
Vallega, Alejandro Arturo. 2014. "Latin American Philosophy from Identity to Radical Exteriority", Indiana University Press.