There is Latin American thought
26
Sep
Yes, it is evident that it exists, but as a school of philosophy it is still linked to various
forms of exogenous thoughts that, in adapting to our reality, remain vague.
I consider Meró Quesada, along with Mario de Andrade (about Macunaíma mainly) and Sergio Buarque de Holanda (Roots of Brazil mainly) those who possess something genuine. There is an entire affiliation to the left of Eduardo Galeano, Argentine Nestor Canclini, and others less read: Manuel Ugarte (Argentina), José Martí (Cuba) and Manoel Bomfim (Brasil).
Of course the brave thinkers of the left like Florestan Fernandes and Caio Prado, anarchist thinkers like Bento Prado, and conservative thinkers like Olavo de Carvalho and the forgotten Mário Ferreira dos Santos, and the not always valued Milton Santos.
I like the didactic division of Quesada, saying that Latin American philosophy was born in the late nineteenth century, fighting positivism (how many people have not yet left), but still linked with a European instrument.
The second, which he called “forgives” and “patriarchs”, but which he intelligently divides into regional and universal, solving this, which did the work of recovering languages and sources giving colors to Latin American thought.
The third generation, curiously is also the period of Mário de Andrade and Sergio Buarque de Holanda, raise the question if possible a specificity of Latin American thought, this founded the group Hiperión.
Miró Quesada defined himself as a nostalgic atheist and then adopted a type of pantheism, which I think is very present in the Latin American cosmogony. His first published work was “Sense of the phenomenological movement” (1941), and as we said in the previous post, he coined the term Paraconsistent Logic in 1976.
There were remarkable encounters, there is record of this, with Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Kurt Gödel. Its main influences are the philosophers Jose Ortega y Gasset and Leopoldo Zea, the fact that there are strong ties the first generation, that is the criticism to positivism is a delay.
