I argue that Bartolomé de las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda differed in their conclusions regarding the status of Indigenous persons at least partly because las Casas had significant, yet incomplete, understanding of Indigenous persons, culture and societies and Sepúlveda had mere knowledge of them. To this end, I show that the epistemic state of understanding explains why Las Casas properly concluded that Indigenous persons deserve the same moral status afforded to Europeans. And I show how las Casas’ understanding (...) of Indigenous persons, culture and societies related to what he got wrong about Indigenous persons. (shrink)

This article develops a philosophical hermeneusis of the “Valladolid Debate” centered on the notion of “universality”, highlighting the universalist elements present both in the foundation of a praxis of colonial domination developed by Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda and in the recognition of the cultural diversity held by Bartolomé de las Casas. First, the historical-ideological context of the conquest is presented. Subsequently the article analyzes de Sepulveda’s arguments about barbarism, cultural superiority and the right of domination, which established a (...) “logic of cultural domination”. In this context, de Sepúlveda intended to establish a fracture between “civilized” and “barbaric” cultures, in which the human essence revealed itself deficiently. Finally, the contribution considers the objections to the “colonial fracture” presented by de las Casas, who composes an alternative position resignifying the concept of “universality” that inhabited de Sepúlveda’s differentialist arguments. (shrink)

«El debate del anciano y el joven» de Yisḥaq ibn Pulgar ha sido estudiado como parte de `Ezer ha-dat y en relación con la polémica religiosa que su autor mantuvo con Abner de Burgos/Alfonso de Valladolid. Pero la tradición manuscrita permite también el análisis de esta disputa como un texto que circuló de manera independiente. Desde esta perspectiva, se propone una lectura de esta versión que, atendiendo a aspectos formales y de contenido, ofrece nuevas claves de interpretación en (...) el marco de los debates religiosos de las comunidades judías en los s. XIII-XIV y revela las estrategias con las que el autor expone y defiende su propia posición ideológica. (shrink)

. A comparison is made between two unlikely debates over intelligence. One debate took place in 1550 at Valladolid, Spain, between Bartolomé de las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepúlveda over the intelligence of the Amerindian. The other debate is contemporary, between John Searle and various representatives of the “strong” artificial intelligence community over the adequacy of the Turing test for intelligence. Although the contemporary debate has yet to die down, the Valladolid debate has (...) been over for four hundred years. The question asked here is whether the contemporary debate can profit from the previous one. The common bond providing the basis for contrast is the issue of the “other” which is present in both debates. From this contrast, the observation is made that the question of meaning is intimately tied to the question of intelligence. (shrink)

La primera mitad del siglo XVI es un momento trascendental en la historia de España. En efecto, no sólo es una época de transición del Medioevo a la Modernidad, sino que con ella asistimos a un “renacimiento” en todos los órdenes de la vida cultural, política, ideológica... En este tiempo –finales del siglo XV y mediados del XVI– los problemas del “descubrimiento”, “conquista” y “gobierno de las Indias” únicamente podían ser afrontados con pautas ideológicas heredadas de la Edad Media. El (...) problema que ahora se plantea –desde una dimensión jurídica, filosófica y teológica– es el del ‘justo título’ que tienen los Reyes cristianos de Castilla y León para ‘el sometimiento de las poblaciones indígenas’, produciéndose así uno de los acontecimientos más curiosos en la historia del mundo occidental cuando dos notables españoles, Bartolomé de Las Casas y Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, se reunieron en Valladolid en 1550 para discutir un gran problema nacional que concernía tanto a los indios americanos como a Aristóteles. Entonces, por primera vez y quizá por última, un imperio organizó oficialmente una encuesta sobre la justicia de los métodos empleados para extender su dominio. La disputa de Valladolid ha de interpretarse claramente como el testimonio apasionado de un hecho decisivo en la historia de la humanidad: por no haber triunfado las ideas de Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda se dio un paso más, penoso e inseguro todavía, en el camino de la justicia para “todas las razas en un mundo de múltiples razas”; por hablar con tanta vehemencia Fray Bartolomé de las Casas en Valladolid en favor de los indios americanos, su larga y complicada argumentación tuvo también otra utilidad: fortaleció a todos aquellos que en su tiempo, y en los siglos que siguieron, trabajaron con la creencia de que “todas las gentes del mundo son hombres”. No bestias, ni esclavos por naturaleza, no como niños con un entendimiento limitado o estático, sino hombres que son capaces de llegar a ser cristianos, que tienen pleno derecho a gozar de sus bienes, su libertad política y su dignidad humana, y que en su creencia deberían ser incorporados a la civilización española y cristiana en vez de ser esclavizados o destruidos. (shrink)

Abstract. Scholars have long debated the possibility of a mystical or illuminationist strain of thought in Ibn Sīnā 's body of writing. This debate has often focused on the meaning and contents of his partly lost work al-Mashriqiyyūn (The Easterners), also known as al-Ḥikma al-Mashriqiyya (EasternWisdom), mentioned by Ibn Sīnā himself as well as by numerous Western writers including Ibn Rushd and Ibn Ṭufayl. A handful of references to what is called Ibn Sīnā 's “Oriental Philosophy” are also found (...) in the Castilian and Hebrew works of the Castilian Jew Abner of Burgos (ca. 1270-ca.1347), known after his conversion to Christianity as Alfonso of Valladolid. Although the content of these citations has not been identified, it has been proposed that they may preserve otherwise unknown passages from Ibn Sīnā's lost work. This study considers the references to Ibn Sīnā 's so-called “Oriental Philosophy” within Abner's writings and concludes that rather than preserving lost passages from Ibn Sīnā's writing, Abner's references were drawn primarily from Ibn Ṭufayl and offer no support for the argument of a possible mystical or illuminationist strain in Ibn Sīnā 's thinking. -/- Résumé. Depuis longtemps, on a discuté de la possible présence d'une orientation mystique ou “illuminative” dans l'oeuvre d'Ibn Sīnā . Le sens et le contenu de son ouvrage (partiellement perdu) al-Mashriqiyyūn (Les Orientaux), également connu comme al-Ḥikma al-Mashriqiyya (La Sagesse orientale), mentionné par Ibn Sīnā lui-même et par des écrivains occidentaux comme Ibn Rushd et Ibn Ṭufayl, ont souvent été au centre de ce débat. On trouve aussi quelques références à ce qui est appelé la “philosophie orientale” d'Ibn Sīnā dans l'oeuvre du juif castillan Abner de Burgos (ca. 1270-ca. 1347) connu après sa conversion au christianisme sous le nom d'Alphonse de Valladolid. Sans avoir au préalable identifié le contenu de ces citations, on a fait l'hypothèse qu'elles auraient permis de conserver des passages, inconnus par ailleurs, de l'ouvrage perdu d'Ibn Sīnā. Cette étude porte sur les références à la “philosophie orientale” d'Ibn Sīnā dans l'oeuvre d'Abner de Burgos. Elle montre que les références d'Abner semblent avoir été essentiellement tirées d'Ibn Ṭufayl et ne renvoient donc pas aux passages perdus de l'ouvrage d'Ibn Sīnā. En conséquence elles ne peuvent servir d'argument pour confirmer la présence d'une orientation mystique ou “illuminative” dans l'oeuvre d'Ibn Sīnā. (shrink)

«(...)En el célebre debate de Valladolid (1550), como hemos dicho, se confrontan posiciones que, en cierto sentido, sobrepasan el delicado objeto del debate de aquella particular circunstancia histórica para convertise en método y criterio de valor en la relación con el otro, con referencia a su participación en la comunidad de comunicación, (...)No hay duda de que los debates que se refieren al descubrimiento del nuevo mundo son, aun hoy, por un lado, dramáticamente actuales por la situación (...) en la que se encuentra aquel continente latinoamericano, sea en el plan de la ética de la comunicación, sea en el de la liberación, frente al que asumen un papel fundamental las nociones de libertad, justicia y bien.». (shrink)

The article discusses the Europeans’ attitude to the other in the 16th century. Together with the conquest of America comes into being the question what rights does the other have, whether the war conducted by Spaniards against Indians was just. The most famous debate over this subject took place in 1550 in Valladolid. The authors present arguments part forward during that meeting by both sides of the dispute: Las Casas and Sepulveda. The supremacy achieved at that time by (...) the Indians’ protector can be recognized as a symbolical beginning of the ethics based on the respect for every human being which started to form in Europe. (shrink)

Este artigo propõe um levantamento do contato entre o pensamento europeu e os povos ameríndios, com ênfase na genealogia dos conceitos filosóficos que vieram a embasar as posições teológicas e as normas jurídicas responsáveis por regular, ao menos em teoria, as práticas históricas para a dinâmica de invasão e conquista dessas terras baixas da América do Sul. Pois, entendemos que nesta trilha encontraremos os fundamentos da dialética entre os direitos indígenas e as regulamentações do Estado nacional, de onde surgem as (...) tensões relativas às reivindicações dos povos ameríndios pelo direito à proteção e uso exclusivo de seus territórios originários. Iniciamos, então, esse percurso, com o momento inaugural da discussão moderna sobre a pauta dos direitos humanos, a partir do debate relativo ao reconhecimento ou não da humanidade dos povos indígenas no século XVI – presente nas formulações do direito dos povos por Frei Francisco de Vitória; passando pelo importante episódio conhecido como C_ontrovérsia de Valladolid_, entre Sepúlveda e Las Casas; percorrendo posteriormente o período colonial, império, primeira e segunda repúblicas, sempre com especial atenção para os conceitos filosóficos que sustentaram as práticas de exploração, usurpação, proteção e controle ao longo deste percurso; até chegar nos ideais de autonomia e autodeterminação presentes na Constituição de 1988. Finalizando esta exposição com a discussão sobre os desafios atuais para sua manutenção e aperfeiçoamento. (shrink)

Una filosofía crítica de la historia se enfrenta a las injusticias del pasado y, por tanto, pone en duda la legitimidad toda institución que esté en deuda con ellas. De ahí que esa filosofía de la memoria sea, por lo mismo, un pensamiento utópico abierto a nuevas posibilidades de futuro de acuerdo con las esperanzas fracasadas del pasado. En el pasado y en el presente hay un común e indeleble anhelo de humanidad futura.

En este artículo se tratan los conceptos de identidad, memoria y democracia en relación con un tipo de sociedad donde prevalece el modelo identitario en un contexto de indi­vidualismo y globalización. El objetivo es señalar el contenido ético-político que podría proporcionar una identidad democrática y anamnética, así como indicar los problemas a los que debe hacer frente una teoría razonada de la democracia que se haga cargo de tal trabajo.

El interés filosófico que despierta la doctrina profetológica de Maimónides encuentra su justificación si con ello se hace justicia, al menos, a lo que en cierta tradición reflexiva se ha entendido como las disposiciones fundamentales que han de acompañar a la filosofía como actitud. Pero, además, ese interés está prefijado, en contraste, por una señalada y actual merma de esas disposiciones en el pensar de buena parte de quienes hoy día se dedican a un arrogante uso publico de la razón.

Plantinga examines the nature of epistemic warrant; whatever it is that when added to true belief yields knowledge. This volume surveys current contributions to the debate and paves the way for his owm positive proposal in Warrant and Proper Function.

The paper defends two claims; Viewed from the perspective of the substantivalism/relationism debate, structural spacetime realism is a form of relationism; However, if we managed to reinforce Rynasiewicz’s point that the general theory of relativity makes the substantivalism/relationism dispute “outdated”, the re-elaboration of Stein ’s 1967 version of structural spacetime realism to be proposed here proves to be a good, antimetaphysical solution to the problem of the ontological status of spacetime.

Philosophers and ethicists debate this controversial moral principle illustrating its application to current moral dilemmas such as war, suicide, nuclear power, affirmative action, and morphine use for terminal cancer patients.

The 1920s and 30s were key decades for the history of American social science. The success of such quantitative disciplines as economics and psychology during World War I forced social scientists to reexamine their methods and practices and to consider recasting their field as a more objective science separated from its historical foundation in social reform. The debate that ensued, fiercely conducted in books, articles, correspondence, and even presidential addresses, made its way into every aspect of social science thought (...) of the period and is the subject of this book. Mark C. Smith first provides a historical overview of the controversy over the nature and future of the social sciences in early twentieth-century America and, then through a series of intellectual biographies, offers an intensive study of the work and lives of major figures who participated in this debate. Using an extensive range of materials, from published sources to manuscript collections, Smith examines "objectivists"--economist Wesley Mitchell and political scientist Charles Merriam--and the more "purposive thinkers"--historian Charles Beard, sociologist Robert Lynd, and political scientist and neo-Freudian Harold Lasswell. He shows how the debate over objectivity and social purpose was central to their professional and personal lives as well as to an understanding of American social science between the two world wars. These biographies bring to vivid life a contentious moment in American intellectual history and reveal its significance in the shaping of social science in this country. (shrink)

The rationality debate centers on the meaning of deviations of decision makers' responses from the predictions/prescriptions of normative models. But for the debate to have significance, the meaning and functions of normative analysis must be clear. Presently, they are not, and the debate's persistence owes much to conceptual blur. An attempt is made here to clarify the concept of normative analysis.

Scientists often make surprising claims about things that no one can observe. In physics, chemistry, and molecular biology, scientists can at least experiment on those unobservable entities, but what about researchers in fields such as paleobiology and geology who study prehistory, where no such experimentation is possible? Do scientists discover facts about the distant past or do they, in some sense, make prehistory? In this book Derek Turner argues that this problem has surprising and important consequences for the scientific realism (...) debate. His discussion covers some of the main positions in philosophy of science - realism, social constructivism, empiricism, and the natural ontological attitude - and shows how they relate to issues in paleobiology and geology. His original and thought-provoking book will be of wide interest to philosophers and scientists alike. (shrink)