## 1. Some Metaphilosophical Questions



Throughout Latin America, philosophers have raised metaphilosophical
questions about the originality and peculiarity of their own
philosophy. Likewise, it is often claimed that *philosophy in
Mexico* is not the same as *Mexican philosophy*, and that
while philosophy in Mexico has a long and distinguished history, it is
wrong to speak of Mexican philosophy, defined by the originality or
authenticity of its debates or theses, the distinctness of its
schools, or the uniqueness of its style or terminology (see Romanell
1975). Other scholars disagree and argue that there are indeed
substantive, thematic, or stylistic continuities that underlie much of
the philosophy produced in Mexico and that allow us to speak of
Mexican philosophy as an original and authentic tradition. Still
others believe that although philosophy in Mexico does not constitute
a unified and distinct tradition *yet*, it has the potential to
become one. (For an extended discussion of the difference between
"Mexican philosophy" and "Philosophy in
Mexico", see Hurtado 2007, particularly chapter 2.)



To complicate the metaphilosophical discussion further, while
philosophy has been produced in Mexico for over 500 years, it is
misleading to speak of "Mexican philosophy" before Mexico
won its independence from Spain in 1821. That is, with few exceptions
did Mexican thinkers and philosophers living under colonial rule or
before think of themselves or their work *as Mexican*. Even
today, given that the development of Mexican philosophy is emerging
largely as a collaborative effort among Mexican and Latinx
philosophers, it is perhaps more accurate to speak of
*trans-Mexican philosophy*--again, as a tradition not
neatly defined by political borders. What we call trans-Mexican
philosophy should not be confused with *Mexican-American* or
*Chicanx philosophy*, although they are closely related (see
the related entry on
 Latinx philosophy).
 Instead, it refers to a field of inquiry that focuses on the
extension and application of Mexican philosophy outside of Mexico,
particularly in the United States, and on the way in which the current
developments in Mexican philosophy both in Mexico and the United
States are mutually supportive.



Even allowing for a certain flexibility in how we define Mexican
philosophy, not all philosophers in Mexico think that cultivating
Mexican philosophy as a distinct tradition is a worthy goal. Many
believe that we ought to leave the pursuit of national philosophies in
the past. So, like Roger Bartra, who coined the phrase *the
post-Mexican condition* (see Bartra 2002), we might speak of a
*post-Mexican philosophy*, that is, of a philosophy that is
produced in Mexico but which does not aim to represent Mexican culture
at all.



We will not discuss these metaphilosophical issues further (see the
related entry on
 Latin American philosophy: metaphilosophical foundations).
 Our primary concern is to provide a sketch of the history of
philosophy in Mexico.


## 2. Pre-Hispanic Philosophy



During the early years following the Conquest, Spaniards quickly
realized that pre-Conquest Mexicans possessed a complex and
sophisticated system of beliefs about human beings and the universe.
In his *Historia general de las cosas de la Nueva
Espana* (1585 [1950-1982]), the Franciscan missionary
Bernardino de Sahagun (1499-1590) reproduced the ancient
Mexican worldview through documents and testimonials. Centuries later,
with the discovery of new documents and a deeper knowledge of
indigenous languages, we have improved our understanding of how the
original inhabitants of Mesoamerica viewed the world.



The first historians of Mexican philosophy recognized the richness and
sophistication of native cosmology, but they did not consider it
philosophy *per se*. However, in 1955, Miguel
Leon-Portilla (1926-2019) challenged the received view
and renewed our interest in Mesoamerican thought by publishing his
influential *La filosofia nahuatl*--emphasis
on *filosofia*--a collection of recovered texts
translated into Spanish that deal with cosmology, metaphysics,
anthropology, ethics, and aesthetics. In his book,
Leon-Portilla argues that the Mexica (i.e., how the Aztecs
referred to themselves) in fact did philosophy, and he does so by
reconstructing their philosophical tradition and comparing it to
Ancient Greek philosophy. Years later, other authors followed his
example and wrote extensive commentaries on Mayan texts such as
*Popol Vuh,* which provide a deeper understanding of classical
Mayan cosmology and anthropology.



The use of the term "philosophy" to speak of Mesoamerican
thought has been applauded by those who believe that it is necessary
to de-center the Western concept of philosophy. But it has been
criticized by those who believe that calling pre-Hispanic thought
"philosophy" fails to appreciate what distinguishes
Western philosophy as an achievement from a worldview or body of
beliefs, which of course all peoples possess. Thus, some scholars have
claimed that to interpret pre-Conquest texts as philosophy is to
retroactively attribute to them something that wasn't there,
specifically a certain level of self-consciousness, rational
reflection, and critique. Others have even questioned the authenticity
of historical sources.



For instance, Quetzalcoatl, a deity of Mesoamerican culture who
was also the putative leader of the pre-Aztec Toltec people,
challenges traditional religious mythology and offers an original
conception of divinity, the universe, and human nature. According to
Quetzalcoatl, the supreme god is Ometeotl, the god of
duality. Ometeotl was masculine and feminine, the creator of
all things, and played an active role in all aspects of reality.
However, since it is not clear whether Quetzalcoatl was a
historical or mythical figure, it is also not clear what to make of
the ideas that we normally attribute to him and which have been
fundamental in the development of our understanding of Nahuatl
philosophy.



Among the *tlamatinime*--wise men who followed the
intellectual tradition of Quetzalcoatl--Tezcoco's
King Nezahualcoyotl (1402-1472) was the most prominent.
Tezcoco was a small kingdom and a military ally of the Aztecs. King
Nezahualcoyotl developed a line of thought that has been
preserved in his poetry and narrative prose, according to which he
doubted the permanence of human life in a world defined by change and
death. If gold and jade can splinter, he mused, then human beings must
accept that their passage on earth is transitory. However, our
finitude should not overwhelm us with sadness; instead, the human
heart can find meaning in *flor y canto* (songs and flowers),
which is how Nezahualcoyotl referred to art and beauty. Poetry
and song persevere even as flowers wither and die, and it is our job
to learn how to be patient and humble in the face of all that is
beyond our ken, such as the gods' plans, which will forever
remain a mystery. Though his texts are fragmentary and poetic, we
might consider Nezahualcoyotl a philosopher because he
questions mythological and religious responses to traditional
philosophical problems, such as essence, change, and the meaning of
life. In fact, we might we might compare his thought and style to that
of Heraclitus or Parmenides.



The connection between pre-Hispanic thought and Mexican philosophy has
deepened in recent years. One example of this is the concept of
*nepantla*, which Emilio Uranga (1921-1988) reintroduces
in his book *Analisis del ser del mexicano* (1952).
According to Uranga, *nepantla* refers to an ontological
condition of existence that captures both the specific nature of
Mexican being and the human condition more generally. Nepantla means
to be in between two opposites without fully rejecting or adopting
either. Several authors from both Mexico and the United States have
since employed the concept of *nepantla* in novel ways to
describe various aspects of our existence (e.g., Gloria
Anzaldua).



Other authors have recovered categories coined by the survivors of
indigenous peoples and have proposed alternatives to Western
philosophy. For example, Carlos Lenkesdorf's (1926-2010)
*Una filosofia en clave tojolabal* (2002) offers a
philosophical reconstruction of beliefs and practices of the Tojolabal
natives who live in the state of Chiapas, Mexico. Lenkesdorf studies
the language and everyday practices of the Tojolabal people to propose
an entirely different way of understanding the relationship between
persons, community, and nature. We can also find key concepts of
indigenous Mexicans in the political thought of the members of the
Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN).



One recent effort to reconstruct pre-Hispanic thought is James
Maffie's *Aztec Philosophy* (2015). Using a broad
selection of sources, old and new, Maffie offers a reconstruction of
Aztec metaphysics that employs categories and concepts of Western
metaphysics to demonstrate the originality of Nahuatl thinking.


## 3. The Philosophy of the Conquest and Renaissance Humanism



The conquest of the Americas and, in particular, of the Aztec Empire,
was an event of global significance that immediately challenged
Spanish-language philosophers and theologians to reflect on what it
means to be human, whether war, colonization, and slavery are ever
justified and under what conditions, as well as the meaning of and
relationship between "America" and
"Europe".



A professor at the University of Salamanca, Francisco de Vitoria
(1483-1546) questioned whether the Spanish colonization of the
American continent constituted "just war". Unlike other
authors who had witnessed the cruelty of Spanish colonization
firsthand and who doubted whether conquest and colonization could ever
be rationally justified, Vitoria never traveled to America and thus
had no direct experience in the matter.



Father Bartolome de las Casas (1484-1566) did have
extensive experience in Mexico and objected to Spanish colonization.
In 1550-1551, he engaged in a famous debate with Juan
Gines de Sepulveda about whether the indigenous people
were fully human. Las Casas claimed that the natives were rational
beings, not unlike Europeans, and should be considered fully human
with the same right to be protected under natural law, to choose their
own form of government, and to be free. Consequently, Las Casas
believed that Spaniards did not have the right to enslave or otherwise
rule them. The ideas of Las Casas proved crucial in the Laws of the
Indies (1542), which required certain protections of indigenous people
of the Americas.



In the middle of the 16th century, the influence of
Erasmus' humanism was manifest in authors who wanted to return
to the doctrinal simplicity and moral purity of early Christianity, a
neo-stoic reconciliation of Plato and Aristotle that emphasized human
dignity. We can also trace the influence of Thomas More's
*Utopia,* which inspired social experiments conducted in New
Spain.



Father Juan de Zumarraga (1468-1548) founded El Colegio
de Tlatelolco, a school in which the natives were instructed in
Christian theology and philosophy. He also helped install the first
press in 1539, and he conceived the creation of the Royal and
Pontifical University of Mexico (the predecessor to the National
University of Mexico today). Zumarraga wrote several books that
exhibit the influence of Erasmus and of the Spanish humanist
Constantino Ponce, who was a chaplain in Charles I's court and
later accused by the Inquisition of being a Protestant.



Vasco de Quiroga (died 1565) founded hospital-towns in
Michoacan that were inspired by the communities described in
Thomas More's *Utopia.* According to Vasco de Quiroga,
the natives lived in a golden age as described by Lucian of Samosata
in his *Saturnalia*.



Phillip II of Spain sent Francisco Hernandez (died 1578) to
study the flora and fauna of New Spain. Once in Mexico,
Hernandez wrote several philosophical works with commentaries
on Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics.



Of course European intellectuals were not alone in thinking about the
political and intellectual consequences of conquest and colonization.
To represent the native perspective on conquest and colonization,
Miguel Leon Portilla published *La vision de los
vencidos* (*The Broken Spears* in its English translation)
in 1959. And in 1958, Edmundo O'Gorman (1906-1995)
published *La invencion de America*, which
challenges the assumption that Europeans "discovered"
America, that is, that America was an undiscovered location that
Columbus both knew of and went in search of. Instead, as O'
Gorman points out, Columbus went in search of Asia and only
accidentally happened upon what Europeans would later call
"America" *ex post facto*, making both the idea of
America, its so-called discovery, and European attitudes toward it and
its inhabitants, a construction based entirely on European assumptions
and beliefs.


## 4. The 16th Century: Scholasticism



Because the Spanish Empire was characterized by its Catholic zeal, it
did not allow Protestant, pagan, or "modern" philosophies
to be studied in New Spain. Instead, Scholasticism was the only school
of philosophy that was approved by colonial authorities and the
Catholic Church. Nevertheless, a number of prominent philosophers in
Mexico made lasting and original contributions to the Scholastic
tradition.



Friar Alonso de la Veracruz (1507-1584) was the first
philosopher of New Spain. A student of Vitoria, he was one of the
first to teach Scholastic philosophy in the New World and was the
first published philosopher of New Spain. He wrote several
commentaries on Aristotle, such as *Recognitio summularum*
(1554a), *Dialectica resolutio* (1554b), and *Physica
speculatio* (1557), which were used as textbooks. Like Vitoria,
Alonso also questioned the justification of the Conquest, but he was
even more sympathetic toward the indigenous population. Alonso argued
that the natives did not lose their right to their lands because they
were pagans, and he claimed that the Spanish Crown had stolen them
from their lawful owners. He also sustained that sovereignty
ultimately belongs to the people, not the king.



The Jesuit priest Antonio Rubio stands out among the philosophers of
the 16th century. Born in Spain, he established himself in
New Spain from 1576 to 1600 and wrote a famous treatise of logic
titled *Logica mexicana* (1603). The University of
Alcala adopted *Logica mexicana* as its primary
logic textbook and many editions of an abridged version were printed
in Europe. We know, for instance, that Descartes studied Rubio's
*Logica* as a pupil in La Fleche. Rubio wrote other
books in which he offered a complete course in philosophy but, while
his works on natural philosophy were published, his work on
metaphysics was not, perhaps due to the popularity of Francisco
Suarez's *Disputationes metaphysicae* (1597).



Another notable philosopher in New Spain from the 16th
century is Tomas Mercado, who wrote several studies on logic
and the philosophy of economics, specifically on the rationality and
justice of commercial trade.


## 5. The 17th Century: Scholasticism and the Baroque



In the 17th century, the Dominicans, the Augustinians, the
Jesuits, and the Franciscans continued to cultivate Scholastic
philosophy, in accordance with their specific religious orientation.
However, the practice of philosophy was almost always lacking in
innovation or critique. A paradigmatic representative of this
traditional view of philosophy is Francisco Naranjo, a scholar who was
known for his ability to recite the entirety of Thomas Aquinas'
*Summa Theologica* by heart. Other philosophers from that same
period include Diego Basalenque, Juan de Rueda, Alonso Guerrero, and
Diego Martin Alcazar.



In Europe, the 17th century is known as the Spanish Golden
Age, producing figures such as Francisco de Quevedo and Luis de
Gongora in literature, and Diego Velazquez and
Bartolome Murillo in painting. Likewise, we can speak of a
Golden Age in New Spain. Three extraordinary figures of the
17th century's Mexican baroque period cannot be
omitted from a history of Mexican philosophy: Father Miguel
Sanchez, Carlos de Siguenza y Gongora, and Sister
Juana Ines de la Cruz. All three of them were born in Mexico,
wrote in Spanish, and were familiar with the Nahuatl language
and culture.



Father Miguel Sanchez (1594-1674) studied at the
University of Mexico, but was eventually not accepted as a member of
its faculty. Sanchez is the author of *Imagen de la Virgen
Maria* (1648) in which he offers a theological and
philosophical interpretation of the Virgin of Guadalupe. Even though
the influence of Saint Augustine is dominant in his analysis,
Sanchez was one of the first intellectuals to approach human
history from a Latin American perspective.



Carlos Siguenza y Gongora (1645-1700) was a
remarkable scientist, historian, and philosopher. He taught astronomy
and mathematics at the Royal and Pontifical University of Mexico, and
he became known for his opposition to the belief that comets were
harbingers of catastrophes. In his book, *Libra astronomica
y filosofica* (1690 [1984]), Siguenza y Gongora
was one of the first intellectuals in New Spain to examine the
advancements of Galileo Galilei, Descartes, and Kepler with scientific
rigor. He was also well versed in pre-Columbian thought and culture,
and rescued the moral and political practices and beliefs of the
ancient Aztecs, presenting them as an example to live by.



Sister Juana Ines de la Cruz (1651-1695) was not allowed
to enroll in the Royal and Pontifical University of Mexico because she
was a woman. However, she became world-renowned for her wisdom and
literary talent. Although Juana Ines de la Cruz was not a
philosopher by trade, her writings contain elements of philosophy,
from stoicism and hermeticism to post-Cartesian philosophy. Her long
poem *Primero sueno* (1692) is an erudite reflection on
epistemology and theology based on several classical and contemporary
works. Juana Ines de la Cruz is also well-known as an early
feminist who described the unfavorable conditions under which women
were forced to produce their own philosophy. Her "Respuesta a
Sor Filotea de la Cruz" (1691) is a feminist reflection
*avant la lettre* in which she argues that men and women should
be allowed to develop fully under the same conditions. In that
brilliant and erudite text, she famously claims that "if
Aristotle would have been a cook, he would have written even
more".


## 6. The 18th Century: The Difficult Reception of Modernity



In both the 17th and 18th centuries, it was
responsibility of the main religious orders to teach philosophy in New
Spain, in accordance with their specific doctrinal orientation.
Franciscans adopted the philosophy of Duns Scotus; Dominicans, that of
Thomas Aquinas; and the Jesuits were more receptive to modern
philosophy. However, in the 18th century, the most
influential philosophers struggled to reconcile the apparent tension
between religion and science and between the modern and Scholastic
tradition.



In the 18th century, the Jesuits were leaders in education
and culture in New Spain. Their work is of central importance, not
only because they adapted modern European thought to their own
circumstances, but also because they helped to instill a sense of
national identity that would result in political independence from
Spain in the 19th century. However, in 1767, at the height
of their influence (and precisely because of their influence), the
Spanish Crown expelled the Jesuits from its territories. This was a
heavy blow to the development of modern philosophy in Mexico, and it
fueled a nascent sense of Mexican national identity among the subjects
of Spanish colonial rule.



Among the main Jesuits of New Spain who were forced to leave their
homeland were two prominent philosophers: Diego Jose Abad and
Francisco Javier Clavijero. Diego Jose Abad taught a complete
course on philosophy in which he studied modern philosophers such as
Descartes and Gassendi. Abad tried to reconcile modern philosophy and
Scholasticism by trying, for example, to reconcile atomism and
Aristotelian hylomorphism. Francisco Javier Clavijero
(1731-1787) wrote *Storia antica del Messico* (1780
[2006]) in which he examines pre-Columbian history using the model of
Greco-Roman classical history. He also wrote a *Cursus
philosophicus,* of which only one section has been preserved:
*Physica particularis* (1765).



Other influential philosophers, educators, and students of
contemporary philosophy are Juan Benito Diaz de Gamarra
(1745-1783), author of *Elementa recentioris
philosophiae* (1774); the polymath Jose Antonio Alzate
(1737-1799), a ferocious critic of Aristotle; and Jose
Mariano Mocino (1757-1820), a distinguished expert in
botany. All three proved influential in challenging the Colonial rule
of Spain by challenging the dominance of tradition for the sake of
tradition.


## 7. The 19th Century: Liberals and Positivists



The 19th century was a time of upheaval in Mexico. In 1808
Napoleon invaded Spain and King Ferdinand VII abdicated the throne,
forcing the citizens of Spanish America to re-examine the concept of
sovereignty. Specifically, they wondered whether, in the absence of a
monarch, the colonies possessed the right to govern themselves until
the monarch returned to the throne.



Appealing to the philosophy of the Enlightenment--though not
always explicitly--several Mexican thinkers and political
activists argued that the colonies did possess the right to
self-government. Such was the case of Miguel Hidalgo
(1753-1811), one of the fathers of Mexican Independence. Hidalgo
was well known for his predilection for French ideas and for his
opposition to Scholastic theology, as is demonstrated in his
*Disertacion sobre el verdadero metodo de estudiar
teologia escolastica* (1784). Francisco Severo
Maldonado (1775-1832) was another philosophically-minded priest
who wrote in favor of independence and about the philosophical
foundations of nationalism.



After Mexico won its independence in 1821, and throughout the
19th century, an intense debate took place regarding the
tenets of liberal philosophy and its application to Mexican reality.
Liberals wanted the Mexican Constitution to resemble the Constitution
of the United States, which defended individual rights, freedom of
speech, and freedom of press. They also believed in the separation of
church and state, and argued that the wealth and land owned by the
Mexican Church should be expropriated to promote economic development.
Liberals believed that everyone is equal before the law and they tried
to erase the racial and cultural inequality that prevailed in the
nation, particularly the position of indigenous communities. Among the
authors who defended liberal ideas were Jose Maria Luis
Mora (1794-1850), Melchor Ocampo (1814-1851), Ignacio
Ramirez (1818-1879), and Ignacio Manuel Altamirano
(1834-1893). (See the related entry on
 liberalism in Latin America.)



There were also influential conservatives who believed that Mexico
ought to preserve its Spanish heritage, such as Lucas Alaman
(1792-1853). While conservatives also promoted legislation to
protect indigenous peoples and local industry, many argued that the
Catholic tradition was needed to maintain national cohesion. So, while
Enlightenment philosophy began to spread throughout the Americas in
the 19th century, some notable Scholastics remained, such
as Clemente de Jesus Munguia (1810-1868), author
of *Del pensamiento y su enunciacion* (1852).



In the middle of the 19th century, the debate between
liberals and conservatives had important political ramifications. On
the one hand, Mexican liberals had elected the first president of
indigenous ancestry, Benito Juarez, who helped establish liberal
reform throughout Mexico in the 1850s. On the other hand, from 1862 to
1867, conservatives supported the pro-French Mexican monarchy, headed
by Maximilian of Hapsburg, ousting Juarez for a time. After the
collapse of the Empire and the execution of Maximilian, the
Conservative Party lost most of its influence as it was associated
with supporting foreign powers.



Throughout the 19th century, Mexican intellectuals
entertained a wide variety of philosophical schools, including
liberalism, utilitarianism, sensualism, materialism, and socialism.
Some also developed anarchist and romantic ideas, such as Juan
Nepomuceno Adorno, a romantic whose *La armonia del
universo* (1862) proposes a deistic philosophy and a utopian
conception of human nature and society. But the main school of
philosophy that dominated the second half of the century was
positivism, understood broadly to encompass authors as varied as
Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer, Hyppolite Taine, and John Stuart
Mill.



The main representative of positivism in Mexico was Gabino Barreda
(1818-1881). In his "Oracion
civica"(1867), Barreda offers an interpretation of
Mexican history inspired by Comte's philosophy of history,
according to which history develops in three stages--the
religious, the metaphysical, and the scientific. Barreda believed that
the victory of the Liberal Party was ultimately grounded in positivist
theses. He also believed that national reform should not be founded on
religion or speculative metaphysics, but on the experimental methods
of science. With this in mind, he promoted education reform that
eliminated theology and speculative philosophy from the curriculum in
public schools, thus initiating a long debate on the role of
philosophy in public education that continues today.



For Mexican positivists the challenge was to reconcile freedom and
order, both moral and natural. In his essay "De la
educacion moral" (1863), Barreda sustained that freedom
does not amount to the freedom to do whatever one wants (i.e., freedom
from constraint). True freedom is always constrained by the law, just
as a free falling object falls *according to the laws of
nature*. Likewise, moral freedom and progress is constrained by
the moral law and must be consistent with the laws of science.



In addition to Comte's philosophy, Mexican intellectuals applied
Spencer's social evolutionism to theories about Mexican history
and society, as can be seen in the works of Justo Sierra
(1848-1912) and Francisco Bulnes (1847-1924). According to
social evolutionism, nations are like animal species: their organs
have evolved to fulfill specific purposes, primarily survival. In his
book *El porvenir de las naciones hispanoamericanas* (1899),
Bulnes claimed that Mexico would have to make major changes to survive
in its struggle against the Anglo-Saxons. From a political point of
view, Spencer's social evolutionism was the foundation of the
view that progress in Mexico would result from a slow, deliberately
planned evolution, not another revolution. For instance, Justo
Sierra's *Evolucion politica del pueblo
mexicano* (1902) was used by some to justify the ongoing
dictatorship of General Porfirio Diaz, who ruled Mexico for
almost three decades leading up to the Mexican Revolution of 1910.



In the fields of logic and epistemology, Mill's influence was
widely accepted. Perhaps most influential in these areas was Porfirio
Parra's (1845-1912) *Nuevo sistema de logica
inductiva y deductiva* (1903), in which he defends an idealist
version of empiricism.


## 8. The 20th Century


### 8.1. Philosophy and the Mexican Revolution (1910-1930)



The Mexican Revolution, which began in 1910, was the most significant
event in modern Mexican history. While it was primarily a military
campaign in defense of political democracy and equality, comprehensive
agrarian reform, and workers' rights, some argue that it was
deeply influenced by a "climate of ideas", including
classical and social liberalism, the social doctrine of the Catholic
Church, socialism, anarchism, spiritism, Bergsonism, and pragmatism.
Some of the Revolution's most influential intellectuals were
activists first and foremost, such as Ricardo Flores Magon and
Francisco Madero, both of whom fought against the dictatorship of
Porfirio Diaz. From 1904 until his death in 1922, Flores
Magon lived in the United States, first as an exile and then as
a prison inmate. In many of his writings, distributed through the
clandestine journal *Regeneracion*, he developed a
conception of society based on socialist and anarchist philosophy. And
Madero, who was elected President of Mexico and who is perhaps best
known for his *La sucesion presidencial en 1910* (1908),
was also an important defender of Allen Kardec's branch of
spiritism.



If some revolutionaries were primarily activists, others were
primarily artists and intellectuals who became the voice of their
generation. Such was the case of a young group of students who
gathered in Mexico City and referred to themselves as the
"Ateneo de la Juventud". Antonio Caso (1883-1946)
and Jose Vasconcelos (1882-1959) were two of its most
prominent members, both of whom criticized the predominance of
positivism, which they found culturally demoralizing. In particular,
they rejected the positivist view that humanity is moved by selfish
calculation, that morality is accountable to the laws of nature, and
that the universe is governed by deterministic laws. The members of
the Ateneo stated that humans are free, creative, and spiritual,
capable of using intuition to understand the world, and inspired by
moral feelings that transcend the laws of nature. This conception of
human beings and the world can also be considered an essential part of
the climate of ideas surrounding the Mexican Revolution.



Antonio Caso was the leading figure of Mexican philosophy in the first
decades of the 20th century, and was most influential as a
charismatic professor who inspired generations of students to pursue
philosophy. Caso also created the Department of Philosophy at the
National University of Mexico and helped to introduce Mexicans to
contemporary European philosophers and schools of thought. His most
important work, *Existencia como economia, como
desinteres y como caridad* (1919), was a challenge to
Darwin's theory of biology, Spencer's social evolutionism,
Nietzsche's doctrine of the *Ubermensch*, and Max
Stirner's radical egoism, and it drew inspiration from sources
as diverse as Bergson, Tolstoy, and Christianity.



According to Caso, human existence has three levels: the biological or
economic, the disinterested or aesthetic, and the charitable. Caso
considered this last level the highest expression of human dignity and
applied this distinction to other moral, political, and aesthetic
problems. In the 1930s, Caso defended academic freedom and the
autonomy of the university and decried the changes to the 1933 Mexican
Constitution that would reform public education along the lines of
historical materialism. For example, he famously debated with the
Mexican Marxist Vicente Lombardo Toledano (1894-1968) about
congress's plan to make public education socialist. In *La
persona humana y el estado totalitario* (1941), Caso defends
democracy against fascism and communism. For a comprehensive overview
of Caso's philosophy, see Mexican philosopher Rosa Krauze de
Kolteniuk's (1923--2003) *La filosofia de Antonio
Caso* (1961).



Jose Vasconcelos was one of the most influential thinkers and
promoters of Mexican culture in the 20th century. His
reputation as an intellectual, politician, and writer is stronger than
his reputation as a philosopher. However, he cannot be passed over in
a history of Mexican philosophy. His theoretical works can be divided
into two groups. The first group includes the writings in which he
developed a philosophical system, from *Estetica* (1936)
to *Logica* (1945), specifically an overarching
metaphysical view that he had sketched out as early as 1916 in his
*Pitagoras, una teoria del ritmo*. Vasconcelos
believed that his main contribution to philosophy was the notion of an
*aesthetic a priori*, as well as a list of metaphysical
categories based on music rather than logic or science. According to
him, the universe is more like a symphony than a logical treatise, and
understanding requires the emotions as much as the intellect.



Unfortunately, his philosophical legacy was compromised by his
abrasive personality and self-imposed isolation, and because he was
not, like Caso, a professor of philosophy. Vasconcelos considered his
writing on Latin American history and culture--the second group
of writings--secondary to his philosophical work. Nevertheless,
his account of Latin American history and culture have been more
influential than his work on philosophy. His most influential work,
*La raza cosmica* (1925), is a prophetic essay in which
he considers Latin America the fountain of a mixed, cosmic race that
will synthesize the four human races and lead humanity to the height
of its development: the aesthetic. Although Vasconcelos believed that
philosophy should be studied for its own sake, and for the
universality of its ideas, he also claimed that Latin American nations
should use philosophy to resist political, economic, and intellectual
domination of the countries to the north (see his
*Etica,* 1932).



In the late 1920s the pedagogical and social ideas of John Dewey were
influential in Mexican education. Vasconcelos believed that
Dewey's philosophy was a vehicle for US imperialism and wrote a
criticism of Dewey titled *De Robinson a Odiseo* (1935).


### 8.2. The Forming of Professional Philosophy (1930-1960)



The intellectual atmosphere of the 1930s underwent dramatic changes:
the new generation of students, many of whom were
proteges of Caso and Vasconcelos, were not interested in
the debate between determinism and freedom or materialism and spirit.
To them, values, objectivity, and social responsibility were the
central issues of the day. They rejected the intuitionism and the
irrationalism of Caso and Vasconcelos and favored a renewed
rationalism and universalism. Critical reflection on what it means to
be Mexican also started to gain importance, although it was not until
the end of the 1940s that it reached full prominence.



At the time, Mexican philosophers also gained confidence in their role
on the international stage. On the one hand, post-revolutionary
Mexican culture was enjoying something of a golden age of creativity,
particularly concerning its own authentic national identity. On the
other hand, the two world wars convinced many intellectuals that the
future of Western Civilization was to be found in America. The
construction of an American philosophy and, in particular, of Mexican
philosophy, was seen as the only way the philosophical tradition of
Ancient Greece could be rescued from European decadence and
savagery.



In the 1930s and 1940s, former students of Caso, such as Jose
Romano Munoz (1890-1967), Samuel Ramos (1897-1959),
Adalberto Garcia de Mendoza (1900-1963), Oswaldo Robles
(1905-1969), Edmundo O'Gorman (1906-1995), Francisco
Larroyo (1908-1981), Eduardo Garcia Maynez
(1908-1993), Antonio Gomez Robledo (1908-1994) and
Guillermo Hector Rodriguez (1910-1988) adopted and
promoted philosophical currents from Germany, such as Neo-Kantianism
of the Marburg and Baden schools, Dilthey's historicism,
Husserl's phenomenology, Heidegger's existentialism,
Kelsen's legal positivism and, above all, the philosophy of
values of Scheler and Hartmann. Jose Ortega y Gasset,
specifically his journal *Revista de Occidente*, also
influenced that generation.



Some philosophers, such as Samuel Ramos, employed European models and
ideals to reflect inwardly on what Ramos referred to as "the
Mexican psyche". Ramos was a famous critic of Caso's
philosophical style and defense of irrationalism, and he believed that
the country needed a new philosophy that could diagnose the flaws in
the Mexican character, specifically one that committed Mexicans to
universal values, especially the use of reason. Thus, although Ramos
philosophized about the Mexican character, he ultimately believed that
Mexican philosophy ought to be dedicated to the rigorous study of
being human and the objective field of values. Ramos also became
interested in aesthetics and promoted the professionalization of
philosophy. Some of his most important works are: *Perfil del
hombre y la cultura en Mexico* (1934), *Hacia un nuevo
humanismo* (1940), and *Filosofia de la vida
artistica* (1950).



Not all philosophers were enthusiastic about applying philosophy to
Mexican themes. For example, Francisco Larroyo was the main
representative of Neo-Kantianism in Mexico, and wrote many books in
defense of Neo-Kantian views on philosophy, science, and education,
including *La filosofia de los valores* (1936) and
*La logica de las ciencias* (1938). Larroyo claimed that
Mexico's progress required a rigorous, rationalist, and
scientific philosophy. Another well-known Neo-Kantian and Kelsenian
was Guillermo Hector Rodriguez.



Aside from defending neo-Kantianism, some philosophers defended and
refined neo-Thomism, such as Oswaldo Robles, who sought to reconcile
Neo-Thomism, phenomenology, and psychoanalysis. Among his books we
might mention *La teoria de la idea en Malebranche y la
tradicion filosofica* (1937) and *Esquema de
antropologia filosofica* (1942).



Finally, a complete history of the first half of the 20th
century Mexican philosophy would be remiss if it did not discuss the
development of Marxism in Mexico, particularly the work of Vicente
Lombardo Toledano. Like many of the intellectuals in our survey, the
philosophical contribution of Lombardo Toledano is complicated by the
fact that he was, perhaps first and foremost, a labor leader and a
politician--a scholar-activist--and because he developed
many of his ideas through public debate and discourse (cf. the debate
between Caso and Lombardo mentioned above). Nevertheless, Lombardo
wrote one of the first philosophical analyses of the Mexican
Revolution and his works are essential reading for those interested in
Marxist interpretations of Mexican themes in the first half of the
20th century.



Some philosophers stretched the concept of philosophy to combine
historical, philosophical, and literary analysis to both Mexican and
universal themes. For instance, in his essay "Del arte o de la
monstruosidad" (1940), the distinguished historian and
philosopher Edmundo O'Gorman maintained that the study of
Pre-Columbian art should be based on different categories from those
used to evaluate European art. In *Crisis y porvenir de la ciencia
historica* (1947), he criticized positivist historiography
from the point of view of historicism and existentialism, and set the
theoretical foundations for his subsequent notion of "the
invention of America". Likewise, while Alfonso Reyes
(1889-1959) and Octavio Paz (1914-1998) were not
professional philosophers, they authored texts that should not be
excluded from a history of Mexican philosophy. In *El deslinde*
(1944), Reyes offered a theory of literature using tools of
phenomenology and in *El arco y la lira* (1956), Paz wrote a
literary theory that used elements from existentialism and
structuralism.



Concerning the professionalization of philosophy in Mexico, Eduardo
Garcia Maynez stands out both for his philosophical and
for his administrative contributions. In 1940-41, Garcia
Maynez founded and was the first director of the *Centro de
Estudios Filosoficas*, which was eventually renamed the
*Instituto de Investigaciones Filosoficas*, and he
founded the influential journal *Filosfia y Letras*,
which continued to be published until 1958. His book *Los
principios de la ontologia formal del derecho y su
expresion simbolica* (1953) marked the beginning of
the logical turn in Mexican philosophy, anticipating the linguistic
turn of analytic philosophy in Mexico a decade later. Some of his
other works include: *La definicion del derecho. Ensayo de
perspectivismo juridico* (1948) and *Filosofia
del derecho* (1974). Garcia Maynez claimed that the
validity of the law depends on the existence of objective values, but
he added that, in spite of their objectivity, values are subject to
several forms of relativism in relation to culture, concrete practice,
and geography. Like Ramos, Garcia Maynez believed Mexico
needed an objectivist axiology to progress socially. He also claimed
that legal freedom was a "second order" right, that is, a
normative right to exercise certain independent faculties through
choice. The development of this thesis forced him to sustain that any
system of normativity that is axiomatic and formal contains *a
priori* principles. His "theory of the three circles"
maintains that the definitions of law as formally valid, as
intrinsically valid, and as a positive right are not theoretically
compatible, though they are compatible in practice.


### 8.3. The Spanish Exiles



The Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) forced some of the most
prominent Spanish philosophers to move to Mexico. Joaquin Xirau
(1895-1946), Jose Gallegos Rocafull (1895-1963),
Wenceslao Roces (1897-1992), Jose Gaos (1900-1969),
Luis Recasens Siches (1903-1977), Eugenio Imaz
(1900-1951) and Eduardo Nicol (1907-1990), would live,
spend their careers, and die in Mexico. Juan David Garcia Bacca
(1901-1992) and Maria Zambrano (1907-1991) spent
part of their exile in Mexico. Adolfo Sanchez Vazquez
(1915-2011), Ramon Xirau (1924-2017), and Carmen
Rovira (b. 1923) arrived in Mexico at a young age, and completed their
studies in their newly adopted country. All of them left a valuable
imprint on Mexican philosophy through their creativity, teaching, and
translations.



Joaquin Xirau wrote several books on metaphysics, the history
of philosophy, and the philosophy of education. After arriving in
Mexico, he wrote *Amor y mundo* (1940), a reflection on love
understood as *Eros* and *caritas*. His ontology is
dialectical, and he claims that being and value, as well as subject
and object, are merely abstract ideas if they are considered static
realities outside change. His premature death at the age of 50
prevented him from being more influential than he should have
been.



Jose Gaos wrote the majority of his published material in
Mexico, and he is remembered, above all, for his extraordinary
influence as a professor and mentor. For his own part, Gaos defended a
radical version of perspectivism: for Gaos, philosophy is a personal
confession, so no philosophy is better or worse than another since
each is, in the end, the expression of an individual. His most
important works are: *Del hombre* (1970) and *De la
filosofia* (1962). His research in the history of ideas in
Mexico and Latin America were also extremely influential. His ideas on
how to teach philosophy were included in the curricula of several
departments of philosophy throughout the country. Among his students
were some of the most important philosophers of the second half of the
20th century.



Luis Recasens Siches, a philosopher of law, wrote many books in which
the influence of Jose Ortega y Gasset was apparent. Among them
is *Vida humana, sociedad y derecho* (1940).



Eduardo Nicol founded the Metaphysics Seminar at the Department of
Philosophy of the National Autonomous University of Mexico, where he
taught with rigor and brilliance, and in 1955 he founded the
influential journal *Dianoia*, still published today. For
Nicol, philosophy ought to recover its place as the primary science.
His metaphysics, dialectical in essence, wanted to reconcile being and
representation, and truth and history. All of his works were written
in Mexico, including: *La idea del hombre* (1946),
*Metafisica de la expresion* (1957), and *Los
principios de la ciencia* (1965).


### 8.4. The Hyperion Group



In 1934, Samuel Ramos published one of the most important books on
Mexican culture, *Perfil del hombre y la cultura en
Mexico,* an analysis of history, culture, and the Mexican
character, which he believed suffered from an inferiority complex.
According to Ramos, Mexicans had set goals that were impossible to
accomplish, particularly because they had tried to imitate more
developed nations, and this had instilled in them a feeling of
inferiority that explains their individual and collective behavior, as
well as many of the problems of Mexican society and politics.
Ramos's book was very controversial and prompted similar studies
of Mexican being, such as Octavio Paz's *El laberinto de la
soledad* (1950).



The Hyperion Group was a group of young philosophers from the National
Autonomous University of Mexico that included Leopoldo Zea
(1912-2006), Jorge Portilla (1918-1963), Ricardo Guerra
(1928-2007), Emilio Uranga (1921-1988), and Luis Villoro
(1922-2014). It was active between 1948 and 1952, and its
purpose was to employ the categories of existentialism to analyze
Mexico and Mexican being, an analysis that was meant to reveal the
reality of Mexico and Mexican being and encourage Mexicans to
transform their reality.



Jorge Portilla's posthumously
published *Fenomenologia del relajo* (1966) is a
phenomenological study of the complexity of Mexican morality and
behavior.



Arguably the most important work of the Hyperion group was
*Analisis del ser del mexicano* (1952) by Emilio Uranga.
This book proposes an ontology of *mexicanidad* and a
philosophy of Mexican culture. According to Uranga, the negative
traits that characterize the Mexican, such as resentment, melancholy,
and *zozobra*, are expressions of a constitutive mode of
Mexican existence that he calls "accidentality". (Here
Uranga is employing the Scholastic distinction between accident and
substance.) Uranga argues further that although Mexicans had been made
to feel inferior throughout their history--specifically, although
Europeans had argued that Mexicans were less than fully
human--Mexicans were in fact closer to the essence of being
human, defined as accidentality. As a result, it was the European who
had a lesson to learn from the Mexican, not the other way around. If
the Conquest of Mexico tried to assimilate Mexican culture to European
culture, what Uranga did was try to assimilate the whole of what it
means to be human to the Mexican experience of humanity, that is, to
make humanity recognize and value its repressed accidentality. By
identifying m*exicanidad* with accidentality, Uranga transforms
Mexican being into an ontological category.



The *filosofia de lo mexicano* (the philosophy of
Mexicanness) was a creative and original movement that impacted other
areas of culture. However, after the 1960s the desire to treat Mexico
as the object of philosophical inquiry declined, and it is only in the
last few years that a small group of Mexican and Mexican-American
philosophers have, in collaboration, attempted to rescue elements of
that movement to think about Mexico from a philosophical point of view
and to think about philosophy from a Mexican point of view.


### 8.5. Leopoldo Zea



Leopoldo Zea was the most influential Mexican philosopher in the
second half of the 20th century, particularly in Latin
America and the former Soviet Bloc. Some of his books are: *El
positivismo en Mexico* (1943), *America en la
historia* (1957), *La filosofia americana como
filosofia sin mas* (1969), and *Discurso desde la
marginacion y la barbarie* (1988).



In his essay "En torno a una filosofia americana"
(1945), Zea sustained that Latin American philosophy should devote
itself to topics that are specifically Latin American, in addition to
the universal problems of any other philosophy. In "La
filosofia como compromiso" (1948), he claims that Latin
American philosophy should aim to transform the reality of the
philosopher, not just understand it. From that point forward,
Zea's work adopts a clearly defined ideological and political
purpose of emancipating Latin America and the "Third
World".



In a word, Zea considers philosophy an instrument of liberation. He
strongly objected to a Eurocentric account of human nature, history,
and reason--a critique that would evolve more fully decades later
with postmodernism and post-colonialism. During most of the second
half of the 20th century, Zea promoted "Latin
American philosophy", understood as an academic discipline that
combines the interdisciplinary study of society, thought, and history
in this region of the world.



Other Mexican philosophers who have contributed to the development of
Latin American philosophy are Joaquin Sanchez McGregor
(1925-2008), Abelardo Villegas (1934-2001), Mario
Magallon Anaya (b. 1946) and Horacio Cerutti (b. 1950).


### 8.6. Luis Villoro



Luis Villoro was a diligent student of the most important
philosophical currents of the second half of the 20th
century: existentialism, phenomenology, Marxism, analytic philosophy,
and multiculturalism. However, in his reflections one can observe a
common thread of lasting questions concerning the metaphysical
understanding of alterity, the limits and boundaries of reason, the
relationship between knowledge and power, community, an ethical
reflection of injustice, a defense of and respect for cultural
diversity, and a critical examination of the role of philosophy. Some
of his books are: *Los grandes momentos del indigenismo en
Mexico* (1950), *Creer, saber, conocer* (1982),
*El concepto de ideologia* (1985), and *El poder y el
valor* (1997).



In *Creer, saber, conocer*, a book that belongs to the
analytical tradition, Villoro develops an epistemology that eliminates
truth from the definition of knowledge in order to make sense of the
historical and political dimensions of epistemology in practice. For
Villoro, "to know *p*" is "to believe *p*
with sufficiently objective reasons". And one's reasons
for believing that *p* are sufficiently objective if they are
conclusive, complete, and coherent, regardless of who
sustains *p*. However, one's reasons can be sufficiently
objective in one epistemic community but not another. This leads to an
epistemic relativism accepted by Villoro as the only way to respond to
the challenge of skepticism (see related entry on
 epistemology in Latin America).
 In "Filosofia y dominacion" (1978), he
sustained that philosophy must always critique inherited and imposed
beliefs by exercising the independent use of reason, that is, without
becoming ideological.



In *El poder y el valor,* Villoro reflects on the nature of
political power and moral values. After a comprehensive and insightful
analysis, Villoro sustains that we should give priority to the values
that bind individuals to their community, without, of course,
undermining either individual freedom or social order. Ultimately,
Villoro defends a form of radical democracy according to which
political power is concentrated in the hands of ordinary people
immersed in concrete social networks. Villoro believed that indigenous
communities of Mexico are a living model of the variety of social and
political egalitarianism he endorsed, and any intellectual biography
of Villoro would be incomplete without mentioning that Villoro was a
secret member of The Zapatista Army of National Liberation, and had a
philosophically rich correspondence with Subcomandante Marcos.


### 8.7. The Years of Expansion (1960-2000)



In the 20th century, several Mexican philosophers developed
forms of humanism and metaphysics from perspectives as dissimilar as
Hellenism, Thomism, and existentialism.



Antonio Gomez Robledo (1908-1994) was a distinguished
humanist and jurist who studied and defended the value of Greco-Latin
and Christian cultures elegantly and non-dogmatically. Among his works
are: *Ensayo sobre las virtudes intelectuales* (1957),
*Meditacion sobre la justicia* (1963), and
*Socrates y el socratismo* (1966). He also translated
Plato's *Republic,* Aristotle's *Politics,*
Marcus Aurelius' *Meditations,* and other classics. His
studies of the principles of international law and the Spanish
tradition of law should also be included in the history of Mexican
philosophy.



Ramon Xirau wrote philosophy, literary criticism, and poetry,
and combined them in enriching ways. Xirau wrote about the
relationship between philosophy and poetry as two different forms of
knowledge, and about the ontological nature of being human,
understanding *ser* and *estar* as different categories.
Among his best-known books are: *Introduccion a la historia
de la filosofia* (1964), *Poesia y
conocimiento* (1979), and *El tiempo vivido* (1985).



Juliana Gonzalez (b. 1936) was a student of Eduardo Nicol. She
has taught and written about the main problems of philosophical and
moral anthropology as well as about Nietzsche, Freud, and Heidegger.
Gonzalez's ethics are grounded in a complex vision of the
human being, which emphasizes our capacity to choose. Gonzalez
has also dealt with the ethical and metaphysical dimension of
psychoanalysis and genomics. Some of her books include
*Etica y libertad* (1989a), *El malestar en la
moral* (1989b), and *El poder del Eros* (1999).



Carmen Rovira (b. 1923) was a student of Gaos. Over the course of her
long academic career, she has labored to introduce and analyze the
history of ideas in Mexico, particularly medieval philosophy in
Mexico. In addition to all her edited collections, Rovira authored
*Eclecticos portugueses del siglo XVIII y algunas de sus
influencias en America* (1958) and *Francisco de
Vitoria*. *Espana y America. El poder y el
hombre* (2004).



Elsa Cecilia Frost (1928-2005) was also a student of Gaos, as
was O'Gorman and Leon-Portilla. Her main interests lay with the
history of colonial philosophy and the processes of acculturation that
created modern Mexican culture. Her text *Categorias de la cultura
mexicana* (1972) is a widely studied and well-regarded text in the
philosophy of Mexican culture.



Jose Sanchez Villasenor (1911-1961),
Fernando Sodi Pallares (1917-1980), Hector
Gonzalez Uribe (1918-1988), Jose Sanabria
(1924-2002) and Miguel Mansur (1928-1993) all taught
Neo-Thomism at the Universidad Iberoamericana. Carlos Llano
(1932-2010), Virginia Aspe (b. 1952), Hector Zagal (b.
1963) and Luis Xavier Lopez Farjeat (b. 1973) all studied the
Aristotelian tradition at the Universidad Panamericana. In Monterrey,
Agustin Basave Fernandez del Valle (1923-2006),
developed what he called an *integralismo metafisico
antroposofico*. Among his many books we can single out
*Tratado de metafisica. Teoria de la habencia*
(1982).



Socialist and Marxist thought was a popular ideology during the
Mexican Revolution. In addition to the work of Lombardo Toledano who
employed a Marxist framework to explain Mexico's situation,
Jose Revueltas (1914-1976) was an unorthodox Marxist who
discussed philosophical themes in his literary and political writings.
Despite the influence of Lombardo and Revueltas, however, academics
didn't take Marxism seriously until the 1970s. Two central
figures of Marxism in the Mexican academy during that period were Eli
de Gortari (1918-1991) and Adolfo Sanchez
Vazquez.



De Gortari was one of the first academic philosophers of science in
Mexico. He studied the foundation of dialectical logic and the
applications of logic to science, and worked on the philosophy of
mathematics and physics, the mechanization of propositional calculus,
and the history of science in Mexico. In 1955 he founded the Seminar
of Scientific and Philosophical Problems. Among his books are *La
ciencia de la logica* (1950) and *Dialectica de
la Fisica* (1964).



Adolfo Sanchez Vazquez was very young when he arrived in
Mexico and he began his philosophical studies in Mexico. He produced a
solid body of work dealing with the concepts of Marxist ethics and
aesthetics. One contribution to Marxist philosophy was his critical
reflection on the concept of *praxis*, and he was critical of
the aesthetic doctrine of Socialist realism. Among his main books we
can mention: *Las ideas esteticas de Marx* (1965),
*Una filosofia de la praxis* (1967), and
*Etica* (1969). Many Mexican Marxist philosophers of
subsequent generations studied under him, and there was an important
debate between Sanchez Vazquez and Villoro concerning the
concept of *ideology*.



The Cuban Revolution had a profound impact among many Latin American
intellectuals. After the 1960s, the number of Marxists increased
exponentially, both at and outside the university, and Marxism became
the dominant school of thought in some Mexican universities. The books
of Gramsci, Marcuse, and Althusser were read by many young students,
as were the writings of Jose Marti, Jose
Carlos Mariategui and Paolo Freire. The main Mexican
Marxist philosophers of that period were: Porfirio Miranda
(1924-2001), author of *Marx y la Biblia* (1971); Enrique
Gonzalez Rojo (b. 1928); Cesareo Morales (b. 1936);
Jaime Labastida (b. 1940), author of *Produccion, ciencia y
sociedad: de Descartes a Marx* (1969); Gabriel Vargas Lozano (b.
1947), author of *Mas alla del derrumbre* (1994);
and Aureliano Ortega (b. 1952). Carlos Pereyra (1940-1988) was a
philosopher of history and a well-known left-wing intellectual. His
philosophical papers were collected in *Filosofia, historia
y politica* (2010). Bolivar Echeverria
(1941-2010) wrote *La modernidad de lo barroco* (1998),
in which he offers a critique of capitalist modernity from a Latin
American perspective.



Mentioned above, Rafael Sebastian Guillen Vicente (b.
1957), also known as "Subcomandante Marcos" of the EZLN,
has been a very influential post-Marxist thinker who has put his ideas
into action. His correspondence with Luis Villoro is included in
*La alternativa. Perspectiva y posibilidades de cambio*
(Villoro 2015).



After the fall of the Berlin Wall there was an abrupt decline in
Marxist philosophy. As intellectuals debated how best to reform the
Mexican state, they began to read other foreign political
philosophers, such as Weber, Arendt, Rawls, Bobbio and Habermas. Some
of the philosophers who have focused on the nature of democracy,
justice, and poverty include: Luis Aguilar Villanueva (b. 1938);
Paulette Dieterlen (b. 1947), author of *La pobreza: un estudio
filosofico* (2003); Luis Salazar (b. 1949); Leon
Olive (1950-2017); Griselda Gutierrez (1951);
Maria Pia Lara (b. 1954), author of *Moral
textures* (1998); Ambrosio Velasco (b. 1954); Rodolfo
Vazquez (b. 1956), author of *Entre la libertad y la
igualdad* (2006); Mario Teodoro Ramirez (b. 1958), author
of *De la razon a la praxis* (2003); and Enrique Serrano
(b. 1958).



Mexican political philosophy played an important role in two public
debates of that period. One concerned the extent to which leftist
political groups were willing accept electoral democracy as opposed to
armed revolution, like that of Cuba. Another concerned whether Mexico
was better described as a homogenous mestizo nation or a racially and
culturally diverse country.



The philosophy of liberation was a movement that originated in South
America in the early 1970s. In the beginning, it mixed elements of
liberation theology, dependency theory, and Latin American philosophy.
Enrique Dussel (b. 1934 in Argentina) is the main representative of
the philosophy of liberation in Mexico. Among his numerous works,
which have been translated widely into other languages, are
*Filosofia de la liberacion* (1977 [2003]) and
*Etica de la liberacion en la edad de la
globalizacion y la exclusion* (1998 [2013]). Dussel
has offered a comprehensive critique of Western history and philosophy
from the point of view of the poor and the excluded, particularly in
Latin America. The Dusselian branch of the *filosofia de la
liberacion* is a vigorous movement with students all over
the world. (See the related entry on
 the philosophy of liberation)



Beginning in the early 1960s, philosophers began to study analytic
philosophy, particularly authors such as Russell, Carnap,
Wittgenstein, Strawson, and Quine. At the time, it was claimed that a
philosophy inspired by science was required to modernize Mexico, not
unlike the positivist turn in the second half of the 19th
century. The creation of the journal *Critica* in 1967
accelerated the popularity of analytic philosophy in Mexico. At the
end of the 1960s, the Institute for Philosophical Research of the
National Autonomous University of Mexico became the main center of
analytic philosophy in the country and in Latin America. The main
promoters of analytic philosophy during that period were Alejandro
Rossi (1932-2009), author of *Lenguaje y significado*
(1969), and Fernando Salmeron (1925-1997), who also wrote
extensively on the history of Mexican philosophy.



By the end of the 1970s, a group of analytic philosophers had
distinguished themselves: Enrique Villanueva (b. 1938), Jose
Antonio Robles (1938-2014), Margarita Valdes (b. 1941),
Hugo Margain (1942-1978), and Olbeth Hansberg (b. 1943),
author of *La diversidad de las emociones* (b. 1996). In the
1980s, more analytic philosophers joined the Institute of
Philosophical research, among them: Raul Orayen
(1942-2003), who wrote *Logica, significado y
ontologia* (1989); Ulises Moulines (b. 1946), a
structuralist philosopher of science; Mark Platts (b. 1947), author of
*Ways of Meaning* (1979); Leon Olive
(1950-2017), who wrote several books of philosophy of science
and culture; and Adolfo Garcia de la Sienra (b. 1951), a
theologian and philosopher of economics.



Mexican analytic philosophy has followed the dominant trends of
analytic philosophy since the 1960s. In the beginning, it had strong
ties to Oxford, but today it has developed working relationships with
other philosophical departments around the world. Some Mexican
analytic philosophers have studied abroad and have remained outside
Mexico, such as Agustin Rayo (b. 1973). Others work in Mexico
but publish most of their work in English, such as Mario Gomez
Torrente (b. 1967). Others write in both English and Spanish, such as
Mayte Ezcurdia (1966-2018). Still others write mainly in
Spanish, like Alejandro Tomasini Bassols (b. 1952), who has written a large
number of books that develop an original interpretation of
Wittgenstein's philosophy.



Carlos Pereda (b. 1944) has also written several important books,
including *Vertigos argumentales* (1994),
*Critica de la razon arrogante* (1999), and
*Sobre la confianza* (2009). He develops Aristotle's
notion of *phronesis* and Kant's view that practical
reason is universal to recommend strategies to help navigate the
temptations and ambiguities of life. Pereda offers a peculiar
diagnosis of the entanglements and pathologies of reason, including
what he calls *argumentative vertigo*, that is, a kind of
intellectual or moral dizziness that blinds us to other points of view
or that makes us stubborn and insensitive to the feelings of
others.



The main exponent of philosophical hermeneutics, Mauricio Beuchot (b.
1950), distinguished himself early as a historian and a translator of
the philosophy of New Spain and medieval philosophy (e.g., *La
filosofia del lenguaje en la Edad Media*, 1981), as well as
for his synthesis of Thomism and analytic philosophy (e.g.,
*Logica y ontologia*, 1986). In the 1990s,
however, he turned to hermeneutics. In his *Tratado de
hermeneutica analogica* (1997), he developed a
system that he called "analogical hermeneutics". His
thesis is that, to avoid the excesses of positivist
"univocalism" or postmodern "equivocalism",
one must adopt analogy as the primary method of interpretation.
Beuchot's analogical hermeneutics has inspired a philosophical
movement with hundreds of students around the world.



Although Mexican women have had full legal access to higher education
since the beginning of the 20th century, they were
discouraged from pursuing advanced degrees or careers as professors of
philosophy. With a few notable exceptions, it wasn't until after
1960--not incidentally, the year birth control was made widely
available--that women began to publish their own philosophy more
regularly. In addition to several of the women mentioned above (e.g.,
Krauze, Frost, Rovira), Vera Yamuni Tabush (1917-2003), another
student of Gaos, wrote about philosophy in the Spanish language,
Arabic philosophy, and feminism. See, for example, her highly-regarded
*Conceptos e imagenes en pensadores de lengua
espanola* (1951).



As women started to pursue advanced degrees in philosophy, they began
to philosophize about the role of women in Mexican culture and the
challenges facing aspiring female intellectuals and artists. The long
list of Mexican feminists, which stretches back as far as Sor Juana,
includes Paula Gomez Alonso (1896-1972), the first
graduate of philosophy of the University of Mexico, whose
master's thesis was titled *La cultura femenina* (1933);
Rosario Castellanos (1925-1974), a famous author, who wrote a
philosophical essay called *Sobre cultura femenina* (1950); and
Graciela Hierro (1928-2003), the main proponent of feminist
philosophy and founder of the Centro de Estudios de Genero of
the National Autonomous University of Mexico. Two of her books are
*Etica y feminismo* (1985), and *De la
domesticacion a la educacion de las mexicanas*
(1989).



As in other Latin American countries, the history of philosophy is a
popular area of research, largely because most philosophy departments
tend to teach the discipline from a historical rather than thematic or
analytic perspective. The most popular periods of philosophy are
ancient philosophy, modern philosophy, phenomenology, and German
existentialism. Among the historians of philosophy today, we can
mention: Laura Benitez (b. 1944), Alberto Constante (b. 1949), Antonio
Zirion (b. 1950), Enrique Hulsz (1954-2019), Gustavo
Leyva (b. 1959), Pedro Stepanenko (b. 1960), Efrain Lazos (b.
1962), Ernesto Priani (b. 1962), Ricardo Salles (b. 1965), Faviola
Rivera (b. 1967), and Angel Xolocotzi (b. 1969).


## 9. The 21st Century



Not unlike other areas of Mexican culture, the production of
philosophy has been concentrated in Mexico City. However, today dozens
of philosophy departments throughout the Mexican Republic are growing
in size and influence. Many universities now offer graduate degrees
and some publish their own journals and books, such as the state
universities of Guanajuato, Michoacan, Puebla, Veracruz, and
Zacatecas.



There are several philosophical associations in Mexico, though the
*Asociacion filosofica de Mexico* is the
largest. Since 1975, the AFM (which serves a role similar to the
American Philosophical Association (in the United States) hosts a
large biannual conference that plays an essential role in forming a
national philosophical community (see
 Other Internet Resources below).



Philosophy also continues to play an important role in Mexican
secondary education. Although philosophy has been taught in public
high schools since the 19th century, in 2009 the Mexican
government tried to eliminate philosophical instruction from public
education (not unlike the second half of the 19th century
under the guidance of Barreda's positivist curriculum, and
Cardenas's attempt to make education in Mexico socialist in
1933). However, in response, a group of academics founded the
*Observatorio Filosofico de Mexico*, which
eventually thwarted government interference (see
 Other Internet Resources).
 The *Observatorio*'s defense of philosophy in Mexico was
so successful that in 2019, the government made a constitutional
amendment recognizing philosophical instruction as the right of all
Mexicans.



This official commitment to the value of philosophy is not without
precedent; it represents a long history of questioning and reaffirming
the role of philosophy in Mexican life. Other events in this history
(discussed above) include the war for Mexican independence, guided by
Enlightenment philosophy; Gabino Barreda's effort to define
Mexican national identity through positivist education; the
*Ateneo*'s critique of positivism during the Mexican
Revolution; amendments to the 1933 Constitution, which sought to make
public education socialist; and the philosophy of *lo
mexicano*, a philosophical expression and critique of
20th century Mexican nationalism.



One challenge to studying Mexican philosophy outside Mexico,
particularly in the United States, has been the lack of resources in
English. However, over the past several years, a group of scholars
have begun to produce translations of and commentaries on canonical
texts. One notable example is *Mexican Philosophy in the
20th Century: Essential Readings*, edited by Carlos
Alberto Sanchez and Robert Eli Sanchez, Jr. (For future
projects related to making Mexican philosophy more widely available in
English, and related to building a binational community dedicate to
the development of Mexican philosophy, see
 20th Century Mexican Philosophy in Other Internet Resources.)
 The APA's *Newsletter on Hispanic and Latino Issues in
Philosophy* is another valuable source of information and research
(see
 Other Internet Resources).



Today, Mexican philosophy is a professional, pluralistic, and growing
field of study. Thanks in large part to the collaboration among
philosophers in Mexico and United States, the resources required to
advance research are now easily accessible in both Spanish and
English. And with the ongoing emergence of new translations,
commentaries, and histories, as well as regular binational meetings,
it is now reasonable to expect that the philosophy produced in Mexico
and about the Mexican (or Mexican-American) experience will continue
to attract new scholars and will soon be recognized for its impressive
contribution to world philosophy.