Is a Latin American philosophical community possible?

A response from the nomadic thinking of Carlos Pereda

Abstract

In his assessment of the state of philosophy in Latin America, the philosopher Eduardo Rabossi distinguishes between professionalism and professionalization. By professionalism, he means the practice of an occupation that requires special knowledge and skills, indicating that professionalism in philosophy has advanced in the philosophical practice throughout almost all of Latin America. However, philosophers in this continent have not achieved an adequate degree of professionalization, understanding this as the quality linked to the existence of a recognized set of rules of the art, and the proper handling of contents considered relevant. From this definition, it follows that professionalism without professionalization is empty, incapable of generating an adequate degree of creativity in philosophy. My purpose in this presentation is to indicate why professionalization fails in Latin American philosophical thought, pointing out that it is not possible to establish professionalization without a supporting community. In this sense, I will draw on the concept of a philosophical community proposed by Luis Villoro and consider, as a central argument to address these issues, an aspect that runs through the work of the Uruguayan philosopher Carlos Pereda: nomadic thinking. What I intend is something precise and limited: to determine the role that the philosophical community plays as a basic assumption to achieve the professionalization of philosophy.