in the 1830s, a young french nobleman—Alexis de Tocqueville—traveled throughout the United States and, on the basis of keen observations, wrote what is arguably still the best book about democracy in America. He noted, with distinctively French irony, that there is no place on earth where Descartes was more completely ignored yet more closely followed than in the United States. More generally, he noted: “I think that in no country in the civilized world is less attention paid to philosophy than in the United States. The Americans have no philosophical school of their own; and they care but little for all the schools into which Europe is divided, the very names of which are scarcely known to them” (de Tocqueville 483). This is in fact intimately linked to the “instinctive,” unreflective Cartesian cast of the American mind, at least as observed by de Tocqueville: Americans “commonly seek for the sources of truth in themselves, or in those who are like themselves” (de Tocqueville 490). “Every person therefore retreats” in Cartesian fashion, he adds, “within the limits of the self and from that vantage ventures to judge the world” (484). The French portrait of the American mind as a monological, insular affair is likely truer than we are disposed to grant, unwittingly thereby providing evidence for the truth of the proposition we are rejecting. Of course, several decades later, America would have a philosophical school of its own and, at the heart of this movement, we encounter an eloquent plea, in the words of Richard J. Bernstein, for “dialogical rationality.”American pragmatism was virtually from its inception—if not truly from its very beginning—a global movement, an international affair. So it seems especially fitting at this particular moment of interwoven crises of possibly catastrophic implications that we are celebrating the advancement of American philosophy by honoring a European—indeed, a Spanish philosopher—and also a Brazilian philosopher. And we are doing so in the name of Herbert W. Schneider, who wrote a magisterial history of American thought, but who was also a student of fascism. Jaime Nubiola was raised in a country where Franco was allied with Hitler and Mussolini, and Ivo Assad Ibri in one in which military dictatorship resulting from a coup in 1964 held sway until 1985. Please note, regarding Brazil today: their guy's attempt to overturn the results of a fair election meant he cannot run next time around, whereas our Supreme Court gave our guy a “get-out-of-jail-free” card. Our country has not extracted itself from deeply rooted impulses toward authoritarianism, xenophobia, misogyny, anti-Black racism, and other forms of racism. Professors Nubiola and Ibri stand philosophically and personally for the ethos of democracy: they exemplify in word and deed their commitment to defending this ethos.However paradoxical it may sound, these are two gentle yet fierce individuals. Honoring such individuals who love truth passionately and justice truly—making them the radiant faces of the dramatic advance of our best tendencies, philosophical, political, and personal—in these dark times seems just right. Congratulations, dear friends, Prof. Ibri and Prof. Nubiola!“Gratitude is the only secret that cannot reveal itself.” With these words from Emily Dickinson to her mentor, I wish to express the deep gratitude with which I receive this honor.When I first began studying Peirce in the early 1990s, I was immediately struck by a peculiar affinity between the founder of pragmatism and some of the most cherished Hispanic philosophers. If my memory does not fail, I believe Goyo Pappas was the first philosopher I met who shared this conviction. In fact, it was Goyo who arranged for a symposium on “American Philosophy and the Hispanic World” at the SAAP meeting in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 1997. Alongside Douglas Browning and Herman Saatkamp, we explored the often-overlooked intersections between American pragmatism and Hispanic philosophy. We were fortunate to have Peter H. Hare, editor of the Transactions, in attendance, and at the end of our session, he invited us to prepare a set with the four papers on the topic for the journal.The following year, in August of 1998, I had the opportunity to attend the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy held in Boston with the general title “Philosophy Educating Humanity.” There, I presented a paper in the section “American Philosophy” with the title “A Plea for a Peircean Turn in Analytic Philosophy” advocating for a pragmatist renewal of analytic philosophy.In my view, the pragmatist transformation of analytic philosophy is related to that Kantian idea of the philosopher as a certain ideal of a teacher, who seeks to promote the essential ends of humanity. That ideal leads to conceiving philosophy as a way of life rather than as a technical discipline and is related to the idea of the responsibility of philosophy and of the philosopher in his or her professional activity.It is not an overstatement to affirm that reason is at risk today. Reasonableness is not the defining trait of our politicians or business leaders all over the world, and it often seems absent even in the practice of our scientific colleagues. As philosophers, who—in Husserl's expression—feel us to be “civil servants of humankind” we have a serious responsibility toward our fellow citizens, like Socrates with Athens. With our work, we are not only transmitting philosophical knowledge to new generations, but we are also keeping alive the flame of rigorous thinking in freedom, the flame of being in plentitude human beings.Last year, upon receiving this award, Vincent Colapietro urged us “to be the contemporary equivalent of the figures to whom one is most strongly drawn, not simply embroider their texts with your our marginalia” (137). Philosophy is not—and cannot be merely an academic exercise; it is an instrument for the progressive, critical, and rational reconstruction of everyday life. In a world where daily life is often disconnected from an intelligent examination of oneself and of the fruits of human activity, a philosophy that separates itself from genuine human concerns would be a luxury we cannot afford.This is what I have strived to do throughout my career, and for that reason, receiving the Herbert W. Schnieder Award is a profound honor. Thank you very much.Muchas gracias!Colleagues, friends, and especially students:It is with great joy that I receive the Herbert Schneider Award, for which I am deeply grateful to the Society for this very singular honor. I would especially like to thank Vincent Colapietro, as a representative of the Society, whose words spoken on this occasion were very touching to me, as a profound testimony of his sensitivity, through which I believe we share many affinities. Your formal recognition of my lifelong work devoted to the study, teaching, research, and dissemination of American philosophy in Brazil and abroad is deeply meaningful.This work includes the founding of the Center for Studies in Pragmatism at our Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo. The work of the Center has been carried out with the assistance and collaboration of an excellent team of scholars, such as professors Eluiza Ghizzi, José Luiz Zanette, Rodrigo de Almeida, and Lúcia Dantas, to name but a handful of especially talented individuals, among others who have been joining the Center's journey over time, many of whom were trained under our guidance, exploring numerous branches of inquiry as suggested by the richly heuristic American philosophy. Multiple lines of research, establishing a dialogue with many authors in the History of Philosophy, are an integral part of the works published by all who are part of the Center's team. It is with the support of this team that we founded the journal Cognitio, which has already accumulated twenty-five years of publications by numerous Brazilian and foreign scholars in the field of American philosophy. It is also important to note that in 1998, we held our first “International Meetings on Pragmatism,” and in 2024, our twenty-third meeting, which was in honor of our dear colleague Nathan Houser. Many international scholars, including more than a few in this room, have already honored us with their participation.I would like to take this opportunity to state that my main focus of research and study has been the work of Charles S. Peirce, notwithstanding the fact that I have a special admiration and appreciation for all the classical American pragmatists, and I also seek to engage in dialogue with contemporary pragmatist thought. I mention this to emphasize our efforts to develop lines of research inspired primarily by the doctrines developed by Peirce, especially his Pragmatism and Semiotics, based on what I have called seeds, aimed at generating reflection on topics he himself did not address, such as Philosophy of Art and Existential Phenomenology, that allows us to dialogue with lineages of thought in contemporary continental philosophy. This line of work is a testament to American philosophy's receptivity to new ideas and its ability to deliver original solutions to age-old and contemporary philosophical problems.On this special occasion, allow me to cordially invite you to take part in our International Meetings on Pragmatism, held in the first week of November each year, and to visit our university in São Paulo, as some of my dear colleagues here have already done.Once again, my deepest gratitude to the Society for this award, which honors not only me, but the entire team that works with me at our Center for Pragmatism Studies.Thank you very much! Muigo obrigado!
Colapietro et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: