Iván Jaksic directs the Santiago Program for the Bing Overseas Studies Program and works at the Center for Latin American Studies at Stanford University. He is the author of The Hispanic World and American Intellectual Life, 1820–1880 and several works the philosophy of Latin America. Prior to his current appointment he worked at the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee; and the University of Notre Dame. His most recent book, Debating Race, Ethnicity, and Latino Identity, studies the work of acclaimed philosopher Jorge J.E. Gracia.
What is your work about?
It is about Jorge J.E. Gracia’s landmark books (but also multiple edited works and articles) on race, ethnicity and Latino identity. These texts have elicited many reactions and polemics, but up to the publication of my book there was no way to see these critiques by prominent philosophers alongside Gracia’s responses, and in one volume. As the arguments and counterarguments unfold we do see the emergence of great clarity about the concepts of race, ethnicity, and Latino identity, always and consistently seen in proper social, political and historical context. I am a historian of ideas, and thus I was naturally inclined to study the way in which Gracia’s ideas developed historically, and also in the context of various polemics. So I gathered all the written comments by 15 distinguished philosophers from the United States and Latin America, and provided a detailed introduction as well as bibliography, with the aim of introducing the subject to the community of scholars, and hopefully the larger public interested in these issues.
Explain what Gracia’s approach to the study of Latino identity is, and the main lines of critique included in the book?
He has contested in a very effective way the notion that Latinos share a common essence and that they are essentially different from non-Latinos. He states that Latinos are a very diverse group. They trace their roots from different national backgrounds, or have been in the States for several generations. But they are united by historical relations and various properties that bring them together. That is why Gracia argues that Latinos constitute a kind of family. Like families, they are related in some respects, but unrelated in others.
There are a number of areas where Gracia’s views have been contested. To mention just a few: Latino versus Hispanic philosophy; the use of the term “Latino” versus “Hispanic;” Latino philosophy as ethnic; global Latino philosophy versus Latino philosophy in the United States; Latino linguistic rights, and affirmative action for Latinos. He responds to his critics in each of these areas, and more.
How does it fit in with your larger research project?
My interests have always been in the history of ideas, primarily political ideas, but also in the role of intellectuals in society. I have written books on the American scholars who cultivated knowledge about Spain and Latin America in the nineteenth century, on the history of philosophy in Chile, and an intellectual biography of perhaps the most prominent intellectual of the Hispanic World, Andrés Bello. I see Jorge J.E. Gracia as the most influential, and indeed the dean of a comprehensive approach to philosophy that includes the contributions of Latin America and Latino scholars in the United States to the field.
What sorts of issues to Latino scholars grapple with which are not found in conventional academic work? How has your work drawn attention to those issues?
Latinos have achieved a significant presence in the academic world in the United States, including, though to a much lesser extent, the field of philosophy. The most significant challenge has been to be considered valid interlocutors in general, rather than be compartmentalized in some corner of the philosophical field. The fact that Latino philosophers are cognizant of traditions of Latin American philosophy is not generally recognized, or is simply dismissed. In my work I show how Gracia does indeed come from a background in Latin American philosophy, including Hispanic (mostly medieval) philosophy, and yet he is thoroughly recognized for his work in metaphysics. Likewise, several contributions in the book show the linkages to a significant body of Latino/Hispanic thought.
Who has influenced this work the most?
Jorge Gracia himself, because of the quality of his work, his impressive range of subjects, and his generous mentorship. Still, I tried to be as objective as possible, giving enough room to strong opinions that question the core of Gracia’s ideas.
What are some of the most important issues concerning the Latino community, and how can Gracia’s work help us think about them?
Clearly, questions about identity continue to challenge and inspire the Latino community. There is the fear that assimilation will sever important emotional ties to countries of origin, shared values, and language. There is also a concern about the less than glorious Hispanic past, with its entire history of religious persecution and discriminations based on race. Latinos often grapple with these questions even if they might be invisible to the larger society. Gracia is a leading voice in calling attention to this important issue, as he has also done with questions regarding language rights and affirmative action. But in my mind, his most important contributions is how he helps the community think about the familial-historical connections that tie them, despite their diversity. At the risk of simplifying, what Gracia proposes is to view the Latino community as a family. Just like any family there is no property that characterizes all of its members at all times and places. But they multiple have properties that characterize some of them at some times or places. In other words, Latinos may share the same historical background stretching back to the days of the Spanish conquest, but they also have important differences in language (Portuguese, Spanish, several indigenous languages) or nationality (Chileans, Mexicans, Hondurans). One should not emphasize only commonalities, or differences. That is why the familial-historical approach is so conducive to the consolidating a sense of community.
Why did you feel the need to write this work?
With Jorge Gracia’s approaching retirement I thought that this would be the proper way to acknowledge his extraordinary contributions. Also, there is much confusion and little consensus about the meaning of such concepts as race, ethnicity, nationality, and identity. Gracia’s views have been contested, but he has made a tremendous effort to provide a coherent view of the distinctions as well as the overlapping nature of these concepts. No doubt his background in analytical philosophy has helped to present his ideas with such clarity and force.
How is your work relevant to historical ideas?
Gracia’s work shows that concepts evolve as a result of interactions with politics, society and culture. In history there is nothing static, but we often fail to analyze how philosophical ideas change. Gracia is both a philosopher and a historian, but his philosophical outlook enriches the historical field.
What effect do you hope your work will have?
I will treasure the day when Gracia’s work reaches every college classroom. I am certain that the book can lead to useful discussions on diversity and citizenship.
What value will undergraduates get from Gracia’s work? Given the American Philosophical Association’s ongoing interest in making the field of philosophy more inclusive, how would you suggest philosophers use his work in their classrooms?
Gracia’s consistent crusade has been to sensitize the population about Latino contributions to American life. He brings a wealth of experiences, including life experiences, to show how important it is, particularly in this day and age, to fully understand the Latino world. He provides the conceptual tools to understand this community. Not least, he has been a crusader for a more inclusive policy within the American philosophical community in general, and the APA in particular. With regards to the latter, he is the founder of the Association’s Committee for Hispanics in Philosophy, where he served a Chair and collected significant data on Hispanics/Latinos in philosophy in the 1990s. He has also done more than anyone in opening publication venues for numerous Latin American and Latino philosophers in his multiple publications, including edited books and mainstream journals of philosophy, such as The Philosophical Forum.
What’s next for you?
I am now working on what I call the “foundational debate” in Chilean and Latin American historiography, that is, the causes and motivations that led Latin Americans to develop the field of history. I am most interested in the philosophy of history and hope to introduce the subject to students in various humanities fields. Perhaps not surprisingly, Jorge Gracia has written about the subject himself.
You can ask Iván questions about his work in the comments section below. Comments must conform to our community guidelines and comment policy.
*
The purpose of the Recently Published Book Spotlight is to disseminate information about new scholarship to the field, explore the motivations for authors’ projects, and discuss the potential implications of the books. Our goal is to cover research from a broad array of philosophical areas and perspectives, reflecting the variety of work being done by APA members. If you have a suggestion for the series, please contact us here.
