x_filesize')); // Sort image tag $OC_sortImg = 'current sort selection'; ?> ࡱ>  _bjbjVV 0v<<W+8?<{$,+++++++$-n0\+++^^^+^+^^s)|*0ih)k++0,*00$**0*l^++^,0 : Reimagining America: North American Pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino World In his recent essay Latinos and Transnationalism in the new Inter-American Journal of Philosophy, Eduardo Mendieta argues that North American pragmatism is best understood as a peoples moral imagination and habitus captured in thought, (27). He draws on the work of Richard Rorty, Cornel West, and Randolph Bourne to remind us that the difficult times that we are presently experiencing in terms of the national and international economy are due in large part to a failure of moral and political imagination. He calls for pragmatic philosophers is to sustain and reinvent this moral and imaginative habitus in real and effective ways, combating the ongoing degradation of civic vitality in order to continue to see the work of citizenship as that of achieving our country. Mendieta sees the Latino community within North America as particularly well located to take up this challenge for two reasons. The first reason is a matter of pure mathematics, Latinos are an increasingly large portion of the U.S. population, and are therefore increasingly determinative of the national moral imagination and habitus. Mendietas second point is a deeper cultural point. He notes that Latinos, in contrast with prior immigrant populations, have retained extensive and continuous ties with their places of origin, giving them a special critical perspective from which they are able to more concretely reimagine the meaning, value, and rights of U.S. citizenship, (33). Following Mendietas call to think carefully and vividly through the connections between pragmatism as the thoughtful expression of North American moral imagination and habitus and the Hispanic/Latino worlds, my primary thesis will be recognizable to philosophers within the pragmatic tradition. I argue here that the reimaginings that take place in the contact between North American pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino world ought to be located on the axis of shared problems within concrete experience. This is, of course, a point that is made often in the pragmatic tradition, but it is also a point that is being made and has been made by Latino thinkers as well as some thinkers in the rest of the Americas. Enrique Dussel, for example, begins his Twenty Theses on Politics with the thought that The political as such is corrupted as a totality when its essential function is distorted or destroyed at its origin, reminding us that the center of political thought and activity is not the state apparatus, but what he calls the political community, (3-4). This community does not occur, necessarily, through the symbolic political concepts of statehood, but through the concrete and lived experience of subjects in communities as they work through their shared problems. Though this is an agreeable idea to pragmatic sensibilities, making an abstract reference to the primacy of problems and concrete experience for orienting philosophical inquiry is, as James described it in A Pluralistic Universe, like deafening you to talk by talking. (290). I want, therefore, not only to make a moral argument that we ought to turn to concrete experience to locate these specific transnationalisms that might better help us achieve a more vibrant and politically nation. Mendieta has already done this well. I would like in this brief space to offer some workable and directed locations for continuing the work of reimagining American philosophy in light of the increasing contact and shared experience between North American pragmatism and Latino, Mexican, and South American culture. I would like to discuss two primary obstacles to this work of reimagining the nation through attention to concrete experience. The first is the increasing professionalization of philosophy, which threatens to divide pragmatism in its academic form from pragmatism in its lived form. The second is the association of pragmatism with an ambiguous concept of America, which threatens to divide pragmatism from the transnational form of experience that Mendieta sees as crucial to the ongoing task of achieving our country. Using the work of William James, Gloria Anzalda, and Eduardo Galeano, I hope to undertake some minor reimaginings that will perhaps allow us to deal with these obstacles in focused and effective ways. Two Pragmatisms, Many Americas Before discussing the relevance of pragmatism for and in the Hispanic/Latino worlds, it is essential to get clear on what we mean by pragmatism. As James famously remarked, pragmatism is a new name for some old ways of thinking. What was new about pragmatism was not its ways of thinking. The newness was in the elevation of pragmatism from the common-sense ways of thinking and ways of life into a self-conscious and academic school of philosophy. In other words, what was new about pragmatism was not so much the habit of attending to experience or the commitment to a pluralistic and experimental way of thinking. These habits had long been necessary for a common life lived amid the clatter, the noise, the threat of violence, the difficulty and risk, and the wild and living uncertainty that is the world of concrete experience. What was new about pragmatismand what remains newis the relevance of this philosophy in the tamer and more self-conscious circles of academic philosophy. This new relevance of pragmatism to academic circles has proven to be a mixed bag in terms of its effects on these older, less conscious pragmatisms. On the one hand, the elevation of pragmatism to an academic mode of thinking has allowed it to mix and blend with more traditional modes of philosophy. Such encounters within and across philosophical traditions have provided challenges to pragmatism that it would not otherwise face had it not ventured into the more arid climes of academia. These encounters have allowed pragmatism to develop for itself a rigorous set of concepts. In addition to being a temperament, a vision, a way of negotiating experience, pragmatism, as an academic school of thought, has also developed an epistemology, a metaphysics, an ethics, a classical canon of texts, andperhaps most importantlya community of pragmatic friends: writers, teachers, cultural critics, and political activists. On the other hand, in forging these new relevancies within academic philosophy there is a danger that pragmatism falls prey to the very forces that it had organized itself to engage. As a way of life, as a set of tools for negotiating the problems of ordinary experience, as a democratic vision and practice of living togetheras these old ways of thinkingpragmatism is no more or less relevant to North America than it is to the Hispanic/Latino worlds. However, pragmatism as an academic philosophy, bearing the marks of its encounter with the halls of power, having acquired a discourse that signals the acquisition of no small degree of social capital, and carrying with it an affinity to American philosophy, presently connotes not only the dream of democracy, but also an alliance with many of the dominating forces in the Western hemisphere and across the globe. In this sense, pragmatism as a concept is fraught with difficulties. Its reference is equivocal. There are (at least) two pragmatisms. When speaking of the relevance of pragmatism to Hispanic/Latino worlds, it is essential to distinguish the two. One way of conceiving pragmatism sees it as filosofa norteamericana, a set of canonical American texts that rises out of and returns to a North American experience. There is some truth to this perspective, but this truth is best understood if we look at the equivocations that structure the concept of America. First, America is subject to a geographic equivocation. The influence, geography, culture, ideals and experience of America extend far beyond the borders of the American state. And the borders of the American state are constantly being troubled, created, and crossed over by actual peoplemost of whom are Hispanic/Latino. Thus, secondly, America is subject to a cultural equivocation. North American philosophy such as it is bears the marks of an experience that can be traced across the whole of the Americas and beyondthough these marks are not always noticed or valued. The same sort of difficulty occurs when we speak of pragmatism as a school of thought. The first danger is that we refer only to the academic philosophy that is practiced by professional philosophers. This assumption erases the reality that the academic mode of pragmatismwhen it has valuerises out of and returns to the pragmatic challenges of everyday life. It erases the sense in which pragmatic philosophy is also practiced on the street as people craft their own visions of life through encounters with joy and with problems. The second danger is that by focusing only on philosophers who self-identify as pragmatists, we miss the possibility of locating philosophers who have affinitieseither methodological or spiritualwith the pragmatic tradition. These problems mark out a space of possibility. The challenge is stated plainly by Eduardo Galeano when he writes, Ni tampoco hay escuela que no encuentra su contraescuela, (8). There is no school that does not make an encounter with its counter-school. This encounter is at the root of the duty Mendiata reminds us of to continue to keep our moral imagination and habitus alive. The encounter means constructingand finding instances withinfor the school of American pragmatism an attunement to its counter-schools, to the pluralities inherent in both the concept of America as well as the concept of pragmatism. This question of how to maintain and intensifying the relations between these counter-schools, the two Americas and the two pragmatisms that co-create the communities of pragmatic thought is intimately and inextricably linked with the problem of the relation between pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino worlds. It is only on the basis of the plural, experiential, multilingual, transnational and constantly growing Americas that lie hidden beneath the word America that pragmatism can legitimately affirm itself as a distinctively American philosophy. By the same token, it is only by maintaining its connection to the ordinary and everyday pragmatisms that orient and sustain the life its philosophy that pragmatism can legitimately affirm itself as a distinctively pragmatic school of thought. These pragmatisms are the found by means of attending to ordinary people working, with some joy perhaps, through their lives. This counter-school outside the halls of academia is the life-source of the philosophical project of achieving our country and articulating its moral and imaginative habitus. The Primacy of Concrete Experience The world of concrete personal experiences to which the street belongs is multitudinous beyond imagination, tangled, muddy, painful and perplexed. The world to which your philosophy-professor introduces you is simple, clean and noble. It is a kind of marble temple shining on a hill. It is no explanation of our concrete universe, it is another thing altogether, a substitute for it, a remedy, a way of escape. (James, 369) It would be easy to escape from the hard work of forging actual relations in this multitudinous, tangled, muddy, painful, and perplexed world by confusing the experiential objects of our analysis with the clarity of their concepts. While it is important to be aware of the historical fact that pragmatism developed out of a North American lineage and in the English language, it is equally important not to hypostasize this fact, to pretend that the past of pragmatism is clear and well-determined, and to make a clear and well-determined future for pragmatism out of this fictitious past. The metaphysics of pragmatism thus reminds us of the practical point that pragmatism is as it is experienced as. Here, the distinction between pragmatism as an academic philosophy and pragmatism as the reconstruction of ordinary experience in the face of problems is paramount. If pragmatism is identified with a school of academic philosophy, thenthe contributions of many of the excellent philosophers both in and outside of this forum notwithstandingthe record of American pragmatism in the Hispanic/Latino world has more to say for its future than for its past. If however, we pay attention to the pragmatism that lives within the world of concrete experience that James identifies, then it is clear that pragmatism is not only a contributor to the problems and possibilities of the Hispanic/Latino world, but it is essential to it. This pragmatismthe old ways of thinking against which James set out his more academic school of thoughtknows no sharp national or linguistic boundaries. This is the pragmatism of the borderlands, of the campesino sin tierra, of the undocumented laborer. It is the pragmatism of the cubicle-dweller, the supermarket cashier, the high school teacher, la empleada domestica, la madre soltera. It is only on the basis of these everyday pragmatisms that an honest evaluation of the relationship between American pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino world can be identified. Seen from the perspective of the primacy of concrete experience, a Latino/a writer like Gloria Anzalda is a pragmatist. She brings the pragmatism of ordinary experience out of the shadows and into the light of daydescribing the new valences, forms, limits and possibilities of contemporary experience. She not only shows us a genuine transnational Latino/Hispanic pragmatism, but also quite pragmatically reminds us how pluralism, radical democracy, and anti-foundationalismthe touchstone values of pragmatism as a mature philosophical point of vieware born out of the quotidian struggles of everyday experience. Listen: La mestiza constantly has to shift out of habitual formations; from convergent thinking, analytical reasoning that tends to use rationality to move towards a single goal (a Western mode), to divergent thinking, characterized by movement away from set patterns and goals and towards a more whole perspective, in that includes rather than excludes. The new mestiza copes by developing a tolerance for contradictions, a tolerance for ambiguity. She learns to be an Indian in a Mexican culture, to be Mexican from an Anglo point of view. She learns to juggle cultures. She has a pluralistic personality, she operates in a pluralistic modenothing is thrust out, the good the bad and the ugly, nothing rejected, nothing abandoned. Not only does she sustain contradictions, she turns the ambivalence into something else. (Anzalda, 101) It is in concrete experience, then, beyond or perhaps before a discussion of the relevance of the more intellectual school of pragmatic thought to a monolithic Hispanic/Latino culture (if such a thing exists), that pragmatism finds the most potential for solidarity with the Hispanic/Latino worlds. And, it is precisely here where the radical promise of Deweyan democracy for the Hispanic/Latino world lies. Pappas and Garrison identify this promise in that pragmatism seeks to be democratic in its face-to-face relations (what da Cunha calls micro-relations) and not just in its formal democratic institutions. Part of the appeal of pragmatism is that it provides a bottom up grass roots democratic reconstruction that trusts people to figure out the means to their own freedom. In this respect, it is more radical than the revolutionary movements that so often evolve into dictatorships because they begin by dictating from above the only appropriate means for achieving democratic ends, instead of trusting the people to work it out for themselves. (517) In order that this radical faith in the potentiality of people to work through their own problems be more than an academic construct, a mature pragmatism cannot merely take radical democracy as the subject of its theorizing. Pragmatism has to make radical democracythe very same face to face, micrological, experiential encounters we theorize abouta part of its philosophical practice. If the link between the theoretical school of pragmatic thought and the counter-school of lived, pragmatic realities is broken, then the vision of pragmatism as a working philosophy of democracy cannot be realized. We end up on the one side with a theory that speak in abstractions, and on the other side with acts that do not live up to the organizing perspective of our own philosophy. Arid and isolated abstractions coupled with fragmented and ineffective lives. Some Suggestions What is, or might be, the rolethe personal rolefor a pragmatic philosophy that does not await a miracle? In the abstract, it might seem that the answer is clear: Give up false hopes, stop marching toward destruction and cultural irrelevance, and begin the hard work needed for philosophy to play different roles in the lives of different persons. But hard work is, well, hard work. It is, well, hard. (Stuhr, 88) The present reflection on the relation between classical American pragmatism and the pragmatism of everyday life provides some answers to the question of how to construct future relevancies between pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino worlds. We ought not to construct false antagonisms by hypostasizing American pragmatism as a philosophy or the Hispanic/Latino world as a region. The pluralism of pragmatism reminds us that pragmatisms most vibrant schools of thought are found in the street, and that its reflective academic form gains its power and critical strength through its connections to the pragmatisms of ordinary life. These pragmatisms are as various as experiences of ordinary life, and are in no way the sole property of a North American culture. By the same token, when determining the influence of pragmatism we ought to be careful to attend to the plurality of the Latino/Hispanic world. To which Latino/Hispanic world is pragmatism relevant? Are we speaking of the world of Latino/Hispanic philosophy? The geographical region of South America? Are we attendant to the ways in which the general concept Latino/Hispanic conceals a vast array of cultures, experiences, peoples, and ways of life? By pluralizing both the ideas of pragmatism and the Latino/Hispanic world, we can locate specific and concrete points of contact or shock. Our analysis of the relation between pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino world ought to be concrete. Pragmatisms metaphysics of experience teaches us that the relationship between pragmatism and the Latino/Hispanic world is determined not by an abstract logic of identity, but in concrete experience. That is, the question of the relevance of pragmatism to the Latino/Hispanic world is not a conceptual question. It is an empirical question. This means that before determining how and why pragmatism might be relevant to the Latino/Hispanic world, these relations and encounters of relevance must be constructed, imagined and identified in actual experience. We, as pragmatic philosophers, ought to be self-reflective about the various interests we have in constructing and reconstructing the encounter between our philosophical point of view and the Hispanic/Latino world. If this encounter is to be both pluralistic in spirit and concrete in effect, then academic philosophers cannot be the primary stakeholders in this encounter. How does the school of of pragmatic philosophy structure and delimit the encounters it makes with the Hispanic/Latino world? Which Hispanics and Latinos do these institutions allow us to meet? What are the specific outcomes of these encounters? Who is it that is invited to determine the value of these encounters? How does the problem of the relation of pragmatism to the Hispanic/Latino world link up with other perhaps more concrete and personal problems? I end with a quote from Gilles Deleuze, neither a pragmatist nor a native to the Hispanic/Latino world. He writes: Discussions are fine for roundtable talks, but philosophy throws its numbered dice on the table. (WP, 98) If a vibrant and critical Hispanic/Latino pragmatism is to come into existence, it will only be through the production of encounters between the school of pragmatic thought and this world. This means taking the Hispanic/Latino world not as entirely pragmatist, but as a counter-school to pragmatism. Commitment to the production of such encounters means undertaking the hard work of building them. In order that these encounters be genuine, their effects must extend beyond roundtable talks. They must be evident in the street that James identifies multitudinous beyond imagination, tangled, muddy, painful and perplexed. And this means that the outcomes of these encounters cannot be controlled entirely by academic philosophers. They cannot be entirely determined by we pragmatists, nor by we denizens of the Hispanic/Latino world. The identifying mark of a genuine Hispanic/Latino pragmatismwhether it has already happened, or whether it is yet to be madewill be the emergence of new streams of experience, new imaginings of political experience, and new transnational conceptions of citizenship. This newness means the appearance of radically different perspectives on the meaning of pragmatism and, perhaps, equally radical changes in the experience of ordinary people who live within and beyond the Hispanic/Latino world. Bibliography Anzalda, Gloria. Borderlands/La Frontera. San Francisco: Ann Lute Books, 1999. Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari. What Is Philosophy? Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell. New York: Columbia Press, 1994. James, William. The Present Dilemma in Philosophy, The Writings of William James. Ed. John McDermott. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977. 362-375. - - -, A Pluralistic Universe. Lincoln: Bison Books, 1996. Galeano, Eduardo. Patas arriba: la escuela del mundo al revs. Siglo XXI Editores, 2004. Mendieta, Eduardo. Latinos and Transnationalism, Inter-American Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011. pp. 26-34. Pappas, Greg and Jim Garrison. Pragmatism as a Philosophy of Education in the Hispanic World: A Response Studies in Philosophy and Education, Vol. 24, No.6 (November 2005), pp.515-529. Stuhr, John. Pragmatism, Postmodernism, and the Future of Philosophy. New York: Routledge Press, 2003.      PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1 MNOb? C G _  2 P Q R ^ t u c g m n  "+A1ͽͱ͉ͩͩ͡řřʼnh lOJQJh]zOJQJh$OJQJhYwOJQJh4gOJQJh&bOJQJhIVhIV6OJQJhuOJQJh(-OJQJhIVOJQJhQ-h}5OJQJh=%S5OJQJh}5OJQJh}h}5OJQJ0NOZ  1# $x(q+&2'2J233G6;:>gd=%S dgd=%S dgdYw d`gd=%S $da$gd=%S1DGr)+12 G%6: ;/01"#*-.B[ࠨxxlxhxh h=%S6OJQJh=%SOJQJhQ-h=%SOJQJhYwhYw5OJQJhBCJ5OJQJh(-OJQJhuOJQJhYwOJQJhOJQJh\h\6OJQJh\OJQJh]zh]z6OJQJhs^OJQJh]zOJQJh lOJQJh[BOJQJ*[dx{ijmt!!!!G"a"I$J$)%@%A%&F'G'z'++,%,p,q,,---?-S-{-!.8.S/a/y//]0i0101v111$2%2&2ȸ谨h\OJQJhb^aOJQJhGAOJQJhIVh=%S6OJQJmH ,sH ,hIVh=%SOJQJmH ,sH ,h=%S6OJQJh=%SOJQJhQ-h=%SOJQJhQ-h=%S6OJQJ:&2J233336677M8}89999):-:[:o::;;;;;;<='=>9>:><>=>D>??jArAxAyAAAIIIIJJJJJJKK|LLLLLLGNLNhBCJh=%S6OJQJhQ-h\OJQJh4gOJQJh\OJQJhQ-h=%S6OJQJhxh h=%S6OJQJh=%SOJQJhQ-h=%SOJQJhQ-h=%S5OJQJ?:>?yAOCEIIIIJJKKPPRRUU hd^hgd=%S & Fdgd=%Sgd=%S dgd=%Sd^`gd=%S d^gd=%SLNPP6REReRsRRR TTT#TRTVT_TiTUUFWeWvWWX XZ [[[[[[[\&\N\r\\\\\i]q]r]s]v]z]º³³žzh1kOJQJh1kh1kOJQJh1k>*OJQJh=%SmH ,sH ,hIVh=%SmH ,sH ,hQ-h=%S6] hQ-h=%Shxh h=%S6h=%ShQ-h=%S5OJQJhQ-h4gOJQJh4gOJQJhb^aOJQJh=%SOJQJhQ-h=%SOJQJ.U[[M\N\\\\)]r]s]]]^ ^ ^Y^^^ `gd1k `gd=%Sgd=%Sgd1k[$\$`gd=%S [$\$gd=%S$hd^ha$gd=%Shhd^h`hgd}z]{]]]]]]] ^ ^ ^^>^X^Y^c^^^^^^_ _!_Q____________ŵŭߢ}qf^Z^Z^Z^hVjhVUh@h=%SOJQJh+ h=%S6OJQJh+ h=%S6OJQJ]h1kOJQJh1kh1kOJQJmH ,sH ,h+ h=%SOJQJh=%SOJQJhIVh=%S6OJQJmH ,sH ,hIVh=%SOJQJmH ,sH ,h1kh=%SOJQJh1kh1kOJQJh1kh1k6OJQJh1k6OJQJ#^^!_C_D__________________$a$ ^gd=%S `gd=%Sgd=%S__________h@h=%SOJQJhVmHnHuh=%Sjh=%SUhV .:p=%S/ =!"#$% j 00 OJPJQJ_HmH nH sH tH D`D zQNormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D Default Paragraph FontRiR Table Normal4 l4a (k ( No List 88 :!0Header !.. :!0 Header Char8 @8 :!0Footer !.!. :!0 Footer CharN^@2N Q-0 Normal (Web)dd[$\$ OJPJQJPK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] Wv ***-1[&2LNz]__023468::>U^_1579 $&-!8@0(  B S  ?p")glZbGS aiw~)23A################$$$$$$*#*[2d2i2o222233 3 33'4/455=6D677j9r9::;;>>BBMNSTT&TNTUThTpTTTUUUV VV+V;VDWIWWWWWWWWWWWWWW++042455O;T;>>AAfPhPT'TNTqTT'U)Ud yLQ4peeER~^g_H5')u$^`o() ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.^`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoq^q`OJQJo(hHA ^A `OJQJo(hH ^ `OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoQ^Q`OJQJo(hH^`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hH^`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hH^`>*OJPJQJ^Jo(n^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hH^`OJPJQJ^Jo(-^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hHp ')ueeEg_yLQ4         0        {n                G        t        kI\(-K=GA[BBCJ=%SIVs^b^a&b1k l]zu4gYw$}VWW@SShSSW@Unknowng* Times New RomanTimes New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial7K@Cambria?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math 1h  J , J ,!hh4WW2QHP?'B2ASCSEdmonds, Jeffrey Sims$      Oh+'0  ( 4 @LT\dlASCSNormalEdmonds, Jeffrey Sims3Microsoft Office Word@_@`Bh@}h  JG(VT$m  L&" WMFC LllVT$m EMFlI$"   % %  Rp@CambriatW`2tlXU`2tl q.1lt r.1,X$7K@Cambri`2 MQtC-'1z%1dv% % %  TT&UU@@LP17TT8&UU@@LP ;!"  TT!(UU@@LP ;!"  Rp@Times New Roman tW`2tl XU`2tl q.1lt Cr.1,Xg* Times ew RomanTi-'1z%1Cdv% % % TX UU@@LxReimagining America: H,R22882HR-,,2!TT X) UU@@ LP 6 T>UU@@7LNorth American Pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino WorldH2,!8IR-,,28<,23S2!'R288!8,N'828,C2!82d2,7TT>DUU@@LP 6 TT $+ UU@@ LP 6 Rp@Times New Roman tW`2tl XU`2tl q.1lt r.1XG* Times ew Romanl-'1z%1 dv% % % T` {UU@@dLTIn 2T {UU@@dLlhis recent essay2'",,,2,''.0TT {UU@@dLP TT >{UU@@dLP -T?  {UU@@?dLLatinos and Transnationalism<-22',22=!,2'2,22,'NTT  {UU@@ dLP -TT ( {UU@@ dLP T`)  {UU@@) dLTin 2TT  {UU@@ dLPtTX  {UU@@ dLPhe2,TT " {UU@@ dLP Td#  {UU@@# dLTnew 2,HRp@Times New Roman tW`2tl XU`2tl q.1lt r.1XG* Times ew Romanl-'1z%1dv% % % Tl {UU@@ dLXInter!2,'TT {UU@@dLP-!T c{UU@@d L`American >H,'-22 % % % TfaUU@@JLxJournal of Philosophy,22'222=22'222,% % % TgJ aUU@@gJL, Eduardo Mendieta argues that=22,!22Y,22,,,"12,'2,TTK c aUU@@K JLP Tb  aUU@@d JLhNorth AmericanH2!2HN,!-,2TT aUU@@ JLP T aUU@@ J Ldpragmatism 2!-2N,'NT`VaUU@@JLTis 'TlWaUU@@WJLXbest 2,' T.GUU@@0Lhunderstood as 222,!'222,'TT/[GUU@@/0LP -TT\GUU@@\0LPa,TTGUU@@0LP TpGUU@@0LXpeople2,22,TTGUU@@0LP "TGUU@@03Ls moral imagination and habitus captured in thought'N2!,N,12,22,222,22',,22!,2222322TT GUU@@0LP,TT 7GUU@@ 0LP ,TT8PGUU@@80LP TTQqGUU@@Q0LP(!TXrGUU@@r0LP2722TTGUU@@0LP)!TTGUU@@0LP.TT(GUU@@0LP TT)AGUU@@)0LP T`BGUU@@B0LTHe H, TW-UU@@Lxdraws on the work of 2!,H'222,H3!22!T X -UU@@X LRichard Rorty, Cornel West, and C-2,!2C2!0&" WMFC ,lC2!2,_,',22T -UU@@ LRandolph Bourne to remind us C,22222B22!3,2!,N222' T,K UU@@%Lthat the difficult times that we are 2,2,2!!,2N,'2,H,,",TL  UU@@L L`presentlyo2",',20TT   UU@@ LP T0  UU@@ &Lexperiencing in terms of the national ,32,",2,212-!N'2!2,2-22,TdS UU@@LTand ,22 T  UU@@ Lxinternational economy 2,!2,22,,,222P0T|  UU@@ L\are due -",22,TT  UU@@ LPiT UU@@ Lln large part to2,"1,3,!2TT & UU@@ LP T' UU@@' Lha failure of a,"-2!,2!TT D UU@@ LPmNTE  UU@@E Loral and political imagination2!,,2222-,N,12,22TT  UU@@ LP. TT  UU@@ LP  TTn 5 UU@@ LPH@HT6n  UU@@6 Lde calls for,,,'!2!TTn  UU@@ LP Tn Y UU@@ Lxpragmatic philosopher3!-1N,,232'222,!TTZn  UU@@Z LPs'TTn  UU@@ LP Tn @ UU@@ Ldis to sustai'2'2',TA n { UU@@A Lhn and reinvent2,22!,22,2TT| n UU@@| LP T n  UU@@ Lthis moral and imaginative 2'N2!,,32N,12,2, TxT  UU@@ L\habitus2,22'TTT ' UU@@ LP T(T ) UU@@( Lin real and effective ways2!,,,22-!!-,2,H.0'TX*T [ UU@@* LP, T\T  UU@@\ L`combating,2N3,21TT T  UU@@ LP T T  UU@@ Ldthe ongoing 2,321231T T UU@@ Lddegradation2-2!,2,22TT T UU@@ LP TT  UU@@ Lxof civic vitality in h2!,2,2,02 T: UU@@ 3Lorder to continue to see the work of citizenship as2!2,!2,2222,2'-,2,H2!22!,-,2'22,'TT : UU@@ LP cT :  UU@@ Llthat of achievi2,2!,,2,2T :  UU@@ Ldng our count3122!,322TX: U UU@@ LPry"0TTV: o UU@@V LP.@TTp:  UU@@p LP @- T  UU@@z L`Mendieta Y,22,,TT  UU@@z LPsh'T` Q UU@@z LTees,,'TTR j UU@@Rz LP Tk UU@@kz Lxthe Latino community 2,<,23,2NN220T UU@@ z Llwithin North AmeH22H2!2HN,Tl UU@@ z LXrica !,,TT UU@@ z LPa,T  UU@@ z Lts particularly well '2,!,2-!0H, TZwUU@@`L|located to take up thise2,,,22,2,222'TT[swUU@@[`LP TtwUU@@t` L`challenge,3,,22,TT wUU@@`LP UT  wUU@@ `Lpfor two reasons. F!2!H2!,,'22'&" WMFC lTT  wUU@@ `LPT=T$ #wUU@@ `$Lhe first reason is a matter of pure 2,!!'!-,'22',N,,!2!22", T]UU@@F LdmathematicsN,2,N,,'T]UU@@FBL, Latinos are an increasingly large portion of the U.S. population<,22',!-,22,!-,'210-"1,22"222!2,H82222,22Th]UU@@F L`, and are ,22,!, T CUU@@,>Ltherefore increasingly determinative of the national moral ima2,!,!2",2,",,'3102,,!N2,2,2!2,3,22,N2!,N,T CUU@@ ,Lhgination and h12,22,222TT CUU@@,LPa,TT <CUU@@ ,LPb2Td=CUU@@=,LTitus2'TXCUU@@,LP.  TTF)UU@@LPMYTxGg)UU@@GL\endieta,22,,TTg)UU@@gLP !T~ )UU@@;Ls second point is a deeper cultural point. He notes that La''-,222222',2,,2-!,22!,222H,22,'2,<,T~ )UU@@~ L|tinos, in contrast with 22'2,22!,'H2 TUU@@Lprior immigrant populations, 2!2!NN1!,22222,22'TTUU@@LP ,Tt_UU@@1Lhave retained extensive and continuous ties with 2,2,",,2,2,3,2'2,,22,222222','H2Td`UU@@`LTthei2,TX/UU@@LPr ! TsUU@@Lpplaces of origin,2,,,'2!2!12TTtUU@@tLP ,TTUU@@LP TTUU@@LPg1TUU@@FLiving them a special critical perspective from which they are able to 2312,N,'2,,,-!,,2-!'2,,2,"!2NH2,22-0-!,,2,2 TjUU@@ Ldmore concreN2!,,22-!,Thj5 UU@@/Ltely reimagine the meaning, value, and rights o,0",N-12,2,N,,2312,3,,32!12'2T6 jUU@@6 Lpf U.S. citizenship!H8,-,2'22TXjUU@@LP, TTj?UU@@LP(!TX@jUU@@@LP3322TTjUU@@LP)!TTjUU@@LP.TTj UU@@LP - TTPPUU@@LPF7T|QPUU@@QL\ollowing22H21TTPUU@@LP T|PGUU@@L\MendietaZ,22,,TTGPgUU@@GLP !TXhPUU@@hLPs 'TTPUU@@LPc-T`P9UU@@LTall-TT:PRUU@@:LP T|SP UU@@SL\to think2222TT P UU@@ LP T P UU@@ Lxcarefully and vividly,,!,!20,22322/TT P UU@@ LP T PUU@@ L|through the connections 2!23123,,222-,22' T6CUU@@Lbetween pragmatism as the 2,H,,22"-1N,'N,'2,TTD6_UU@@DLPtT`6 UU@@`Lthoughtful expression22212!2& WMFC l,32!,''22TT 6 UU@@ LP T` 6. UU@@ LTof 2!T- 6UU@@/ !LNorth American moral imagination H2!2HN,!,,2N2!,N,12,22 TUU@@v Ldand habitus,222,22'TTUU@@vLP T UU@@vLand the Hispanic/Latino world,222,H'3,2,<,22H2!2TT  UU@@ vLPs'T` ; UU@@ vLT, mOTX<  UU@@< vLPy 0T|  UU@@ vL\primary 3!N,#0Tx  UU@@ vL\thesis 2,''T UU@@ vL|will be recognizable to H2,!,,312-,2,2% % 666666666666666666666666666666666666 6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6 66666666666666666666   ."System--@Cambria---  2 1 2  , ' 2 r , '@Times New Roman---+2 i;Reimagining America: t     2 i ^2 7North American Pragmatism and the Hispanic/Latino World         2 K  2  @Times New Roman---2 In s#2 his recent essay 2   2 52 Latinos and Transnationalism   2  2  2 in s 2 t2 he 2  2 new  @Times New Roman---2 Inters 2 ;-2 @ American  ---+2 rJournal of Philosophy ---82 , Eduardo Mendieta argues that  2   2 North American   2  2 # pragmatism   2 ois e2 }best s 2 runderstood as  2  2 a 2  2 people 2 X2  3s moral imagination and habitus captured in thought   2 G, 2 J 2 Q  2 U(2 Z27 2 i) 2 n. 2 r  2 v 2 zHe p +2 <rdraws on the work of   ;2 < Richard Rorty, Cornel West, and   72 <Randolph Bourne to remind us n   C2 _r%that the difficult times that we are   2 _C presently 2 _{ D2 _&experiencing in terms of the national  2 _cand ,2 rinternational economy  2 are due  2 /i"2 3n large part to 2  2  a failure of  2 m 82 oral and political imagination  2 . 2   2 rH 2 } e calls for 2  +2 pragmatic philosopher   2 Fs 2 K 2 O is to sustai 2 n and reinvent 2  42 this moral and imaginative i  2 rhabitus  2  22 in real and effective ways 2 >, 2 F combating  2  2  the ongoing 2  degradation  2  +2 "of civic vitality in X2 r3order to continue to see the work of citizenship as  2  "2 that of achievi2  ng our count2 Iry 2 V. 2 Z 2  Mendieta   2 s2 eesi 2  +2 the Latino community   #2 within North Ame   2 rica u 2 a)2 s particularly well  .2 1rlocated to take up this 2 1 2 1 challenge 2 16 %2 1:for two reasons. p  2 1T A2 1$he first reason is a matter of pure  2 Tr mathematics  n2 TB, Latinos are an increasingly large portion of the U.S. population  2 TH , and are h2 wr>therefore increasingly determinative of the national moral ima    2 wgination and h 2 wDa 2 wJb2 wRitus2 wh.  2 rM2 endieta  2 d2 ;s second point is a deeper cultural point. He notes that La  /2 tinos, in contrast with  72 rprior immigrant populations,   2 &U2 ,1have retained extensive and continuous ties with a 2 Wthei2 nr %2 rplaces of origin, 2  2   2 gt2 Fiving them a special critical perspective from which they are able to    2 r more concre R2 /tely reimagine the meaning, value, and rights o  &2 f U.S. citizenship 2 F,  2 M(2 R33 2 b) 2 g. 2 k  2 &F2 &ollowing  2 & 2 &Mendieta 2 &2 &!s  2 &*c2 &1alld 2 &A 2 &Dto think 2 &s +2 &wcarefully and vividly 2 & /2 &through the connections 22 Irbetween pragmatism as the     2 It)2 Ihoughtful expression 2 I 2 Iof t=2 I!North American moral imagination     2 mr and habitus 2 m 72 mand the Hispanic/Latino world    2 mus2 m{, mt 2 my 2 mprimary  2 mthesis /2 mwill be recognizable to --՜.+,0 hp  Vanderbilt University,W  Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F0Zlh1Table<0WordDocument0vSummaryInformation(U̙DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q