until just recently it would have been both futile and absurd to speak of American Philosophy, especially if that implied a reference to philosophy in Latin America. However, the subject was introduced and those concerned with whether or not such a philosophy existed have become even more vocal in the past few years. The nature of their preoccupation implicitly raised another, broader question: Is it possible to speak in terms of an American culture—where “American” is not simply a geographical indication but an expression of the presence of something basic to Latin American thought? Is there something “American” in a sense which would correspond to the significance this word for Bolívar, San Martín, Hidalgo, Morelos, Sucre, O'Higgins and many other notable leaders since who continually referred to America —her culture, her people and her philosophy?

although at times quite thin, there does appear to be a common thread of agreement running through most of the classic and contemporary literature on theories of revolution—this being the simple proposition that the majority of the participants engaging in such activity are dissatisfied, discontented, and often disaffected individuals. If we can think of “revolution” for the moment in its most general terms—to subsume under such a conceptual label both the simplest manifestation of civil disorder to the most grandiose occurrence of what might be called basic social change—then, it seems, we are in a position to illustrate the emergence of this basic proposition throughout the literature.