Abstract

Liberation thought began within the Catholic Church in solidarity with the people of Latin America on behalf of human rights and the necessities of human life. It emerged with a method derived from action and prepares for action. This thesis is a comparison of the liberation thought of Enrique Dussel from Latin America and the liberation thought of Michael Novak from the United States. Liberation thought is understood as a critical reflection on ultimate categories in relation to person and societal structures. Chapters I and II are introductory with reference to Dussel and Novak respectively. The following four chapters are comparisons of Novak and Dussel in four areas: the goal of philosophizing, liberation/freedom, sin and the marginalized, and progress. ;In many areas they have similar viewpoints. For both Dussel and Novak philosophical discourse is open to action. For both, liberation/freedom is not just another characteristic of person, it is constitutive of person. Both stress the dignity and uniqueness of persons in society. For both sin, the abuse of freedom, is an integral part of the human condition. The consequences of sin--alienation from self, others and God--are suffered by all, throughout society. Both Novak and Dussel understood progress as social change that fosters liberation/freedom, the enhancement of persons toward self-transcendence and a world where there are sufficient material resources for all to have a truly life. ;They also differ in several significant areas. For Dussel, philosophy is a weapon for the liberation of the oppressed. Novak believes that philosophy must include the self-appropriation of an ethical method for progress and the critical revision of that progress. Concerning liberation/freedom, Dussel thinks that the people of Latin America do not experience freedom. For Novak and other Americans, freedom is already a reality and an undisputed right. Even though both see sin as an alienation from oneself, others and God, Dussel adds a fourth--alienation from institutions and structures. For Novak, social change characterized as evolutionary, pluralistic and managerial is progress. For Dussel, social change characterized as transformative, interdependent and participative is progress or a real utopia