JOSÉ AUGUSTO CEREIJIDO ALTRAN

Since the philosophical tradition places Henry David Thoreau on the list of marginal thinkers, his political thought was read under concepts or robust systems that let the subtlety of his originality escape. Thoreauvian disobedience does not predict actions or define agendas, as expected by the categorization of political dissent raised by the political philosophy of the 20th century: it is not established by the act, but by the preparation. It begins with the recognition that, even if we want to make our laws positive and guarantee the benefits of civilization, the State is, precisely, a place (topos) from where you can go. The Thoreauvian man seeks detachment from the spare things that ties him to the government - conventions, titles, possessions -, but makes abnegation for the other - always treated as a neighbor - his moral obligation. Here I intend to go through Thoreau's writings to synthesize his still poorly understood intuition, also evaluating whether, in the current years, this disposition would not be more adequate than what was agreed by political philosophy as civil disobedience.