Talk:Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda

Latin America

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Spain

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Philosophers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces: /  Philosophers

Title

The original title was indeed in Latin, and published under the pseudonym "Demócrates Alter" - "Democritus Junior" by Sepúlveda. --129.173.172.174 20:03 13 Jan 2007 (UTC)

I assume Tratado sobre las Justas Causas de la Guerra is a modern Spanish translation of his De Iustis Belli Causis. If so, the text should probably reflect the original, Latin title, but I won't change the article until I know for sure that these are the same work. --Iustinus 18:48, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Religious status

Sepulveda was NOT a Dominican! He was a secular thinker and humanist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by orique (talk • contribs)

I can't speak to whether or not Sepúlveda was a Dominican, but he definitely was a Catholic. Perhaps "secular thinker" is a relative term? Can you provide a citation? (I myself don't have a specific citation, at least not a quick and easy one one, but I've been browsing his works online—there's a handy list of online versions here—and it's clear from those. For instance, he is listed as being a Doctor of Theology, and in one of his works he rails against Martin Luther.)

In any case, whether or not he was a dominican, there was no reason to delete the "see also" section and the interwiki links, so I will revert your changes. Please discuss here if you intend to redo them. --Iustinus 18:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I had the same arguement wiht a professor. I called de Sepúlveda a Jesuit, which is wrong. My professor wrote me that he was a "normal" diocesan priest. BUT! On the spanish page of de Sepúlveda I found the mention that he was as DOMINICAN! And the author of the page seems to be a serious source! cf. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Gin%C3%A9s_de_Sep%C3%BAlveda —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.136.132 (talk) 07:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The BBC's Racism: A History (Part I - The Colour of Money - about 9:30 mins into it) states quite clearly that he was a Jesuit, and he was opposed by a Dominican. Watch it on YouTube. elvenscout742 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sepulveda was definitely not a Dominican or a Jesuit. He was a humanist who lived most of his life in Italy. Here is a brief discussion of Sepulveda in a leading scholar's history of political thought:

http://books.google.com/books?id=dyzDnCLWJugC&pg=PA168&lpg=PA168&dq=Sepulveda+Dominican+Jesuit&source=bl&ots=pFb3JVGSNm&sig=agHfSXNXv9x0q9UO__odxhMdyBk&hl=en&ei=MabJScbgEcWktwf3gvyeAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA142,M1

This review in a peer-reviewed journal says that he is a secular priest (thus not a Dominican or a Jesuit):

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2004/2004-07-27.html

I can easily get more for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrusrex1545 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Argumentation

De Sepúlveda was fully in the school of natural philosophy - he translated Aristoteles! He argued fully in the traditional way of natural law; but also did his opponents like de Las Casas or de Vitoria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.136.132 (talk) 07:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Today?

Is the comment about how Sepulveda's views would be viewed today, using the anachronistic term "racist," really useful? If so, it would be good to find a legitimate source or scholar which uses this language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrusrex1545 (talk • contribs) 05:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't seem anachronistic at all. And nothing is more fitting than 6 years of ignoring this guy and his article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.212.175.30 (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2015 (UTC)