Our purpose in this research is twofold. On one hand, it is to examine the relations that the concept of universality maintains with the Latin American proposal of « local », « inculturated » philosophy, and therefore to examine the contributions of critical Latin American philosophies to the debate on universalism and culturalism. In a context where universalism is for all intents ans purposes the effect of an ethnocentric and homogenizing globalization (monological universalism), and faced with the demands of differences as identities that are predetermined and closed to fundamentalism risks, a new and genuine universalism as intercultural dialogue presents itself as an interesting alternative to the dilemma between universalism and particularity. On the other hand, our purpose is to present crtical thinking in Latin America today, in this sense, our work is organized around a single figure, namely Enrique Dussel, in order to deepen ties between Latin American philosophy of liberation and certain currents of European (Emmanuel Levinas's metaphysics of alterity and Karl-Otto Apel's discourse ethics in particular) and Latin American philosophy (Leopoldo Zea and Augusto Salazar Bondy on one hand, and the current names « Modernity/Coloniality group », « post-Occidentalism » or « decolonial theories » on the other). To see these research perspectives through, the following plan will be adopted. To understand the intention of the paradigm shift claimed by Dussel's philosophy of liberation, this work takes as its starting point the presentation of different contexts (philosophical, historical, political, economic, cultural,etc) and the origins of philosophy of liberation. In the second part, we study a specific way, using a diachronic approach of Dussel's ethics of liberation, which was developed through dialogue with various authors. We specifically and critically study Levinas's influence on philosophy of liberation, and of its extensive dialogue with Apel's discourse ethics. Finally, the last part of our research raises the question of timeliness, or rather the current problems of philosophy of liberation, through internal and external criticism that has been directed at the school of thought over the last four decades. Using these issues, our research aims to contribue to the task, from our point of view both urgent and necessary, of thinking philosophically from within a global mindset.
