Resultados de la Búsqueda

The loss of a sibling creates a radical change in a person's life, regardless of their age. The special bond and complicity built over the years, whether many or few, are abruptly and painfully severed (González Núñez, 2024). In the specific case of children, even when they are young, they face not only the emotional void left by the loss of their sibling but also the reality of seeing their parents completely devastated and unable to support them due to the immense pain of losing a child. According to González Núñez (2024), children must cope not only with their sibling's absence but also with the physical emptiness of a room they once shared, the games they used to enjoy together, and the free time they spent as partners in fun and entertainment, which further intensifies their sense of loneliness and loss. Children’s Reactions to the Death of a Sibling How a child reacts to the loss of a loved one is a personal experience (González Núñez, 2024). While some express their sadness quietly and reservedly, others may exhibit challenging and uncontrolled behaviors. Often, children observe and are influenced by the reactions of other family members, especially their parents’ emotional responses. According to González Núñez (2024), each child’s response also varies depending on their developmental stage, as each one has different defense mechanisms and skills to handle the void left by a sibling’s death. A child's response to this situation may largely depend on the nature of their relationship with their sibling, their individual characteristics, the reasons behind the death, their age, and other relevant factors (González Núñez, 2024). It is important to note that for some children, losing a sibling can be as difficult as losing a parent, and sometimes even more so. This is due to the strong bonds that typically unite siblings—bonds that are extremely special. Siblings not only share adventures, mischief, and experiences throughout life but often also share the same physical space, such as a room. Thus, according to González Núñez (2024), the sense of emptiness a child may feel after losing a sibling is extremely deep and hard to manage. The Emotional Weight of Losing a Sibling The experience of losing a sibling often reactivates old guilt that the child may have accumulated over time (Sánchez, 2022). Although siblings respect each other, they often go through conflicts more than once. Each child’s personal identity is largely shaped through contrasts and comparisons with their siblings. There may have been moments of distance or episodes of tension in that process, but despite all conflicts and differences, siblings often build strong and indestructible bonds. Therefore, according to Sánchez (2022), when a sibling dies, a child may experience a certain desire to torment themselves over past events, such as not sharing a toy. On the other hand, when dealing with the death of a child, it is crucial for parents not to neglect the surviving children, as they are also going through a time of profound grief (González Núñez, 2024). Despite the emotional devastation in such a painful situation, children need attention, understanding, and comfort. According to González Núñez (2024), now more than ever, the family must stay united to face the painful loss and provide mutual support. Facing the Taboo of Death In various societies and cultures, death remains a taboo topic (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). However, it is undeniable that everyone will eventually face this experience, either directly or through the loss of loved ones. Death generates distress, an unquestionable reality, but what increases that feeling is the lack of certainties and the fact that it is covered by a veil. This covering allows fantasies to flourish, causing even more fears and questions. Some of the questions that arise include whether it is really as frightening as to make people unwilling to talk about it or whether everyone suffers at the moment of death. Specifically, according to Seppi Vinuales (2023), when it comes to children, it is crucial not to underestimate the emotions they experience regarding death while also providing information appropriate to their developmental level and understanding. How Children Understand Death According to Their Age Children’s understanding of death becomes increasingly complex as they go through different stages of growth (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). Seppi Vinuales (2023) mentions that while this understanding is influenced by multiple factors, such as personal experiences and social and cultural factors, knowing what kinds of thoughts and concepts are expected at different ages can be a useful tool for addressing this topic appropriately. From birth to around 2 years old, children do not yet develop a formal concept of death as such; however, from about 6 to 8 months of age, they can perceive the absence of a person, although they do not yet understand what death itself means (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). According to Seppi Vinuales (2023), as the child approaches 2 years old and makes significant advances in areas such as socialization, language development, and increased autonomy, they become more aware that the important person will not return, reinforcing the idea of loss and giving it greater meaning in their daily life. In the age group from 3 to 6 years, children often view death as a temporary and reversible phenomenon, reflected in their belief that the caregivers in their lives will not die (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). According to Seppi Vinuales (2023), this inability to fully grasp the concept of death naturally leads them to ask questions like whether their deceased grandfather can still hear them. Finally, between the ages of 6 and 10, children begin to think about death in more concrete terms, such as biological implications, understanding that, for example, the process of dying involves stopping breathing (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). Additionally, according to Seppi Vinuales (2023), at this age, they are able to understand that death is a universal and irreversible phenomenon and begin to show increased interest in the rituals associated with death and saying goodbye to loved ones. Advice for Telling a Child That Their Sibling Has Died Death is an experience that causes distress, but the beliefs or fantasies that often arise around it can be equally distressing (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). For this reason, as Seppi Vinuales (2023) suggests, it is most appropriate to explore what children are experiencing and support them appropriately through this process. Allow Space to Discuss the Topic Just as with other topics, it is recommended that adults take on the role of guiding, always providing accurate and reliable information (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). This approach, based on the concerns of the person asking the question, also allows for regulating the type of information offered. This is even more important when it comes to the death of a sibling, as hiding the situation is not a viable option. The topic should not be avoided or minimized. Open dialogue and the grieving process are essential for the proper emotional management of children. For instance, if a child expresses concern about why their sibling is still in the hospital and not coming back, it is logical to provide true information, adjusted to their level of understanding and stage of development. According to Seppi Vinuales (2023), phrases like "keep playing, don’t worry about it," or trying to make it seem like nothing is happening should be avoided. Respond to Their Concerns When communicating with a child about their sibling’s death, it is crucial to listen attentively and actively to aspects that might interest them (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). For example, the child might want to know if their sibling suffered during the process or if death itself is painful. Alternatively, they might be worried that the cause of death was due to frequent fights or because they hid their toys. This means that, depending on the child’s age, their concerns will be more concrete and less symbolic. From an adult perspective, some questions might seem like a sign of not taking the matter seriously, but this is not the case. Such questions reflect the meanings and constructions of the child’s world. Instead of judging, Seppi Vinuales (2023) suggests that the adult’s role should be to provide calm and relieve any possible feelings of guilt. Explain Death Using Situations and Experiences They Can Relate To The way a child is told about their sibling’s death should be adapted to their previous experiences that allow them to better understand the situation (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). An example of how to explain this process is through a nearby experience, such as the death of a pet. You might say something like: "Do you remember when your pet died? You felt bad, it was painful, and you were sad. But sometimes, you remember playing with them and it makes you happy, even though you might still feel sad sometimes. But you always keep them in your heart, and that makes them close to you." This way, not only is the absence of death explained, but also how emotions can vary over time. Similarly, in line with Seppi Vinuales (2023), this approach provides a sense of comfort by knowing that the deceased person remains present in the heart and memories. Children Have Their Own Theory About Death It has been observed that children, even if they haven’t asked explicit questions about it, develop their own perception of death as this concept is part of their universe (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). This can be seen in their play activities, where they often depict situations in which they or fictional characters die or cause the death of others. Consequently, according to Seppi Vinuales (2023), it is not alarming for children to feel curiosity or talk about death, as it is a natural and universal phenomenon that must be accepted naturally. What makes a difference in how children face this topic is the emotional support provided during the grieving process (Seppi Vinuales, 2023). This support not only comes from parents but should also be extended from educational institutions. It is crucial to understand that informing a child about their sibling’s death is not the same as helping them process this information on a practical level. Children need not only to receive a certain amount of information but also to understand the underlying reality, a process that comes with an emotional burden. In this context, it is important to recognize that after the loss, children may regress in their previously achieved milestones. Behaviors such as needing to sleep with the light on or requesting the presence of their caregivers at bedtime may arise. In these cases, Seppi Vinuales (2023) suggests that the key lies in constant presence and emotional support, avoiding leaving them alone at such a crucial time. Tips for Supporting a Child After the Loss of a Sibling Returning to school can be challenging for a child due to the different treatment they might receive from peers and teachers (González Núñez, 2024). It is crucial to prepare the child to handle uncomfortable questions that might arise at school and explain that any comments they receive are not made with bad intentions, but that their peers and teachers care about them. The grieving process following the death of a sibling must be carefully supported by the family. Children may feel very confused and disoriented, as they do not understand the meaning of death and may fear their parents’, grandparents’, or uncles’ emotional reactions. Death represents a new and unknown experience for them. According to González Núñez (2024), grieving children seek answers and security from their parents, who, in the face of losing a child, may feel overwhelmed and unable to provide the necessary answers. Communication with the Child It is essential to be available at all times when the child needs to talk (González Núñez, 2024). Questions should be answered whenever a suitable response is available; otherwise, there is no need to worry. Similarly, according to González Núñez (2024), the child should not be forced to speak if they are not willing. Honesty in Explanation Depending on the child’s age, it is important to clearly communicate what has happened to their sibling (González Núñez, 2024). Phrases like “they are sleeping” or “they went on a trip to heaven” should be avoided, as such expressions may cause fear in the child, worrying that something similar might happen to other loved ones when they sleep or are away. According to González Núñez (2024), it is necessary to explain death to the child clearly, giving them the opportunity to ask all the questions they need. Maintaining Routine It is essential to avoid excessive overprotectiveness of the surviving child due to fear of potential incidents (González Núñez, 2024). The child should continue with their school routine, as well as their usual activities and meal times. According to González Núñez (2024), maintaining this routine will provide a sense of security and stability during a period of uncertainty. Patience with Repeated Questions The child may repeatedly ask questions about their sibling’s death (González Núñez, 2024). It is important to be patient with these concerns, explaining what happened without fearing to admit that there are questions for which there is no answer. According to González Núñez (2024), the absence of the sibling may be overwhelming, but over time the child will process the grief. Managing Intense Emotions It is recommended to reserve the most intense emotional reactions for private moments (González Núñez, 2024). However, there should be no fear in showing pain in front of the child, as it is crucial for them to understand that feeling sad about a loss is not negative. The loss of a sibling is particularly difficult for a child, so it is important to support them through their process of saying goodbye (González Núñez, 2024). For greater understanding and support during these processes, the guide "An Important Person Is No Longer Around" can be very helpful. This resource offers practical guidance on addressing loss and grief in children, assisting parents in managing these situations with sensitivity. References González Núñez, P. (2024). Cómo Afronta un Niño la Pérdida de un Hermano . Eres Mamá. https://eresmama.com/afronta-nino-la-perdida-hermano/ Sánchez, E. (2022, mayo 10). La Pérdida de un Hermano: el Duelo Fraternal . La Mente es Maravillosa. https://lamenteesmaravillosa.com/perdida-hermano-duelo-fraternal/ Seppi Vinuales, M. F. (2023, junio 3). Cómo Decirle a un Niño que su Hermano Murió . Mejor con Salud. https://mejorconsalud.as.com/decirle-nino-hermano-murio/

When abusive parents pass away, it is common to experience mixed emotions (Sabater, 2021). Many people may be surprised to feel pain in such a situation. So many emotions converge that it is common to fall into a state that is difficult to clarify, compounded by the additional factor of not knowing how to act in this situation. In fact, it is not unusual for some people to find themselves in a situation where others say things like: "From what you've told me about your father/mother, I think you must feel relieved knowing they're gone." However, beyond the inappropriate nature of this statement, not everyone feels only relief; in reality, the loss of an abuser or someone who denied them the right to receive healthy and enriching love can reopen many past wounds that have not yet healed. Therefore, according to Sabater (2021), these situations can be more traumatic than they appear. Suffering Does Not End with Death When abusive parents pass away, for some, it seems that everything is resolved (Sabater, 2021). Death, being the physical absence of someone, is perceived as the tangible loss of a figure, and therefore, it is assumed that everything is settled. However, when the deceased is someone who caused suffering, many things remain and sometimes even reactivate. In fact, the death of a family member who inflicted suffering tends to reopen old wounds. Research, such as that conducted at the Queen's Children's Psychiatric Center in New York, reveals that physical or psychological abuse causes a rupture in identity and leaves a mark of anger in the person, as well as a constant doubt about why their caregiver acted that way towards them. These sequelae persist into adulthood and reopen with the loss of that parent. Therefore, in line with Sabater (2021), instead of experiencing relief from the situation, it is more common to feel pain. Emotions After the Abuser's Death Given that contemporary society tends to minimize topics related to death and mourning, considering them largely as issues to be forgotten, silenced, ignored, rejected, or hidden, it becomes even more challenging to achieve social validation and acceptance of the emotions experienced by a victim of abuse in response to the death of their abuser (Arrabales Moreno, 2020). This difficulty increases when the abuse itself is a situation often silenced, denied, and hidden. When the abuser is a family member, as occurs in 10% of children estimated to be victims of physical abuse in Spain, social norms seem to demand that the victim, who simultaneously becomes the mourner, experiences sadness and deep pain over the loss of their family. However, according to Arrabales Moreno (2020), in these circumstances, feeling relief or even joy should not be considered a pathological response. Fear and Anxiety Victims may wonder if the disappearance is real or if it is a manipulation tactic, which could cause them a fear that prevents them from feeling safe (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). Additionally, they might question how things will develop now that the abuser, who always gave orders, is no longer there. For those who could not leave the house, death could imply the possibility of doing so freely, but fear may also accompany this new freedom. The expectation of possible repercussions may not fade simply because the person has died. In cases where financial abuse was involved, the survivor might face economic difficulties now that the "provider" is gone, generating anxiety about the future. In such situations, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), it is likely that they are unaware of their current financial state, especially if the abuser incurred debts in their name and had access to bank accounts. Depression Feelings of depression, which may or may not amount to clinical depression, are a common experience in both the context of grief and following domestic abuse, so they are likely to manifest when both factors are present (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). According to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), the individual who has survived these experiences has faced significant trauma, and the feelings of depression they experience are a natural reaction to such circumstances. Guilt There are numerous reasons why the survivor may experience feelings of guilt after a death (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). Self-blame related to the situation is highly common after having suffered domestic abuse, even in the absence of a death. In some cases, the person may feel guilty for experiencing relief upon hearing the news of the death or for having wished for the death as a way to escape the threat without facing the danger of leaving. Additionally, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), it may occur that the abuser committed suicide as a reaction to being abandoned or brought to justice, which can further intensify feelings of guilt. Loneliness It is common for abusers to isolate people, as this isolation makes them more vulnerable and easier to control (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). Death may have left the survivor in a situation of loneliness, with no one to share their grief with. Even with an extensive support network of friends and family, the survivor is likely to still feel alone in their grief. Because domestic abuse is an extremely complex process, it is difficult for outside observers to understand how it is possible to continue loving or depending on someone who has had such a negative impact on the individual's life. For this reason, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), survivors often feel deeply alone in their grief, as those around them are unlikely to fully understand their situation. Shame People may experience loneliness in their suffering caused by an abuser and, at the same time, feel deep shame for these feelings and for the persistent control that person still exerts over them (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). Additionally, in line with Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), it is likely that their self-esteem has been so eroded by the abuser that shame becomes a frequent emotional reaction to any event in their lives. Helplessness Abusers often exert total control over their victims' lives, which can lead to survivors feeling completely helpless when they die (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). When these individuals are no longer accustomed to making decisions for themselves or enjoying the freedom to leave at will, the sudden change that allows them to do these things can be disorienting and overwhelming. Consequently, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), they may not know what steps to take next. Relief It is natural that when a terrible situation ends, those who have lived through it experience a sense of relief (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). This relief may manifest in various ways, such as the survivor no longer having to face the danger of trying to separate from the abuser, or no longer living in fear of possible repercussions for ending the relationship. Additionally, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), relief can also come from the finality of the situation, as now that it has ended, those involved can no longer be manipulated into that horrible experience again. Disbelief It is common for survivors not to truly believe that the abuser is gone; the situation may not feel real to them, and therefore, they may not immediately feel safe (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). Sometimes, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), they may need to see the abuser's body or attend the funeral to fully accept the reality in which they are safe. Anger There are numerous reasons why a survivor might experience anger during the grieving process (Dandelion Bereavement Support, 2022). One reason could be frustration at seeing others mourning the abuser. Another possible reason is anger at the fact that the abuser died before being brought to justice, thus avoiding facing the consequences of their actions. Furthermore, death may provide the emotional space needed to begin processing the abuse and channeling anger related to the situation. It is important to note that this is not an exhaustive list of the feelings that a survivor of domestic violence may experience following the death of an abuser. However, according to Dandelion Bereavement Support (2022), it is crucial to recognize that any emotion that arises is understandable and represents a natural reaction to such complex circumstances. Persistent Pain After the Death of the Abuser An abusive father or a narcissistic or unaffectionate mother essentially steals childhoods (Sabater, 2021). It is common that when abusive caregivers die, the person experiences sorrow for everything they lived through. This person feels pain for what could have been and was not, for a disrupted existence, a broken childhood, and many shattered dreams due to those experiences (Sabater, 2021). Abuse in the family context involves multiple dilemmas for the victim, including the conflict related to one person acting as both caregiver and abuser simultaneously (Arrabales Moreno, 2020). Additionally, in line with Arrabales Moreno (2020), in families where sexual abuse occurs, dynamics centered on isolation, shame, and secrecy develop, leading to emotional, social, and behavioral problems in the victims. These problems, far from disappearing with the abuser's death, intensify when the victim and other family members attempt to build a new identity in a family system lacking healthy dynamics (Arrabales Moreno, 2020). In a sense, the abuse seems to persist even after the abuser's death. From an attachment theory perspective, according to Arrabales Moreno (2020), when the abuser is a caregiver, the victim is likely to develop a disorganized attachment style, which also complicates identifying their own emotions and forming healthy intimate bonds that support the grieving process. Complicated Grief Due to Abuse and Mistreatment Given the high incidence of child sexual abuse and physical mistreatment within families, it is common for a grieving process to become complicated when the deceased is the abuser of the bereaved (Arrabales Moreno, 2020). The traumatic experiences resulting from mistreatment can place the victim in a more compromised position to face grief, which is often mistakenly considered atypical. In this context, multiple risk factors are present since the relationship was, at the very least, ambivalent; the mistreatment causes psychological trauma, and furthermore, social norms do not provide the necessary support. Other risk factors, such as low self-esteem or lack of support from the family environment, are often associated with the victim’s condition, which frequently manifests as caregiver neglect and/or family system disruption. According to Arrabales Moreno (2020), the victim possesses defense mechanisms that are already developed and established in their mental functioning, such as repression, denial, or dissociation. The Incessant Doubt After the Death of Abusive Parents When abusive parents die, the persistent doubt of why they acted that way resurfaces in the victims’ minds (Sabater, 2021). In some cases, children are forced to care for their parents in their final moments. Often, there is hope that during these final moments, the parent might offer an explanation for their actions or even express an apology. However, according to Sabater (2021), this hope is not always fulfilled, leading to a new form of pain. How to Face the Loss of Traumatic Figures To address the question of what to do when abusive parents pass away, it is crucial to understand that each individual handles this situation uniquely. Some people have decided to completely cut ties with the parental figure who caused them trauma, while others have chosen to maintain the relationship despite past problems. In general, according to Sabater (2021), it is advisable to reflect on these different realities and consider them in order to manage the situation appropriately. To Attend or Not to Attend the Funeral? Funerals can be considered, to some extent, as rituals intended primarily for the living rather than the dead (Sabater, 2021). There are various ways to say goodbye to someone, as long as it is desired. In this context, the most important thing is not to be influenced by external pressure or that of other family members. According to Sabater (2021), the decision to attend or not attend a funeral belongs solely to the individual, and this choice should be made by evaluating which option will provide the most comfort in closing that chapter. Acknowledge Every Emotion and Feeling It is not helpful to tell oneself phrases like "they are gone, now it’s over" (Sabater, 2021). Accepting or integrating this idea may cause more harm than good. It is crucial for the person to go through the stages of grief, and for that, it is essential to acknowledge and recognize every emotion they experience. It is entirely normal to feel anger, especially when reliving past anger associated with each lived event. Similarly, it is completely valid to feel pity for the loss of a parent. According to Sabater (2021), every emotion is valid, every sensation is correct, and it is appropriate to go through them, allowing them to be expressed and released. Deactivate Unhelpful Thoughts Many people who have experienced some form of abuse tend to hold onto unhelpful and even harmful thoughts (Sabater, 2021). Mourners often think things like, "Maybe if I had done this, that wouldn’t have happened," or "I should have said this to make that happen." According to Sabater (2021), this type of thinking is not beneficial; in fact, what it does is intensify the pain associated with the original wound over the long term. A Personal Closure to Grief When abusive parents die, it is necessary to go through a grieving process and close that chapter (Sabater, 2021). This process is personal and complex, during which it is essential for the person to rely on close individuals, heal the memories that resurface with the loss, and somehow rebuild themselves to begin a new phase. Additionally, as noted by Sabater (2021), it is important not to forget to seek professional help if deemed necessary. References Arrabales Moreno, R. (2020). El Proceso de Duelo Cuando el Fallecido es el Maltratador . Psicobotica.com . https://www.psicobotica.com/2020/07/19/el-proceso-de-duelo-cuando-el-fallecido-es-el-maltratador/ Dandelion Bereavement Support. (2022). Complicated Grief - Grieving the Death of an Abuser . Counselling Directory. https://www.counselling-directory.org.uk/memberarticles/complicated-grief-grieving-the-death-of-an-abuser Sabater, V. (2021, febrero 25). Cuando los Padres Maltratadores Fallecen, ¿Cómo es el Duelo?  La Mente es Maravillosa. https://lamenteesmaravillosa.com/cuando-los-padres-maltratadores-fallecen-como-es-el-duelo/

The loss of a loved one is an event that can be both traumatic and distressing, especially when it occurs unexpectedly (Mitjana, 2022). This process becomes even more complex if the deceased was the primary caregiver, as the death of a father or mother creates a turning point in the lives of those who have experienced this painful farewell, a shared experience for all humans at some point in their lives (Mitjana, 2022; Nicuesa, 2024). According to Nicuesa (2024), in such situations, children and other family members often feel that they did not have enough time to process what happened. Understanding the Grieving Process Before addressing the resources that can be employed to emotionally manage the loss of a loved one, it is crucial to understand the grieving process (Mitjana, 2022). In the context of a loss, people go through a series of grieving stages, though there are variations in how this process unfolds. Depending on various circumstances, some individuals may remain longer in certain stages than others, and at times, may even revert to an earlier stage. In some cases, such as when there are pre-existing illnesses, anticipatory grief can develop, allowing survivors to confront the pain associated with this process and eventually move forward after the inevitable outcome. However, according to Mitjana (2022), in situations where anticipatory grief is not possible, especially when the loss occurs suddenly, the difficulties in processing the event increase significantly, complicating the emotional process. The Unreal Nature of Sudden Loss The most prominent feature of an unexpected death is the struggle with the sense of unreality (Pastor, 2014). It is common for the bereaved not to feel the pain of the loss immediately after a sudden death. When observed reactions of sustained calmness or great tranquility occur in those who have just lost a loved one, such responses are often attributed to coldness or even strength, either positively or negatively, but in any case, they are surprising. These reactions often result from basic defense mechanisms that protect from pain. People cannot face what they are not prepared to endure. These internal protective mechanisms allow the mind and body to process what has happened. According to Pastor (2014), each individual has their own timing for confronting the reality of death, and this timing must be respected. Coping with Unexpected Loss When someone faces the sudden loss of a loved one, it is likely that they will need more time to process what has happened, and their energy will primarily be focused on this process rather than other matters (Pastor, 2014). During this time, the bereaved will experience distress, pain, confusion about what happened, and even a sense of insecurity. Death is always difficult to assimilate, and the sense of unreality may intermittently alternate as part of the acceptance process. When death occurs suddenly, the task of adaptation becomes even more complicated. According to Pastor (2014), it is common to hear bereaved individuals who have experienced a sudden loss describe how reality hits them suddenly, in waves, alternating between the sense of unreality and the feeling of living a nightmare. Strategies for Coping with Sudden Death To cope with the sudden death of a caregiver, it is essential to clarify that there are no magic formulas, but rather useful strategies that collectively provide support during the process (Mitjana, 2022). Despite an individual's ability to handle emotional situations, they are likely to face deep pain and a significant sense of loss of control over the events occurring. Moreover, according to Mitjana (2022), since parents are often the primary attachment figures, it is common to feel a great sense of helplessness at their loss. Navigating the Stages of Grief In the current context, it is essential to experience each of the stages of grief outlined by Elisabeth Kübler - Ross (Mitjana, 2022). According to Mitjana (2022), understanding this process is crucial for navigating each stage of grief effectively, as these stages do not occur in a linear fashion but rather follow a cyclical pattern, repeating over time until the integration of the loss is achieved, rather than simply "moving on" from it. The first stage is denial, which manifests when receiving the news of a loved one's death and experiencing an inability to process this information (Mitjana, 2022). At this moment, the mind tries to distance itself from reality as a form of protection. During this stage, it is common to experience a sense of shock that prevents connection with the current situation. Additionally, one may feel disbelief regarding the events and a sense of unreality, as if the event were a dream. It is important to allow yourself to feel all emotions without rushing. Ultimately, according to Mitjana (2022), this shock phase will eventually be overcome. Once the denial stage has been passed, anger often manifests, and this is precisely when emotions tend to overflow, frequently resulting in confusion about how to manage them appropriately (Mitjana, 2022). It is crucial to understand that, in this stage, anger tends to emerge strongly, and it is important to allow this emotion to be expressed, as long as adaptive ways to channel it are found. Therefore, according to Mitjana (2022), it is essential to recognize that anger is an integral part of the process; however, it is equally important to be aware of its presence to avoid directing it towards others, which could cause wounds that may become an emotional burden in the future. After the storm caused in the previous stage, the negotiation phase presents itself, resembling a kind of truce that individuals attempt to establish while processing what has happened (Mitjana, 2022). During this phase, individuals seek to negotiate with a higher power, be it God, the universe, or any entity of their belief, hoping that death could be reversed. In this stage, thoughts focus on the illusion that it is possible to undo what has already occurred. This phase is usually very brief. It is important to allow oneself to go through this phase, as it is normal for the mind to seek to negotiate with pain and what has happened. Sometimes, according to Mitjana (2022), this negotiation is an unconscious search for answers. When one becomes aware that it is not possible to reverse time, the next stage, depression, emerges, where sadness completely engulfs the person (Mitjana, 2022). After experiencing the previous emotional turmoil, depression causes a drop in the person's mood. It is common for many people to try to speed up this stage, perceiving depression as something solely negative; however, this perception is incorrect, as this stage is essential for navigating the grieving process healthily. Nevertheless, in accordance with Mitjana (2022), it is crucial to pay attention to avoid becoming stuck in this phase, which could hinder the necessary progress in the grieving process. Finally, after going through the pain and suffering process, one reaches the acceptance stage (Mitjana, 2022). According to Mitjana (2022), this does not mean that the death of a loved one no longer causes suffering, but rather that one develops the capacity to accept the loss, beginning to understand and assimilate the new reality that comes without that dearly loved person by one's side. Understanding That Every Grief is Unique Just as every person has unique characteristics, the relationship between a caregiver and their child also presents specific differences (Nicuesa, 2024). Consequently, the grieving process following a loss is an individual and exclusive journey for each person. It is crucial for each individual to accept grief personally and seek their own methods for managing it effectively. Among the various ways that can be helpful in coping with this experience are writing a letter, having a special object, such as a photograph, a piece of clothing, or a piece of jewelry, which allows one to feel the symbolic presence of their parent, as might be the case with jewelry designed to hold ashes (Nicuesa, 2024). Additionally, the guide "A Significant Person is No Longer Here" can be a valuable tool in this process, providing a space to explore and express feelings associated with the loss, helping to honor the memory of the deceased while moving through the grieving process. Seeking Social Support The weight of sadness is so intense that seeking support from close surroundings, such as friends and family, is beneficial, as their presence and companionship provide comfort to those going through this situation (Nicuesa, 2024). In such moments, each person's heart will indicate with whom they feel most comfortable. Sometimes, those who observe a situation like this from an external perspective want to help the affected person but are unsure of how to do so, as they want to respect their privacy during such a personal time. For this reason, according to Nicuesa (2024), it is crucial to express one's needs so that those around the bereaved can better understand how to offer support during these moments. Understanding the Role of Time The lack of time that the family had to say goodbye or prepare for the farewell before the deceased's death is especially relevant in the aftermath (Nicuesa, 2024). Each child requires their own grieving process to experience what happened, mourn the absence, and move forward. Time is crucial for living life from the new perspective that comes with the loss of a loved one. In such situations, beyond any theory, the individual finds their own path through practical experience. Although time is a vital factor, it should not be approached from an impatient perspective of wanting to close the cycle as quickly as possible. According to Nicuesa (2024), each person has a unique grieving process in response to a significant loss. Taking Care of Inner Dialogue Death generates a profound human incomprehension, especially when experienced so closely (Nicuesa, 2024). In such circumstances, the human being, while trying to find reasons for what happened, may come to think that they would feel better if the circumstances of the death had been different. The reality is that the loss of a caregiver, regardless of the process in which it occurred, leaves a deeply human feeling, like the sense that many things were left unsaid. In the case of an unexpected death, questions multiply due to the unpredictable nature of the situation. People may ask themselves: What would they have liked to say? Perhaps, according to Nicuesa (2024), these feelings can be expressed through a letter or a poem. Resuming Routine A person's life inevitably changes when experiencing a loss of this kind, transforming their inner world (Nicuesa, 2024). However, by resuming both professional and personal commitments, they may find in the usual comfort zone an anchor to hold onto. In these moments, according to Nicuesa (2024), the sense of security offered by a predictable routine proves therapeutic, as the inner dialogue about the brevity of life and the unpredictability of fate becomes a constant echo. Seeking Professional Support Although it is not always necessary, Nicuesa (2024) mentions that in some cases it is highly advisable for a person to take the initiative to seek help, as through individual psychotherapy, the bereaved can find a space in the therapeutic environment to share emotional aspects of themselves that they do not disclose to other friends and family. References Mitjana, L. R. (2022, marzo 12). Cómo Gestionar Emocionalmente la Muerte Repentina de un Padre . La Mente es Maravillosa. https://lamenteesmaravillosa.com/como-gestionar-emocionalmente-muerte-repentina-padre/ Nicuesa, M. (2024, julio 11). Cómo Superar la Muerte Repentina de un Padre . Psicologia Online. https://www.psicologia-online.com/como-superar-la-muerte-repentina-de-un-padre-4052.html Pastor, P. (2014, mayo 22). El Duelo por una Muerte Inesperada . Fundación Mario Losantos del Campo. https://www.fundacionmlc.org/duelo-muerte-inesperada/

The most painful experience a child can face in life is the loss of a parent, an event so traumatic that it will have a significant impact on the child's development, deeply and permanently altering the course of their life (Bueno, 2024). From the very moment a parent dies, the child's life undergoes a radical change due to the inevitable modification of the family system that surrounds them and provides emotional support. However, Bueno (2024) suggests that by implementing a series of guidelines, it is possible to provide meaningful support in the grieving process that the child goes through after losing a parent. How the Loss of a Parent Affects a Child The death of a loved one leaves a deep wound that, like any other injury, illness, or physical wound, requires time to heal, and although it will eventually heal, it is important to remember that the scar will remain as an indelible mark of that experience (Bueno, 2024). The grief that follows that death is an experience that can extend over many years, affecting those who go through it. How this grief affects the child will largely depend on the empathetic and social skills of the surviving parent, who will have to take on the responsibility of accompanying and supporting the child. In fact, according to Bueno (2024), any psychopathology that may manifest in adulthood in those who have experienced the loss of a parent in childhood is correlated with the quality of care provided by the surviving parent after the loss, whether that care was good or bad. If the death occurs suddenly or unexpectedly, the distress experienced is even more intense and requires special attention from the surviving parent, who must be prepared to provide appropriate support and comfort, considering that the physical shock experienced upon receiving the news is real and needs to be addressed sensitively (Bueno, 2024). According to Bueno (2024), for the child's emotional wound to heal in the best possible way, it is essential that the surviving parent reassures the child that they will not be left alone and that their life, although it will never be the same, will return to a routine as soon as possible, preserving those virtues of the previous life that are beneficial, such as routines and the relevant and necessary limits for their emotional and psychological development. The Impact of Words on Childhood Grief "Dad is not here, Mom has gone to heaven, Grandma has fallen asleep forever" are expressions some adults use to inform a child about the death of a loved one (Oller, 2020). Adults believe that terms like death, suicide, or cancer are too shocking for a child to process adequately. However, this perception is far from reality. Avoiding certain words out of fear only increases the fear of the concept they represent. Therefore, it is suggested that children be informed about the death of a parent, relative, friend, or close person in a clear and direct manner. It is crucial that the word "death" is explicitly mentioned in the conversation between the adult and the child. According to Oller (2020), even in the case of infants, the word "death" should be used, even if the child does not yet understand its meaning. It is essential to prepare for possible unusual reactions from the child (Oller, 2020). The reactions that the child may experience upon receiving this news are varied. It is not surprising if a child exhibits behaviors such as wanting to continue playing immediately after being told about the death of their parent. This is completely normal; this reaction indicates that the child has received the information but is not yet ready to process it and needs time to do so. This behavior, which can extend for several hours, is not exclusive to children. A similar example can be seen in adults who, in a house full of people offering condolences, decide to start washing the dishes. At these moments, according to Oller (2020), during the initial phase of grief, it is crucial that the person who has just received the news feels accompanied. It is important to differentiate between facts and beliefs (Oller, 2020). Unlike an adult, the child needs to know that they will be well cared for and that someone will always be available to answer their questions after the death of their caregiver. If the child asks where Mom or Dad is, it should be explained that their body is in the cemetery, has been cremated and placed in an urn, or that their ashes have been scattered. If the family is religious, they can share their beliefs with the child; however, it is necessary to use the verb "believe," as otherwise, the child might develop psychotic thoughts. In this way, some children may avoid flying on airplanes because they believe the sky is full of dead people or imagine that their deceased parent is constantly watching them. According to Oller (2020), these beliefs can cause great distress. It is crucial to avoid making false promises (Oller, 2020). After the death of one parent, it is common for the child to ask the surviving parent if they are going to die as well. In moments of desperation, many adults choose to give a definitive negative answer. However, according to Oller (2020), it is preferable to offer alternative responses like: "Dad/Mom was sick; I am fine and hope to live with you for many years." Guidelines for Helping Children Grieve the Loss of a Parent Being Honest and Sincere in Communication In situations where a child does not have complete information, it is natural for their mind to try to fill in the gaps with fantasies and imagination (Bueno, 2024). For this reason, it is essential to explain what happened in an honest and sincere way, adapting the explanation to their level of understanding and age, ensuring that they can process the information in the best possible way. In this sense, according to Bueno (2024), it is ideal for the surviving parent to take on this communication, especially in the early stages after the death of the other parent. Allowing the Child to Participate in Farewell Rituals When the time for the funeral comes, many families tend to consider that places like the church, cemetery, or funeral home are not suitable for children, as they may be too disturbing or sad (Oller, 2020). However, it is recommended not to exclude the child from these rituals, as participating in them can help process grief in a healthier way. It is crucial, however, that the child is thoroughly informed about what will happen at each moment and what they will encounter at each place, which should be done by a reference person for the child. Children, regardless of their age, should experience these moments naturally and at their own pace. If they express a desire not to attend the farewell, Oller (2020) mentions that they should not be forced to do so, although it is recommended to invite them to participate in some form of farewell ritual that allows them to start channeling their pain and honoring the memory of the deceased parent. Providing Emotional Security and Reassurance The loss of a parent often generates great insecurity, making the child feel vulnerable to the possibility of facing more losses in the future (Bueno, 2024). It is not possible to guarantee that there will be no more deaths in their environment, as that would be a lie, but it is possible to explain that, generally, people tend to die at an old age, which can offer some reassurance. Additionally, it is recommended to discuss with the child what would happen if the surviving parent were to die, addressing topics like who would take care of them, where they would live, and other relevant aspects. According to Bueno (2024), involving the child in these decisions will provide them with a sense of control and security in a time of great uncertainty. Facilitating the Expression of Emotional Pain Manifestations of grief in a child or adolescent can vary significantly, ranging from episodes of anger and irritability to behaviors that appear completely indifferent to the loss, as if nothing had happened (Bueno, 2024). If the adult is unsure how the suffering is affecting the child emotionally, the best approach is to spend time with them and observe their attitudes and behaviors, as these will provide valuable clues about the level of distress they are experiencing. Likewise, according to Bueno (2024), it is not uncommon for the child or adolescent to prefer to express their emotional pain and seek comfort from other people in their environment, such as a teacher, friends, or peers, rather than from the surviving parent. Maintaining Routines and Rules In times of great emotional turbulence, such as grieving the death of a parent, it is crucial for the child to cling to the routines and rules previously established (Bueno, 2024). Although these activities may be challenging for the grieving and saddened adult, especially when the loss is recent, maintaining a predictable structure can help reduce the fear and uncertainty the child experiences. Children and adolescents find security when they know what is expected of them. Sometimes, they may use their distress as a justification for inappropriate behaviors; in these cases, it is important to recognize their right to feel pain and sadness, but it is also essential, with empathy, to emphasize the importance of being responsible for their actions and the consequences of those actions. According to Bueno (2024), being in grief should not be an excuse to allow rules that were previously not accepted to be broken. Promoting Personal Health and Well-Being as a Model The child needs the presence of an adult who remains emotionally and physically healthy to provide support and understanding during the grieving process (Bueno, 2024). Therefore, it is crucial for the adult to take care of their own physical and emotional well-being and not hesitate to seek external support if necessary to process their grief. Failure to do so, according to Bueno (2024), risks transferring the pain to the child, which could complicate the child's grieving process. Expanding the Dialogue and Creating New Avenues of Communication Sharing personal experiences where an adult has felt distress or sadness, especially if they experienced the death of a loved one during their childhood, can help the child normalize and understand what they are going through (Bueno, 2024). Likewise, it is essential to listen to how the child is handling the situation and allow them to ask questions to express their emotions. Encouraging the development of new avenues of creative expression, such as drawing, writing, modeling, or playing together, can be beneficial when words do not seem sufficient to communicate what is felt (Bueno, 2024). In this context, the guide "An Important Person is No Longer Around" can be a valuable tool to help the child process the loss in a way that feels safe and understandable to them. In line with Bueno (2024), these new experiences and forms of communication will contribute to building a unique and original narrative about the grieving process. Practicing Patience and Allowing the Necessary Time to Adapt In the context of grief, calmness and patience are essential, rather than rushing to quickly forget or escape the pain (Bueno, 2024). Patience and support will allow a new bond to form between the surviving parent and the child, helping to gradually ease the intense pain, sorrow, distress, shock, and recurring longing. It is beneficial to spend time together creating new moments, reminiscing about the past, comforting each other, or honoring the memory of the deceased through meaningful remembrances. Facilitating mutual comfort can be one of the best ways to move forward in the grieving process. Patience, at its core, is key to allowing experiences to either integrate or fade with time. According to Bueno (2024), spending time with the child in a calm and reflective manner will promote growth and continuity in the construction of their lives. Seeking Additional Help if Necessary As children and adolescents learn to cope with the death of a loved one, it is essential to provide them with the necessary space, understanding, and patience so they can express their grief in the way that feels most natural to them (Lyness, 2012). The way children express their grief can differ significantly from that of adults; for example, a young child might not cry or might react with problematic behaviors like hyperactivity, while a teenager could show anger and prefer to talk about their feelings with friends rather than with their parents. Whatever the child's or teenager's reaction, it is important not to take it as a personal attack. In accordance with Lyness (2012), facing the loss of a loved one is a process that requires time and care, similar to facing other difficult situations. However, it is crucial to be aware of any significant changes in the child’s behavior, such as drastic changes in social interaction or academic performance. If a substantial alteration is observed, it is advisable to seek professional help, consulting with a doctor, school psychologist, or a specialized psychological care organization. Additionally, resources such as books, websites, and support groups can be used to provide guidance. Lyness (2012) mentions that, although parents may wish to protect their children from situations involving sadness and loss, teaching them to face and manage these feelings will allow them to develop valuable emotional skills that will serve them throughout their lives. References Bueno, M. (2024, junio 15). El Duelo de un Hijo por la Muerte de un Padre o Madre . Criar con Sentido Común; Criar con Sentido Comun. https://www.criarconsentidocomun.com/duelo-por-muerte-de-padre-madre/ Lyness, D. (2012). Cómo Ayudar a su Hijo a Enfrentar la Muerte de un ser Querido. KidsHealth. https://kidshealth.org/es/parents/death.html Oller, S. (2020, junio 18). Cómo Comunicar a un Niño la Muerte de Papá o Mamá . La Vanguardia. https://www.lavanguardia.com/vivo/mamas-y-papas/20200618/481714212910/nino-muerte-papa-mama.html

Theories about the anatomical location of the spiritual component of the human being have their roots in the earliest manifestations of philosophical thought and the emergence of religions, although the scientific community has not been absent from the development of this debate (López, Rubio, Molina & Alamo, 2012). Indeed, one of the most interesting hypotheses regarding the corporeal seat of the human soul was proposed by René Descartes . He argued that the compact structure of the pineal gland, like the structure of other parts of the brain, is composed of fibers separated by pores through which the blood, coming from the choroid plexuses and the epiphyseal arterioles, penetrates the brain. According to López, Alamo & García (2010), for its function, the pineal gland extracts fine particles suspended in the blood and produced in the left ventricle of the heart, under the heat of the myocardium, and transforms them into animal spirits. On the other hand, those coarser particles, not filtered by the pineal gland, enter the cortical surface of the brain and serve as nutrients (López, Alamo & García, 2010). These spirits have two fundamental properties: they are extremely small particles and move with great speed. Thus, according to López, Alamo & García (2010), Descartes gives the pineal gland a primary and basic role in the intimate mechanism of the relationship between man, machine, and his environment. The Importance of the Pineal Gland Throughout his Works Descartes' assertion that the pineal gland is the main seat of the soul has stood out as one of the most enduring and significant statements of his thought (Shapiro, 2011). This assertion remains present in his biological writings and extends to his work "The Passions of the Soul." In "Treatise of Man," he first associates the soul with the pineal gland specifically and directly (Shapiro, 2011). For Descartes, the pineal gland played a fundamental role, as it was involved in processes as diverse as sensation, imagination, memory, and the causation of bodily movements (Lokhorst, 2013). However, according to Lokhorst (2013), it should be noted that some of Descartes' basic anatomical and physiological assumptions proved to be completely wrong, not only by current scientific standards but also in light of the knowledge available in his own time. In the "Fifth Discourse on Optics," he reiterates the soul's connection with this specific part of the brain (Shapiro, 2011). This same idea is revisited in the "Meditations," where he insists that the soul is not immediately affected by all parts of the body, but only by the brain, or perhaps by a specific part of it, namely the one believed to contain common sense. According to his assertion, whenever this small part of the brain is in a certain state, it presents the same signals to the mind, regardless of the states in which other parts of the body may be at that time. This same thesis is transferred to his work "The Passions of the Soul," where, according to Shapiro (2011), this small part of the brain is again identified as the seat of the soul. In the most influential texts where Descartes makes this assertion, he does not seem to offer any detailed explanation as to why he holds this position (Shapiro, 2011). Nevertheless, Descartes justifies his assertion that the pineal gland is the seat of the soul in two specific contexts. First, he presents a relatively detailed view of the pineal gland in a series of letters addressed to Meyssonnier and Mersenne, starting in 1640 and continuing into 1641. This perspective is later elaborated upon but remains largely unchanged in "The Passions of the Soul." According to Shapiro (2011), the justifications Descartes offers for his assertion are divided into two general categories: anatomical and analogical. The Anatomical Arguments The reasons that led him to consider the pineal gland as the control center of the body, as well as the dwelling place of the sensorium commune and the seat of the soul, are undoubtedly based on purely anatomical aspects, as can be inferred from some letters sent by the philosopher during the year 1640, perhaps influenced by the remarkable advance in the knowledge of the nervous system experienced at the time (López, Alamo & García, 2010). According to Shapiro (2011), due to the anatomical location of the pineal gland, it is argued that it is the only structure that allows the soul to think in the way it does while being united to the body. There are two basic kinds of anatomical arguments (Shapiro, 2011). First, Descartes argued that the anatomical position of the pineal gland uniquely fits the limitations of our sensory perception. Once Descartes announced that the function of the conarium was to be the principal seat of the soul and the place where all thoughts are formed, he proceeded to reason that, since we never have more than one thought at a time, it must be the case that the two impressions from our double sensory organs are joined somewhere in the body; that part should not be double if it is to present a single impression to the mind, from which a single idea can be conceived. Then, according to Shapiro (2011), Descartes found that there is no part of the brain, except the pineal gland, that is not double. Secondly, the mathematical reasons that led to this choice must be considered, since Descartes chose an organ located precisely at the geometric center of the brain (López, Alamo & García, 2010). Descartes argued that the protected position of the gland within the brain was especially suited to receive ideas and, therefore, conducive to a good and subtle mind (Shapiro, 2011). Although this point may seem entirely different, it turns out that, also for this reason, the pineal gland should be considered the seat of common sense. Thus, as it is the seat of common sense, the pineal gland should also be the seat of the soul. Consequently, according to Shapiro (2011), both types of anatomical arguments aim to demonstrate that the pineal gland is the seat of common sense and, from there, conclude that it is the seat of the soul. For Descartes, the only alternative to the soul not being connected to any solid part of the body was that, instead, it was connected to the animal spirits found in various cavities, but that idea is patently absurd (Shapiro, 2011). Similarly, according to Shapiro (2011), it was much easier to understand how images from our double sensory organs combined into one within the pineal gland than to understand how they would do so in the cavities. The Analogical Argument Apart from the previously mentioned anatomical considerations, Descartes also presents an analogical argument on one occasion to justify his assertion that the pineal gland is indeed the seat of the soul (Shapiro, 2011). In the letter addressed to Mersenne on July 30, 1640, he argued that, since the human soul does not have a double nature but is unique and indivisible, the part of the body to which it is most closely attached must also possess that same characteristic of uniqueness and not be divided into two similar parts. According to his analysis, there is no part of the brain that meets these conditions except the pineal gland (Shapiro, 2011). Moreover, in accordance with López, Rubio, Molina & Alamo (2012), its central location would allow for the integration process of perceptions and sensations from duplicated organs. Subsequently, he proceeds to dismiss other possible parts of the body as candidates for being the main seat of the soul based on the previously mentioned reasons (Shapiro, 2011). He points out that, although the cerebellum is superficially one and is named as such, even its processus veriformis can be divided into two parts; similarly, the spinal cord can be divided into four parts. Thus, Descartes argues that the pineal gland, being unique and undivided, is particularly suitable for being united with the soul. Since the pineal gland is not divided and is therefore a single entity, and considering that the soul is also one and indivisible, both form a unit. According to Shapiro (2011), it is precisely the analogy in their structures that allows for this union. References Gallo, L. E. (2005). De las cosas que pueden ponerse en duda en Descartes: el cuerpo . EFDEPORTES. Recuperado 20 de diciembre de 2021, de https://www.efdeportes.com/efd87/cuerpo.htm Lokhorst, G. (2013). Descartes and the Pineal Gland . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Recuperado 20 de diciembre de 2021, de https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pineal-gland/#TreaMan López, F., Alamo, C., & García, P. (2010). La neurofisiología cartesiana: entre los spiritus animalis y el conarium . Medigraphic. Recuperado 20 de diciembre de 2021, de https://www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/arcneu/ane-2010/ane103i.pdf López, F., Rubio, G., Molina, J. D., & Alamo, C. (2012). The pineal gland as physical tool of the soul faculties: A persistent historical connection . ScienceDirect. Recuperado 20 de diciembre de 2021, de https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173580812000429?token=8129F40DB85AB90C253EFF31D92C751CA572A054F1B0562F61E2D42016613BDA86E134C3FA258B088981ACCA2CC14BDD&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20211220191640 Shapiro, L. (2011). Descartes’s Pineal Gland Reconsidered . Midwest Studies in Philosophy. Recuperado 20 de diciembre de 2021, de https://lisacshapiro.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/shapiro-pinealgland.pdf

Jean-Jacques Rousseau emerged as one of the most influential thinkers during the Enlightenment in 18th-century Europe, gaining recognition with his first significant philosophical work, "A Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts," which won an essay contest organized by the Academy of Dijon in 1750 (Delaney, n.d.). In this text, he argued that the advancement of the sciences and the arts had led to the corruption of virtue and morality, which brought him fame and recognition, laying the groundwork for his later work, "A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality." Although this second discourse did not win the Academy's prize, it was widely read and further solidified his position as a prominent intellectual figure. In this work, according to Delaney (n.d.), he asserted that humans are intrinsically good by nature but have been corrupted by the historical events that gave rise to contemporary civil society. Rousseau's praise of nature is a recurring theme in his later writings, notably in his work on the philosophy of education, "Emile," and his principal work on political philosophy, "The Social Contract," both published in 1762 (Delaney, n.d.). These works generated great controversy in France and were immediately banned by the Paris authorities, leading him to flee France and settle in Switzerland, where he continued to face difficulties with the authorities and maintained conflicts with friends. According to Delaney (n.d.), his later years were marked by a sense of paranoia and his constant efforts to justify his life and work, which were notably reflected in his later writings, such as "The Confessions," "Reveries of a Solitary Walker," and "Rousseau: Judge of Jean-Jacques." Biography Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 - 1778) was born on June 28, 1712, in Geneva, Switzerland (Cartwright, 2023). His father, a watchmaker, was exiled due to his involvement in a duel, while his mother passed away a few days after his birth. After his mother's death, he was cared for by an aunt and a cousin, and later was temporarily taken in by a clergyman named Lambercier. Except for some teachings about the principles of the Catholic faith, he did not receive formal education. From 1724, he worked as an apprentice to an employee before moving on to work with an engraver. In 1728, according to Cartwright (2023), he left his apprenticeship in Geneva and started earning a living doing odd jobs, which led him to Turin, where he converted to Catholicism. His fortunes changed in 1731 when he secured a position with Louise Eléonore de Warens, with whom he had first met in 1728 (Cartwright, 2023). During his time with Warens, he worked as an employee and taught music, which allowed him sufficient time to read and make up for the education that had been neglected until then. In 1740, he moved to the house of the Abbot of Mably in Lyon, where he resumed teaching music. In 1742, he moved to Paris, where he continued his interest in music, publishing a pamphlet on musical notation and presenting his musical theories to the Academy of Sciences. According to Cartwright (2023), he secured a position as secretary to the French ambassador in Venice, a post he held between 1742 and 1743, but was dismissed due to misconduct, revealing his difficult character, which became more apparent over time. Back in Paris, he began to build social connections and obtained a job working for the financier Dupin, which allowed him to reside in the Château de Chenonceau (Cartwright, 2023). Among his associates was Denis Diderot, editor of the Encyclopedia to which Rousseau contributed several essays on music and political economy. According to Cartwright (2023), during a visit to Diderot in 1749, while he was confined in the Château de Vincennes due to accusations of atheism, he experienced what he described as a moment of enlightenment, an event that led him to broader recognition. The First Discourse, known as "Discourse on the Sciences and Arts," presented an argument contrary to what the Dijon Academy anticipated with its question, "Has the restoration of the sciences and the arts tended to purify morals?" A question that, without a doubt, the Academy hoped would inspire the applicants to extol the benefits of increased culture and enlightenment (Cartwright, 2023). It argued that while the arts and sciences may be good in themselves, they only reach their full splendor in developed societies. However, the main drawback of developed societies is that they are often accompanied by various forms of injustice and inequality. Therefore, it argued that the moral cost of allowing the arts and sciences to thrive in such societies was too high. According to Cartwright (2023), this negative perspective on progress contradicted the majority opinion held by most Enlightenment thinkers. Subsequently, Rousseau took a lighter turn by writing the opera "Le Devin du Village" in 1752 (Cartwright, 2023). This opera achieved such popularity that the French king offered Rousseau a position at his court, though the writer was unsuccessful in the interview. In any case, according to Cartwright (2023), Rousseau's true passion was philosophy. He wrote his Second Discourse, known as "Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men," in 1755 (Cartwright, 2023). This work is considered a key piece of the Enlightenment and the foundation of modern social critique. Just like in the First Discourse, he wrote this work in response to a question posed by the Dijon Academy, which on this occasion was: "What is the origin of inequality among men, and is it authorized by natural law?" Among Rousseau's responses is the famous phrase: "The man who first had the idea of enclosing a piece of land and saying 'this is mine,' and who found people naive enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society." According to Cartwright (2023), the essay received second prize as it subverted the purpose of the competition by completely denouncing inequality in society. Rousseau begins his exposition by describing his vision of humans before the existence of society, even going back to humanoid apes, indirectly suggesting an evolutionary theory (Cartwright, 2023). Furthermore, he suggests that humans in their natural state are free and equal beings, possessing two fundamental instincts: a sense of self-preservation and an innate compassion for others. In his view, the development of society, along with its growing sophistication, leads to a decline in morality. He explains that, given the abuse perpetrated by the rich and powerful, many people would be better off if humanity had not advanced to such sophisticated societies. Consequently, according to Cartwright (2023), Rousseau claimed that civilized humans are unhappy, selfish, and lack freedom. Madame Warens, who was his former employer, had suffered the consequences of an unsuccessful arranged marriage, which made her a figure who captivated him from the first moment he saw her (Cartwright, 2023). Over time, their relationship evolved into a romantic one; however, they eventually separated when Rousseau progressed in his personal and professional life. Unfortunately, Madame Warens died in poverty, marking a sad end for a woman who had once been so important in the philosopher's life. Later, according to Cartwright (2023), he found another romantic interest in 1756, a neighbor named Sophie d'Houdetot, who inspired him to write the novel "Julie." From that same year, he chose to live in relative seclusion at Madame d'Épinay's estate, a woman who sympathized with several French-speaking philosophers (Cartwright, 2023). The residence where he lived, which was modest, was aptly called "The Hermitage.” Later, he moved to Montmorency, north of Paris. Once there, according to Cartwright (2023), he devoted himself to writing more frequently, producing the bestselling romantic novel "Julie, ou La Nouvelle Héloïse" (1761), the educational treatise "Émile" (1762), which included influential ideas such as freeing babies from dangerously restrictive clothing and advocating for breastfeeding, and finally, his most celebrated and influential work on political philosophy, "The Social Contract" (1762). Thérèse Le Levasseur, a humble maid he met in Paris, became his wife in 1768 (Cartwright, 2023). The couple had five children, but Rousseau insisted that all of them be sent to a Parisian orphanage. Levasseur strongly opposed this decision, which was completely understandable, as the infant mortality rate in that orphanage was 70%. Rousseau, who had written a treatise on the best way to care for children in his work "Émile," did not follow any of the advice he himself had presented. According to Cartwright (2023), these and other negative details about Rousseau's personal life were revealed by his fellow philosopher Voltaire, who publicly attacked him as a form of revenge for the literary attacks Rousseau had made against the theater. In his work "The Social Contract," he offers a solution to the social problems he had previously described in his "Second Discourse" (Cartwright, 2023). Realizing that absolute equality was impossible, he proposed limiting the excesses of inequality. For example, in his ideal society, no person should be forced to sell themselves, and no wealthy person should be able to buy another. For Rousseau, equality was especially important in creating a social contract between citizens, but not between citizens and rulers. In his view, people should come together in a community based on consent, with the aim of ensuring that the society worked for the common good. According to Cartwright (2023), this position differs from that of many other Enlightenment liberal thinkers, who emphasized that people acted solely in their own self-interest. He recognized the need for a system of laws and a strong government to guide the general will of the people when it might inadvertently stray and to protect property, which he considered an unfortunate creation of society (Cartwright, 2023). According to Rousseau, the general will was a compromise in which individuals sacrificed complete freedom to achieve a restriction on freedom to avoid a situation of total lack of freedom. Whatever the resulting general will, that would be the correct one. He claimed that the sovereign, merely by existing, is always what it should be. Indeed, in correspondence with Cartwright (2023), he had doubts about what was the best type of political system, whether a monarchy or a representative (elitist) democracy, but in either scenario, he believed it was necessary to encourage citizens, through education, to adopt a less selfish approach to community life. However, it was not his political philosophy but the treatise on education, "Emile," that got him into serious trouble with the French establishment (Cartwright, 2023). Considering his views that religion was a personal matter consisting of an inner light dangerous to Catholicism, the Church influenced the Paris Parliament (a court of justice) to arrest him and ban his book. Rousseau, upon learning of this situation, decided to go to Switzerland. Despite this, according to Cartwright (2023), "Emile" became a bestseller. Although in the 18th century the discussion about Rousseau focused on his views on faith, other aspects of the treatise, particularly his largely negative views on women and their abilities compared to men, earned the author equally determined criticism in the subsequent centuries (Cartwright, 2023). His forced exile did not help his already high sensitivity; some historians have claimed that he had a persecution complex. In 1766, he moved to England. Cartwright (2023) mentions that, despite a public clash with his fellow philosopher David Hume, Rousseau's reputation in England was high, and King George III of Britain offered him a pension. During his time abroad, he dedicated his time to considering a more practical application of his thoughts on political philosophy, which led him to write works such as "A Constitutional Project for Corsica" and "Considerations on the Government of Poland" (Cartwright, 2023). Several symptoms of paranoia began to manifest, leading him to return to France incognito in 1770 (Cartwright, 2023; Cranston & Duignan, 2024). His delicate psychological state may explain his concern in his later years to evaluate himself and his life’s work (Cartwright, 2023). During this period, according to Cartwright (2023), he wrote "Confessions" in 1770, "Judge of Rousseau by Jean-Jacques" in 1776, and "Dreams of the Solitary Walker," which remained unfinished. He spent his last years in Paris before moving north to Ermenonville in May 1778 (Cartwright, 2023). Jean-Jacques Rousseau passed away on July 2, 1778 (Cartwright, 2023). The civilization he so detested and to which he had dedicated his life to combat seemed to have annihilated the one who had exposed its injustice and corruption (Sala, 2021). However, he remained a significant political thinker, and his writings would inspire the revolution that, a decade later, would certify the death of the regime that had attempted to destroy him and his reputation. In a twist of fate, according to Sala (2021), his remains, transferred in 1794 to the crypt of the Pantheon of Illustrious Men in Paris, rest alongside those of his bitter enemy, Voltaire. The Theory of the Noble Savage It is understood that politics involves the management of both authority and force, a concept that Rousseau, like other political philosophers of his time, focused on (Torres, 2017). In this context, he assigned great importance to the concept of the "social contract." This social contract represents a hypothetical agreement between citizens and those who hold power, an agreement that enables the existence of States and the stability of their structure. Therefore, according to Torres (2017), for Rousseau, both the existence of the State and politics imply that certain individuals have the ability to compel others to behave in a certain way, supposedly for the good of the majority. According to Rousseau, private property is a source of violence (Torres, 2017). The existence of private property forces the State to create mechanisms to protect it, and since this protection is one of the fundamental pillars of society, laws are created from the perspective of those who own the most property, that is, the wealthy. In line with Torres (2017), this situation causes the interests of a minority, the wealthiest, to prevail over those of the majority, who own less property. In Rousseau's view, citizens only gain existence to the extent that they possess private property (Torres, 2017). This dynamic creates systemic violence in society, as it becomes difficult to discern which actions benefit the majority and which do not; moreover, it is not possible to hold the State accountable for all its actions, leading to corruption and injustices. These injustices arise not only from authorities towards civilians but also from the existence of economic and democratic deficiencies, which create a ripple effect fostering violence among citizens. Therefore, according to Torres (2017), for civilization and States to exist, a certain degree of injustice and violence must also exist, due to the imbalance between those who dominate and those who are dominated, who cannot take advantage of the mechanisms of oppression that society offers from birth. According to this perspective, laws create dynamics of relationships between people that are inherently unjust (Torres, 2017). It concludes that human beings are born free but live in chains. From this viewpoint, people enter the world with a natural predisposition towards morally good behavior; however, society corrupts them to force their participation in its game. According to Torres (2017), it is important to note that the concept of the "noble savage" does not refer to a type of human who necessarily existed at some remote point in history, nor does it precisely define tribal behavior; rather, it is a hypothetical assumption that helps to understand the nature of the State, rather than describe how people lived in the past. Voltaire, a Frontline Adversary The philosopher François - Marie Arouet (1694 - 1778) was a prominent critic of Rousseau. However, it is important to consider other prevailing philosophical ideas to gain a more comprehensive view (Farias, 2023). Regarding the concept of the state of nature, Thomas Hobbes reflected that each individual pursues their own interests and that the natural state is a war of all against all. In contrast to Hobbes's view, Rousseau argued that humans are inherently good and compassionate, claiming that it is society that generates inequalities and injustices (Farias, 2023). In addition to understanding these ideas, it is crucial to note that during the 18th century, only affluent families could afford to have wet nurses in their homes (Farias, 2023). Generally, children were nursed by women who were not their mothers, leading many infants to die shortly after birth due to diseases contracted through breastfeeding. Those who survived developed a strong attachment to their wet nurses, viewing breastfeeding as a job; thus, separation from the nurse was traumatic. According to Farias (2023), Rousseau's philosophical ideas changed this perspective, shifting breastfeeding from a job to a biological function inherent to the mother, thereby reinforcing bonds of love. However, Rousseau, who contributed to childhood pedagogy, made a notable error (Farias, 2023). At 33, he began a relationship with a seamstress, with whom he had five children. These children were given to an orphanage by the decision of Rousseau and the woman, who, despite her pain, agreed to this decision. After the publication of his work "Emile" or "On Education," Voltaire exposed the fact that Rousseau had sent his own children away, despite being an advocate for breastfeeding and the idealization of motherhood. Rousseau attempted to defend himself and explain his reasons, but the incident was recorded in history. Furthermore, Rousseau did not promote women's autonomy; instead, he posited that their sole function was to nourish their children, while the father was responsible for imparting values and principles. According to Farias (2023), this idealization of motherhood also had negative consequences, relegating women to a secondary role in political life, as their sole duty was to devote themselves to the role of the ideal mother. References Cartwright, M. (2023). Jean-Jacques Rousseau. En World History Encyclopedia. https://www.worldhistory.org/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau/ Cranston, M., & Duignan, B. (2024). Jean-Jacques Rousseau. En Encyclopedia Britannica . https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jean-Jacques-RousseauDelaney, J. J. (s. f.). Jean-Jacques Rousseau. En Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Recuperado 12 de agosto de 2024, de https://iep.utm.edu/rousseau/Farias, I. (2023, mayo 18). Principales Ideas de Rousseau . Psicoactiva.com. https://www.psicoactiva.com/blog/ideas-de-rousseau/ Sala, À. (2021, febrero 16). Rousseau: El Filósofo que no Quería ser Ilustrado. National geographic . https://historia.nationalgeographic.com.es/a/rousseau-filosofo-que-no-queria-ser-ilustrado_7443Torres, A. (2017, agosto 5). La Teoría del Buen Salvaje de Jean-Jacques Rousseau . Psicología y Mente. https://psicologiaymente.com/social/teoria-buen-salvaje-jean-jacques-rousseau

William Cullen (1710 - 1790) excelled as a physician and professor, standing out among his contemporaries and gaining recognition as the most renowned among them (Passmore, 2010). Indeed, his influence has endured as the most lasting of all. Shortly after his death, documents about his life and works began to emerge, leading to an extensive literature that continues to grow. Throughout his life, he enjoyed good health and maintained his energy without ceasing. Even at the age of 79, he published his "Treatise on the Materia Medica" in two volumes, which became a work used in both Europe and America, remaining a standard reference for forty years. In fact, the library of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh holds a copy corrected by Cullen the year before its publication. According to Passmore (2010), only in the last year of his life, when he died at the age of 80, did his energy begin to decline. Biography William Cullen, born on April 15, 1710, in Hamilton, Lanarkshire, Scotland, was the second of seven children in his family (Passmore, 2010; The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). His father, a lawyer who managed the estate of a duke in the Clyde Valley, owned a small estate near Hamilton, a town located about 10 miles southeast of Glasgow (Passmore, 2010). He received his early education at the Hamilton Grammar School, the same town where he was born and where his father worked as a lawyer for the Duke of Hamilton (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). In 1726, he went to the University of Glasgow, where he became an apprentice to British surgeon John Paisley (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). According to Passmore (2010), Paisley was a liberal man who owned an extensive medical library and encouraged his apprentices to make the most of it. After completing his apprenticeship at the age of 19, he moved to London to expand his medical experience (Passmore, 2010). By then, he had developed a habit of broad reading that he would maintain throughout his life, encompassing not only medical literature but also philosophy, history, and sciences, with a particular interest in chemistry and botany. His published writings and the manuscripts of his lectures testify to his knowledge. Students appreciated his culture and education, which likely contributed to his success as a professor. Similarly, according to Passmore (2010), patients valued a learned physician, which undoubtedly was an important factor in his professional success. In 1729, he was hired as a surgeon on a merchant ship sailing from London to the West Indies (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). After a year of travel, he returned to London, where he worked in an apothecary's shop, continued his reading habit, and attended public lectures (Passmore, 2010). He remained in London until 1732, when he decided to return to Scotland and established his own medical practice near the village of Shotts in Lanarkshire, which is now in North Lanarkshire (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). After the death of his older brother and with his father already deceased, he was forced to return to Scotland to take charge of the education of his younger siblings (Passmore, 2010). There, he reunited with a friend who lived near the family estate and offered him lodging in his home to care for his son, who suffered from a chronic illness. Additionally, according to Passmore (2010), he maintained a small medical practice. After nearly two years, he received an inheritance and decided to continue his education before settling in Hamilton to practice medicine (Passmore, 2010). He attended the winter sessions of the 1734-35 and 1735-36 classes in Edinburgh, including anatomy lectures given by Monro Primus. During the summer months, he resided with a clergyman in Northumberland, where he devoted his time to reading general literature and philosophy, an unusual preliminary approach to medical practice today. In early 1736, he returned to Hamilton and established a practice there, nominally as a surgeon. Although his formal training had concluded, his tireless energy and efficient use of time ensured that his education continued until the end of his life (Passmore, 2010). According to The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2024), he dedicated eight years to private clinical practice, during which he treated those who could not afford his services for free. In 1740, he received the title of Doctor of Medicine from the University of Glasgow, and several years later, he obtained the necessary authorization to deliver a series of independent lectures on chemistry and medicine, which represented the first offering of its kind in all of Great Britain (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). In 1741, he married Anna Johnstone, the daughter of a clergyman residing in the western region of Scotland (Passmore, 2010). Anna, over the course of 46 years, provided a home for Cullen and their eleven children, passing away three years before her husband. In 1751, he was elected to occupy the chair of medicine at the University of Glasgow (Passmore, 2010). According to The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2024), in 1755, he returned to the University of Edinburgh, where he was appointed president of the institutes of medicine, a position he held until shortly before his death. In 1777, he was elected a member of the Royal Society of London (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). He was a pioneer in demonstrating the effects of cooling by evaporation, a topic he addressed in his work titled "On the Cold Produced by Evaporation of Fluids and Some Other Means of Producing Cold." In medicine, he taught that life was a function of nervous energy, and he believed that muscle was an extension of the nerve. Additionally, he organized a classification of diseases known as nosology, which was divided into four categories: pyrexias, or febrile diseases; neuroses, or nervous diseases; cachexias, diseases resulting from bad bodily habits; and local diseases. According to The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2024), this classification system, which he described in his work "Synopsis Nosologiae Methodicae," was based on the observation of the symptoms manifested by the diseases, which were used for diagnosis. He gained greater recognition for his innovative teaching methods and for his inspiring and direct lectures, which attracted medical students from all over the English-speaking world to the University of Edinburgh (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). He was one of the first to deliver his classes in English rather than in Latin, and his clinical lectures were conducted directly in the infirmary, using his own notes rather than relying on established texts. According to The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2024), his work "The First Lines of the Practice of Physic," published in 1777, was widely used as a textbook in Great Britain and the United States. Several of his students made significant contributions to science and medicine (The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, 2024). According to The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (2024), among the most prominent students were Joseph Black, a British chemist and physicist known for the rediscovery of carbon dioxide, known as "fixed air"; William Withering, an English physician celebrated for his discoveries on the use of extracts from the plant Digitalis purpurea, commonly known as foxglove; John Brown, a British physician who advocated the theory of "excitability" in medicine; and Benjamin Rush, an American physician and political leader, member of the Continental Congress and signer of the Declaration of Independence, also known for his advocacy for the humane treatment of people with mental illnesses. "Placebo" in the Lectures of William Cullen Until the end of the 18th century, the term "placebo" was used in a religious rather than medical context. This stems from an early Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible, specifically Psalm 116:9, which was interpreted as "Placebo Domine," meaning "I will please the Lord" (Kerr et al., 2010). In medieval Catholic Church, "placebo" referred to a funeral rite known as the Vespers for the Dead, which utilized Psalm 116. By the 13th century, the term acquired a derogatory and secular meaning, as mourners who were paid to attend funerals to "appease" the dead were said to be "singing placebos" in the form of insincere and easy praises. According to Kerr et al. (2010), it is noteworthy that in the 14th century, Chaucer, in the Canterbury Tales, named his obsequious and flattering courtier "Placebo." How did the word "placebo" come to signify a medical treatment intended to please a patient? The term "placebo" seems to have entered common medical use in the late 18th century (Kerr et al., 2010). While the 1775 edition of George Motherby’s New Medical Dictionary contained no reference to the term, the 1785 edition defines it as "a common method or medicine." The transition from the religious to the medical meaning of the word "placebo" can be understood through an analysis of William Cullen’s writings. He used regular medications as placebos, albeit in lower doses. According to Kerr et al. (2010), his lectures also reveal the medical and social context of placebo use in medical practice at the end of the 18th century. He used the term "placebo" at least twice in a series of lectures delivered in 1772 (Kerr et al., 2010). First, he described administering a placebo treatment to a patient named Mr. Gilchrist, whom he considered "absolutely incurable" and who was "awaiting his fate." In fact, his motivation for taking the case was more scientific than clinical, as he hoped to make observations and learn something from the patient’s death. Since he had no hope that the treatment could cure Mr. Gilchrist, he decided to use a placebo treatment to console him. In particular, according to Kerr et al. (2010), he chose to use what would now be called an "active placebo," as opposed to an "inactive" substance that he knew was physiologically inert, such as a bread pill. Thus, his definition of placebo treatment was not so much related to the substance itself, but to the intention with which it was prescribed (Kerr et al., 2010). He considered a "placebo" treatment to be one administered to please the patient, but without any curative intent or hope. For Cullen, whether mustard, an external treatment, or Dover's powder, an internal treatment composed of Ipecac and opium, it could be prescribed when circumstances made it "necessary," even when the clinician himself "did not have much faith" in the curative activity of the offered medicine. In this context, according to Kerr et al. (2010), Cullen illustrates his general principle of prescribing placebos that could be "useful" to the patient, using his knowledge of botany and materia medica to offer active compounds that might "tend" to be beneficial, even if they were offered without a specific hope of cure. Neurosis The term "neurosis" was formally introduced into Western medical literature by William Cullen in 1769, with the aim of referring to diseases that affected the senses and movement, without presenting idiopathic fever or local affliction (Sarudiansky, 2012). Thus, in line with Sarudiansky (2012), Cullen differentiated these diseases from other types of pathologies grouped under the categories of "fevers" or "pyrexias," which included pneumonia, gastroenteritis, hepatitis, nephritis, rheumatisms, chickenpox, malaria, and hives; "cachexias," a category that covered diseases such as syphilis, scurvy, and trachoma; and "locales," where conditions such as bulimia, polydipsia, pica, nymphomania, anorexia, nostalgia, aphonia, strabismus, contracture, and gonorrhea were grouped. William Cullen based his disease taxonomy on the methodology proposed by Thomas Sydenham (1624 - 1689) , and justified the introduction of the category of "neurosis" on the need to overcome the inaccuracy of the concept of "nervous disease" (Sarudiansky, 2012). Sarudiansky (2012) mentions that, according to Cullen, almost all morbid alterations of the body depended, to some extent, on the motions of the nervous system, so almost all diseases could, in that sense, be called "nervous." According to Sarudiansky (2010), within the group of neuroses, Cullen identified four main categories: "comatas," which involved a decrease in voluntary movements, accompanied by sleep or suspension of the senses, including here apoplexy and paralysis; "adynamiae," which involved a decrease in voluntary movements, with examples such as syncope, dyspepsia, hypochondriasis, and chlorosis; "spasmi" or spasms, characterized by irregular muscle movements, including tetanus, convulsions, chorea, raphania, epilepsy, palpitations, asthma, dyspnea, pertussis, pyrosis, colics, cholera, diarrhea, diabetes, hysteria, and hydrophobia; and finally "vesaniae," a disorder of the mental faculties of judgment, without fever or sleepiness, which covered conditions such as amentia, melancholy, mania, and onirodynia. From this classification, under the denomination of neurosis, a great diversity of clinical pictures was grouped, some of which, today, would be questionable to label under that term (Sarudiansky, 2012). Despite this, the distinction had a significant impact on the medicine of the time, even influencing one of the most prominent physicians in the development of psychological and psychiatric disciplines, such as Philippe Pinel (1745 - 1826). However, this definition of the term neurosis did not remain intact over the centuries. For example, Étienne Georget (1795 - 1828) redefined them as chronic and intermittent diseases that did not present post-mortem anatomical lesions and were not necessarily dangerous, but caused excessive suffering in those who suffered from them. Sarudiansky (2012) mentions that, for Georget, neuroses could include frequent headaches, madness, hypochondria, catalepsy, chorea, hysteria, nervous palpitations, asthma, gastralgia, and neuralgias. References Kerr, C. E., Milne, I., & Kaptchuk, T. J. (2010, mayo 26). William Cullen and a Missing Mind - Body Link in the Early History of Placebos . The James Lind Library. https://www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/william-cullen-and-a-missing-mind-body-link-in-the-early-history-of-placebos/ Passmore, R. (2010, mayo 26). William Cullen (1710-1790) . The James Lind Library. https://www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/william-cullen-1710-1790/ Sarudiansky, M. (2012). Neurosis y Ansiedad: Antecedentes Conceptuales de una Categoría Actual. Aacademica.org. https://www.aacademica.org/000-072/63.pdf The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. (2024). William Cullen. In Encyclopedia Britannica . Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Cullen

One of the most profound, significant, and long-lasting legacies of René Descartes' philosophy is the thesis that the mind and body are truly distinct entities, a claim now known as "mind-body dualism" (Skirry, n.d.). Descartes reached this conclusion after convincingly arguing that the nature of the mind is completely different from the nature of the body, implying that both could indeed exist independently of each other. According to Skirry (n.d.), this reasoning directly leads to the renowned problem of causal interaction between the mind and body, a topic that continues to be debated in contemporary philosophy. What is a Real Distinction? It is important to highlight that, for Descartes, the term "real distinction" is a technical concept denoting the distinction between two or more substances (Skirry, n.d.). In this context, a substance is defined as something that does not require any other entity to exist, while a mode refers to a quality or affection of that substance. Therefore, a mode needs a substance to exist, and not merely divine intervention. For example, the spherical shape is a mode belonging to an extended substance. According to Skirry (n.d.), a sphere requires an object that is extended in three dimensions to exist, as an unextended sphere cannot be conceived without logical contradiction. On the other hand, a substance can exist on its own without depending on any other entity (Skirry, n.d.). For instance, a stone can exist independently, meaning its existence does not depend on the presence of minds or other bodies, and this stone can exist without having a specific size or shape. According to Skirry (n.d.), this implies that God, if He wished, could create a world composed solely of this stone, further demonstrating that it is a "really distinct" substance from anything else, except for God. In summary, by arguing for the real distinction between the mind and the body, Descartes maintains that the mind is a substance that can be clearly and distinctly understood without recourse to any other substance, including bodies, and that God could create a mental substance independently of any other created substance (Skirry, n.d.). Thus, according to Skirry (n.d.), Descartes is ultimately defending the possibility that minds or souls could exist without the need for a physical body. Why Real Distinction? What significance might the argument that the mind and body could exist independently of each other have? What would be the reward for facing and overcoming each of the difficulties and enduring all the problems involved? For Descartes, the reward is twofold (Skirry, n.d.). The first reward has a religious nature, as it provides a rational basis for hope in the immortality of the soul. The second reward, according to Skirry (n.d.), has a more scientific orientation, as the complete absence of mentality in the nature of physical things proves fundamental for advancing Descartes' version of the new mechanistic physics. Religious Motivation In the "Letter to the Sorbonne," published at the beginning of his foundational work "Meditations on First Philosophy," Descartes expresses that his goal in demonstrating that the mind is distinct from the body is to refute those "irreligious people" who placed their faith solely in mathematics and did not believe in the immortality of the soul unless there was a mathematical demonstration to support it (Skirry, n.d.). Descartes goes on to explain that due to this lack of faith, such individuals did not seek to attain moral virtue, as they did not consider the perspective of an afterlife that would reward virtue and punish vice. However, since all arguments presented in the "Meditations" are as absolutely certain as geometric demonstrations, he believes these individuals will be compelled to accept them. Therefore, according to Skirry (n.d.), irreligious people will be forced to believe in the existence of an afterlife. It is important to remember that Descartes' conclusion is only that the mind or soul could exist without the body (Skirry, n.d.). He does not prove that the soul is truly immortal. In fact, in the "Synopsis of the Meditations," he claims to have demonstrated that the decay of the body does not imply, either logically or metaphysically, the destruction of the mind; an additional argument would be necessary to conclude that the mind truly survives the destruction of the body. This would require both "a complete account of physics" and an argument demonstrating that God cannot annihilate the mind. Nevertheless, according to Skirry (n.d.), although the argument of the real distinction does not go that far, it provides, according to René Descartes , a sufficient basis for religion, given that the hope for an afterlife is now based on logical reasoning rather than merely an article of faith. The Scientific Motivation The other reason for arguing that the mind and body could exist independently has a more scientific orientation and stems from Descartes' intention to replace final causal explanations in physics, which were favored by Scholastic-Aristotelian philosophers, with mechanistic explanations based on the model of geometry (Skirry, n.d.). Skirry (n.d.) mentions that while Thomas Aquinas is credited with laying the foundations of this Scholastic-Aristotelian philosophy dominant in Descartes' time, it is also relevant to consider that other thinkers, such as Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, and Francisco Suárez, who worked within this Aristotelian framework, diverged from Thomistic positions on various important issues. Indeed, during Descartes' time, Scholastic positions that diverged from Thomism were so widespread and subtle in their differences that classifying them was quite complicated (Skirry, n.d.). Despite this tangled array of positions, according to Skirry (n.d.), Descartes understood that a thesis lay at the core of the entire tradition: the doctrine that everything ultimately behaves according to some end or purpose. The Mind-Body Problem The famous mind-body problem originates from Descartes' conclusion that the mind and body are truly distinct (Skirry, n.d.). The complexity lies in the assertion that the respective natures of the mind and body are completely different and, in a way, opposed to each other. The mind is a completely immaterial entity, without extension, while the body is completely material, without the capacity for thought. This implies that each substance can only have its particular modes. For example, the mind can only have modes of understanding, will, and, in a sense, sensation, while the body can only have modes of size, shape, movement, and quantity. However, according to Skirry (n.d.), bodies cannot have modes of understanding or will, as these are not modes of extension; and minds cannot have modes of shape or movement, as these are not modes of thought. Descartes claims that matter is spatial and has the characteristic properties of linear dimensionality (Westphal, 2019). Things in space have, at a minimum, height, depth, and length, or one or more of these dimensions. Mental entities, in contrast, do not exhibit these characteristics. It is not possible to describe the mind as a two-by-two-by-two-inch cube or a two-inch radius sphere, located in a position in space within the skull. This is not because the mind has some form in space, but because it is not characterized by space at all. What characterizes the mind is its consciousness, unlike the brain, which has physical characteristics and occupies space. In simple terms, according to Westphal (2019), bodies remain in space, while minds do not, in the most direct sense that assigning linear dimensions and locations to them or their contents and activities is unintelligible. The problem arises because, in the case of voluntary bodily movements, contact between the mind and the body would be impossible due to the non-extended nature of the mind (Skirry, n.d.). This is because contact must be between two surfaces, but a surface is a mode of body. Consequently, the mind does not have a surface that can come into contact with the body and cause it to move. Therefore, according to Skirry (n.d.), if the mind and body are completely different, there is no intelligible explanation for voluntary bodily movement. For Descartes, the consequences of this problem are serious, as they undermine his claim to have a clear and distinct understanding of the mind without the body (Skirry, n.d.). This is because humans experience sensations and move some of their bodily members voluntarily, which requires a surface and contact. Since the mind must have a surface and capacity for movement, it must be extended, and thus, the mind and body are not completely different. This means that the "clear and distinct" ideas of mind and body as mutually exclusive natures must be incorrect to allow for mind-body causal interaction. Therefore, according to Skirry (n.d.), Descartes has not adequately demonstrated that the mind and body are truly distinct substances. Thus, his response to the mind-body problem is twofold (Skirry, n.d.). First, he maintains that it is necessary to explain the union between mind and body, but does not believe that bodily movements and sensations are caused by direct interaction between mind and body. Instead, he defends a version of the form-matter theory about the relationship between soul and body, based on Aristotelian ideas. Second, he argues that the question itself is based on the false assumption that two substances with different natures cannot influence each other. He asserts that the less real cannot cause something more real, as it lacks the reality sufficient to produce something more real than itself. According to Skirry (n.d.), this applies to substances and their modes in general: an infinite substance, like God, is the most real because it needs nothing else to exist; finite substances require the activity of God to exist; and modes are the least real because they depend on a substance and the infinite substance to exist. Thus, according to this principle, a mode cannot cause the existence of a substance, as modes are less real than finite substances (Skirry, n.d.). Similarly, a created finite substance cannot cause the existence of an infinite substance. However, a finite substance can cause the existence of another finite substance or a mode. Therefore, Descartes' argument could be that the completely diverse natures of the mind and body do not violate this causal principle, as both are finite substances causing the existence of modes in some other finite substance. According to Skirry (n.d.), this also suggests that the "activity" of the mind on the body does not require contact and movement, indicating that the mind and body do not maintain a mechanistic causal relationship. References Skirry, J. (s.f.) Descartes, Rene . Iep.utm.edu . Recuperado 11 November 2021, a partir de https://iep.utm.edu/descarte/ Skirry, J. (s.f.). Descartes, Rene: Mind-Body Distinction | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy . Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Recuperado 9 de diciembre de 2021, de https://iep.utm.edu/descmind/ Westphal, J. (2019). Descartes and the Discovery of the Mind-Body Problem . The MIT Press Reader. Recuperado 9 de diciembre de 2021, de https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/discovery-mind-body-problem/

Recognized as the greatest taxonomist of all time, Carl von Linné dedicated his life to the meticulous exploration of his homeland, acting as a true discoverer within the confines of his own Scandinavian nation (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Despite coming from a family of Lutheran pastors, the young Linné chose to diverge from the family tradition, directing his passion and curiosity toward the vast world of natural sciences. With the same determination and wonder that characterized the explorers of the New World, Montagud Rubio (2020) notes that Linné embarked on a mission of discovery and cataloging that would lead him to traverse the intricate and shadowy forests of his country. Biography Carl Nilsson Linnæus (1707 - 1778), later known as Carl von Linné or Carolus Linnaeus, was born on May 23, 1707, in Råshult, Sweden, into a family with religious roots and an innate passion for botany (Montagud Rubio, 2020). His father, Nils Ingemarsson, a Lutheran pastor with a love for plants, and his mother, Christina Brodersonia, daughter of a Protestant pastor, laid the groundwork for the future naturalist who would revolutionize the classification of living beings. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), at the early age of two, the family moved to Stenbronhult, a region in southern Sweden characterized by its lush vegetation and diverse species, where he began to cultivate his fascination with the natural world around him. In this environment, his father took on the responsibility of maintaining the local church garden, introducing plants from other regions and passing on his love for botany to his son (Montagud Rubio, 2020). This passion became his cornerstone, and from a young age, he showed an interest in studying plants and animals. In 1716, he began his Latin studies at the Vaxjö Cathedral, laying the linguistic foundations that would later allow him to delve deeper into scientific knowledge, as Latin was the vehicle for transmitting the highest knowledge. During his education, he met Johan Rothman, a botanist who introduced him to Tournefort's classification system, which organized plants according to the corolla of their flowers. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), this encounter, along with exposure to Sébastien Vaillant's work on plant reproduction and access to Herman Boerhaave's "Institutiones Medicae," laid the foundation for his scientific thinking. Despite coming from a religious family, he showed no inclination toward an ecclesiastical vocation, preferring to dedicate his life to the study of natural sciences (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In 1727, he began studying medicine at the University of Lund, though this discipline did not interest him as much as the search and classification of insects and plants. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), his passion for nature caught the attention of Kilian Strobaeus, a local scholar who allowed him access to his library, an experience that would prove fundamental in his training and reinforce his scientific vocation. After a year at the University of Lund, he was transferred to the University of Uppsala, the leading educational center in Sweden at the time (Montagud Rubio, 2020). To support himself financially, he began teaching botany, which not only allowed him to make a living but also deepened his knowledge. Despite his financial limitations, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he managed to fund his first botanical and ethnological expedition to Lapland in 1731, an adventure he undertook with limited resources but with overflowing enthusiasm to discover and catalog new species. This expedition to Lapland, a region encompassing the north of present-day Norway, Sweden, and Finland, allowed him to discover and catalog hundreds of species unknown to science (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Although he had not left his native country, he felt like an explorer of the New World, dedicating himself to naming and classifying every animal or plant specimen he encountered. Additionally, he studied the Saami cultures of the region, demonstrating skills as a naturalist and anthropologist. The findings and observations made during this expedition laid the groundwork for one of his most important works: "Flora Lapponica," a publication that would arouse the interest of the Swedish and European scientific community. Furthermore, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), his experiences in Lapland motivated him to study minerals more thoroughly and propose a classification system for rocks and crystals, thus expanding his field of study beyond botany and zoology. Encouraged by the success of his first expedition, he organized a second one in 1734, this time accompanied by ten volunteers, to study the flora of the Dalarna region in central Sweden (Montagud Rubio, 2020). This expedition, funded by the regional governor, resulted in the publication of "Iter Dalecarlicum." In 1735, he met the family of Dr. Johan Moraeus and fell in love with his daughter Sara Lisa. Although he obtained permission to marry her, Dr. Moraeus required him to complete his medical studies. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), this requirement led him to travel to Holland in the spring of 1735 to complete his studies at the University of Harderwijk, where he earned his doctorate with a thesis on the origins of malaria titled "Febrium Inttermitentium Causa." Subsequently, he moved to Leiden, where he published several of his works, including "Flora Lapponica" and "Systema Naturae" (Montagud Rubio, 2020). During his stay in the Netherlands, he met several Dutch botanists such as Jan Frederik Gronovius and George Clifford III, who commissioned him to reorganize and maintain his botanical garden, an experience that led to the work "Hortus Cliffortianus." In the following years, Linnaeus published a series of works that laid the foundation for his plant classification system, using the characteristics of plant reproductive organs as criteria. These works include "Fundamenta Botanica," "Bibliotheca Botanica," "Critica Botanica," "Genera Plantarum," and "Classes Plantarum." In these publications, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he presented his plant classification method based on the characteristics of reproductive organs, marking a turning point in global botany. In 1736, he traveled to Oxford and met several English naturalists, including J.J. Dillenius (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Taking advantage of his time in Europe, he also visited France, where he became the eighth foreign member of the Paris Academy of Sciences. These trips not only allowed him to exchange plant and animal specimens but also to obtain seeds to enrich the multiple botanical gardens he had founded. Montagud Rubio (2020) mentions that, upon returning to Sweden in 1738, he combined his medical practice with the study and specialization in the treatment of syphilis, which earned him recognition at the University of Uppsala for his outstanding work in medicine, in addition to receiving the important task of reorganizing the botanical garden of the institution, an opportunity he took to apply his now-famous binomial taxonomic system. The year 1739 marked a milestone in his career, as he spearheaded the creation of the Stockholm Academy of Sciences, becoming its first president, and two years later, in 1741, he was appointed professor of practical medicine at the University of Uppsala, and the following year, he assumed the chair of botany, dietetics, and materia medica, titles that more accurately reflected his knowledge (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Under his leadership, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), the University of Uppsala became the epicenter of botanical study in Europe, and his scientific findings resonated so strongly in Swedish society that the political group known as the "hattar" ("hats" in Swedish) began to promote and support the expeditions led by the naturalist, in the context of imperial expansion and Sweden's search for commercial independence from the rest of Europe. The Swedish bourgeoisie, recognizing the economic potential of new trade routes, began to support expeditions aimed at discovering resource-rich regions, coinciding with Linnaeus's rise to an influential position in the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Taking advantage of his position, he established connections with the Swedish East India Company, seeking the financial support necessary to organize botanical expeditions to unexplored regions, with the goal of documenting not only Sweden's flora and fauna but also those of Europe and ultimately the entire world. In his quest to achieve this goal, Montagud Rubio (2020) mentions that Linnaeus decided to recruit a group of young students, whom he called "apostles," to assist him in his expeditions, visiting both known and undiscovered places, under his own direction or that of other explorers like James Cook. Despite the commercial and scientific success they achieved, Linnaeus's expeditions were fraught with dangers, resulting in the loss of many of the young "apostles," who succumbed to death or madness due to the extreme conditions they faced in unknown territories in South America or Asia (Montagud Rubio, 2020). After years of tireless exploratory and scientific work, he returned to Sweden to dedicate his final years to teaching as a professor of medicine and botany, settling in 1758 in a residence near Hammarby. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), in recognition of his scientific merits and his contribution to establishing Sweden as a renowned scientific center in Europe, he was granted a noble title in 1762, at which point he officially adopted the name Carl von Linné. However, the decline of this scientist began in the early 1770s, when his strength started to wane (Montagud Rubio, 2020). The spring of 1774 marked a turning point in his life when he suffered a stroke from which, although he recovered, left significant sequelae. Over time, he experienced progressive paralysis and memory loss, to the point of being unable to recognize even the most common and simple plants. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), Carl von Linné died on January 10, 1778, at the age of 70, leaving a scientific legacy that would endure through the centuries and lay the foundation for the systematic study of biodiversity worldwide. The Linnaean System in Taxonomy The binomial system for species classification, attributed to Carl Linnaeus, represents a fundamental contribution to the field of botanical taxonomy. Its development and evolution spanned several decades, profoundly transforming the way naturalists identify and categorize plant and animal species (Montagud Rubio, 2020). According to Montagud Rubio (2020), Linnaeus's observations on plant morphology, particularly focusing on the reproductive organs of flowering species, laid the foundation for creating a botanical classification system. As the naturalist discovered and described new species, the system was refined and adapted to more accurately reflect natural reality. Although Linnaeus initially held the belief in the immutability of species since Creation, his perspective evolved towards a more dynamic view, considering the possibility that new "species" could originate through processes such as hybridization and cross-pollination (Montagud Rubio, 2020). His work "Species Plantarum," published in 1753, represents the consolidation of his binomial system for plant classification, based on theoretical similarities between species and the distinctive characteristics of each variety, managing to name around 8,000 plant species (Montagud Rubio, 2020). According to Sadurní (2022), the importance of this system for botanical taxonomy lies in its ability to provide a more efficient and accessible plant identification method, which was valuable for naturalists exploring new territories in Africa and Oceania, constantly facing the discovery of unknown species. The binomial nomenclature proposed by Linnaeus stands as an effective method for assigning "first and last names" to all living beings, thus simplifying a system that, before its implementation, was more complex and confusing (Sadurní, 2022). To illustrate the magnitude of the change brought by this system, consider the case of the wild rose, previously known by various names such as "Rosa sylvestris inodora seu canina" or "Rosa sylvestris alba cum rubore" by different botanists. Linnaeus, according to Sadurní (2022), in his effort to unify criteria, established that this plant should be universally known as Rosa canina, applying a specific format: the genus name (Rosa) written in uppercase and italicized, followed by the species name (canina) in lowercase and italicized. Despite being a revolutionary idea for its time, the system has undergone refinements and adjustments over the past three centuries, adapting to advances in taxonomic knowledge (Montagud Rubio, 2020). A modern example of this system's application is the scientific naming of the wolf as "Canis lupus," where "Canis" represents the genus shared with other species like the fox, and "lupus" identifies the specific species within that genus. The taxonomic classification of the wolf, following the established hierarchical structure, is broken down as follows: Species (Canis lupus), Genus (Canis), Family (Canidae), Order (Carnivora), Class (Mammalia), Subphylum (Vertebrata), Phylum (Chordata), and Kingdom (Animalia). According to Montagud Rubio (2020), this taxonomic pyramid allows the wolf to be placed in the broader context of the animal kingdom and also facilitates understanding of its evolutionary relationships with other species. The Foundation for Evolution Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which explains how species change over time in response to their environment and other living organisms, found its basis in the work of Carl Linnaeus, the father of taxonomy. Although Linnaeus, a man of the 18th century and contemporary of King Charles III, could never have imagined such influence on the future of biology (Sánchez, 2018). Sánchez (2018) notes that, despite Linnaeus's view of species as immutable creations of God with no possibility of evolution, his hierarchical classification system laid the groundwork for the later development of evolutionary theory. Today, advancements in genetics allow for the classification of living organisms using DNA barcodes, representing a qualitative leap in modern taxonomy (Sánchez, 2018). However, according to Sánchez (2018), the binomial nomenclature system established by Linnaeus remains relevant and important, as it provides biological entities with a tangible identity and a defined place in the classification of living beings, preventing them from becoming mere theoretical abstractions. References Montagud Rubio, N. (2020, septiembre 25). Carl von Linné: Biografía de Este Naturalista Sueco . Psicología y Mente. https://psicologiaymente.com/biografias/carl-von-linne Sadurní, J. M. (2022, mayo 23). Carlos Linneo, el Botánico que Ordenó la Naturaleza. National Geographic . https://historia.nationalgeographic.com.es/a/carlos-linneo-botanico-que-ordeno-naturaleza_18012 Sánchez, G. L. (2018, enero 9). Linneo, el «Gran Hombre» que le Puso Nombre y Apellidos a Animales y Plantas . ABC.es. https://www.abc.es/ciencia/abci-linneo-gran-hombre-puso-nombre-y-apellidos-animales-y-plantas-201801092147_noticia.html?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.es%2Fciencia%2Fabci-linneo-gran-hombre-puso-nombre-y-apellidos-animales-y-plantas-201801092147_noticia.html

François - Marie Arouet (1694 - 1778), better known by his pseudonym Voltaire, is a prominent Enlightenment thinker (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Despite his plebeian but comfortable background, Voltaire criticized the class society of his time, as well as the Catholic Church and various injustices. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), he defended freedom and religious tolerance, maintaining that all men are equal. Biography François-Marie Arouet, globally known as Voltaire, was born in the city of Paris, specifically in Châtenay-Malabry, on November 21, 1694 (Montagud Rubio, 2020; Cartwright, 2023). Coming from a prominent family, he was the son of François Arouet, a notary who served as counselor to the king and treasurer of the Chamber of Accounts of Paris, and Marie Marguerite d’Aumard, who passed away when he was seven years old (Montagud Rubio, 2020). According to Montagud Rubio (2020), the Arouet family was large, with five children, but only three, including Voltaire, survived into adulthood; his siblings Armand, who would become a lawyer in the Parliament of Paris, and Marie. He received his education at the Jesuit college Louis-le-Grand, from 1704 to 1711, during the reign of Louis XIV (Montagud Rubio, 2020). There, he developed a friendship with the brothers René-Louis and Marc-Pierre Anderson, who would later hold ministerial roles. At the age of twelve, he already showed literary talent by writing the tragedy "Amulius and Numitor," of which only fragments remain published in the 19th century. Despite starting legal studies between 1711 and 1713, he abandoned the career to focus on literature. Corresponding to Montagud Rubio (2020), during this time, his godfather, the Abbot of Châteauneuf, introduced him to the Temple Society, a libertine circle, and around the same period, he inherited a large sum from the elderly courtesan Ninon de Lenclos, intended for purchasing books. In 1713, he worked as a secretary at the French embassy in The Hague, where he composed his "Ode on the Misfortunes of Time" (Montagud Rubio, 2020). However, he was soon sent back to Paris due to his relationship with Catherine Olympe Dunoyer, known as "Pimpette." During this period, he began writing his tragedy "Oedipus," which would not be published until 1718, and his poem "La Henriade." From 1714, he worked as a clerk in a notary's office. Despite his plebeian origins, he frequented Parisian salons and gatherings with the Duchess of Maine at the Château de Sceaux, where he had the opportunity to interact with celebrities and prominent libertine nobles of the time. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), during this time, he composed two scandalous poems, "Le Bourbier" and "L’Anti-Giton," reminiscent of the erotic verse tales of "La Fontaine." When Louis XIV died in 1715, the Duke of Orléans assumed the regency (Montagud Rubio, 2020). At this time, Voltaire dared to write a satire against the incestuous loves between the duke and his daughter, the Duchess of Berry. As a consequence of his audacity, he was imprisoned in the Bastille, serving his sentence from May 1717 to April 1718. Upon his release, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he was exiled to his ancestral home in Châtenay-Malabry, adopting the name by which he would be known: Voltaire. The late 1710s and early 1720s were a highly prolific period for him (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In 1718, he premiered his tragedy "Oedipus." In 1720, he presented "Artemira," and the following year, he offered the manuscript of his epic "La Henriade" to the regent, publishing it under the title "Poème de la Ligue" in 1723. This work was dedicated to King Henry IV of France, whose glory and deeds are the central theme. The success of this work motivated him to begin writing his "Essay on Civil Wars." In 1722, following the death of his father, who left him a substantial inheritance, he traveled to Holland accompanied by the Countess of Rupelmonde. Despite this, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he did not cease to have other romantic entanglements, such as his relationship with the Marquise de Bernières a year later. In 1724, he premiered "Mariana" and, despite health problems, presented "The Indiscreet" the following year (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In 1725, he was invited to the wedding of King Louis XV, gaining presence at the French Court. However, in 1726, he became embroiled in a scandal with the Chevalier De Rohan, who ordered him beaten without accepting a traditional duel, considering him a commoner. Despite this, he did not back down and searched all over Paris to demand a duel. Although his demands were just, high society disapproved of a commoner challenging an aristocrat. As a result, he was imprisoned in the Bastille, this time for only two weeks. He was released under the condition of exile to Great Britain, where he spent two and a half years. These events taught him that despite initially being welcomed among the nobles, he would never cease to be seen as a commoner by them. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), this experience turned him into an advocate for the right to universal justice. During his exile, he decided to settle in London, where he was welcomed by Lord Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In his despair, he even sought help from his brother, Armand Arouet, who did not respond. In England, he immersed himself in Newtonian science, empiricist philosophy, and English political institutions. He learned English and became an Anglophile, considering the English as the wisest and freest people of the time. Although he did not have the opportunity to meet Isaac Newton , he attended his funeral in 1727 at Westminster Abbey. In London, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he was also struck by religious tolerance and the variety of beliefs among the English. He also deeply admired Shakespeare, translating Hamlet's monologue. During this period, he published his first major English works: "Essay on Civil War" and "Essay on Epic Poetry" (Montagud Rubio, 2020). He met prominent British figures of the time, such as the deist Samuel Clarke, the philosophical poet Alexander Pope, the satirist Jonathan Swift, and John Locke , whose work he admired. In 1729, he returned to France with three goals: to get rich quickly, to promote tolerance and combat fanaticism, and to spread Newton's scientific thought and Locke's political ideas. To this end, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he published in French his "Philosophical or English Letters," a text that highlighted the supposedly backward and intolerant French society. Voltaire desired wealth and saw an opportunity in the project of the mathematician Charles Marie de la Condamine, who discovered a flaw in the lottery system of the French finance minister, Michel Robert Le Pelletier-Desforts (Montagud Rubio, 2020). De la Condamine found a way to exploit the system by buying bonds that allowed him to accumulate almost all the lottery numbers. Surprisingly, the trick worked for both, and despite the lawsuit filed by the minister, they did not break any laws and won a considerable sum of money. However, these gains were small compared to the wealth Voltaire would accumulate. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), he increased his fortune by acquiring American silver in Cádiz and speculating in various financial operations, becoming one of France's main rentiers. In 1731, he published his work "History of Charles XII," anticipating issues and themes that he would develop in his "Philosophical Letters" (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In this work, he defended religious tolerance and ideological freedom, inspired by English permissiveness and Anglo-Saxon secularism, and accused Christianity of being the root of dogmatic fanaticism. Although the government withdrew the "History of Charles XII" due to its content, it continued to circulate clandestinely. In 1732, he achieved his greatest theatrical success with "Zaïre," a tragedy he wrote in just three weeks. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), in 1733 he published "The Temple of Taste," coinciding with the beginning of his profound relationship with the mathematician and physicist Madame Émilie du Châtelet. In 1734, his "Philosophical Letters" were condemned, and his arrest was ordered (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Anticipating his arrest, he took refuge in the castle of Marquise du Châtelet in Cirey-sur-Blaise, Champagne. From this moment on, he established a romantic relationship with the marquise, which would last sixteen years, during which they worked on the work "The Philosophy of Newton," summarizing in French the physics of the English genius. He would remain in this retreat for ten years, dedicated to literature. During his stay, he took the opportunity to settle his financial affairs, concluded his lawsuits, and offered to restore the castle, adding a gallery and providing it with a cabinet for the marquise's physics experiments. Similarly, he built a library of 21,000 volumes, personally selected. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), these were austere years for Voltaire, dedicated to writing and studying alongside the marquise. During this period, he resumed his dramatic career by writing "Adélaïde du Guesclin," the first classical play to depart from Greco-Latin themes and delve into French history (Montagud Rubio, 2020). He later penned "La Muerte de César," "Alzira o los Americanos," and "El Fanatismo o Mahoma." In 1741, he met Felipe Stanhope de Chesterfield in Belgium, inspiring him to write "Los Oídos del Conde de Chesterfield y el Capellán Gudman." In 1742, his work "El Fanatismo o Mahoma" was banned. He traveled to Berlin, where he was appointed an academician, historiographer, and Knight of the Royal Chamber. After a sixteen-year relationship, Marquise du Châtelet fell in love with poet Jean-François de Saint-Lambert. Voltaire discovered them and, though furious, accepted the situation. The Marquise became pregnant but died in 1749 due to childbirth complications. Montagud Rubio (2020) mentions that devastated, he accepted Frederick II of Prussia's invitation to Berlin, angering King Louis XV. In 1751, he published the first complete version of "El Siglo de Luis XIV" and followed with "Micromegas" in 1752 (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Due to disputes with Frederick II, especially over his clash with Berlin Academy President, materialist philosopher Maupertuis, Voltaire fled Prussia in 1753. He was arrested in Frankfurt by a royal agent and suffered several humiliations before returning to France. He was not well-received by King Louis XV, leading him to seek refuge in Switzerland, at a mansion and estate, Les Délices, near Geneva. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), the 1755 Lisbon earthquake deeply affected him, prompting reflections on the senselessness of history and the nature of evil, leading to the publication of "Poem on the Lisbon Disaster." Around this time, he began collaborations with Diderot and D'Alembert's Encyclopedia, publishing seven volumes of "Ensayos Sobre la Historia General y Sobre las Costumbres y el Espíritu de las Naciones" in 1756 and "Historia del Imperio de Rusia Bajo Pedro el Grande" in 1759, focusing not only on human history but also on artistic manifestations of the human spirit, customs, social institutions, and religions (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In 1758, he acquired a property in Ferney, France, near the Swiss border, for quick escape if needed. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), he lived there for eighteen years, hosting numerous European intellectuals, exchanging about 40,000 letters, often ending with his phrase "Écrasez l'Infâme." In 1763, he wrote his "Tratado Sobre la Tolerancia" and completed his "Diccionario Filosófico" the following year (Montagud Rubio, 2020). During this period, he anonymously published a pamphlet against Jean-Jacques Rousseau titled "El Sentimiento de los Ciudadanos." Recognized as an influential figure in public discourse, he participated in various legal processes, including the case of Jean Calas, which contributed to the abolition of judicial torture in France and other European countries, laying the groundwork for modern human rights. In 1773, at an advanced age, he fell seriously ill. Despite this, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he managed to publish "Historia de Jenni" in 1775 and draft his will in 1776, aware that the end was near. In 1778, he returned to Paris, where he was warmly received and premiered his play "Irene," fascinating the public (Montagud Rubio, 2020). During this time, he received numerous visitors to debate philosophical and intellectual issues. His health deteriorated progressively, and he passed away on May 30, 1778, at the age of 83, initially buried at the Benedictine monastery of Scellières near Troyes. According to Cartwright (2023), in 1791, his remains were transferred to the Panthéon in Paris in a ceremony led by revolutionaries of the French Revolution, an ironic act given Voltaire's potential disdain for the trial and execution of Louis XVI of France two years later. Enlightenment Philosophy His philosophical legacy is based on how he practiced philosophy and the goals that guided his activities, rather than on specific doctrines or original ideas (Shank, 2022). Voltaire's particular philosophical positions and his use of broader philosophical campaigns to defend certain understandings and criticize others shaped what is known as Voltaire's Enlightenment philosophy. This philosophy is characterized by a set of intellectual stances and orientations rather than rigorously defended systematic doctrines. However, as Shank (2022) notes, others found in Voltaire both a model of the well-oriented philosopher and a set of philosophical positions appropriate to this stance. According to Shank (2022), each aspect of this equation was crucial in defining the Enlightenment philosophy that Voltaire came to personify. Freedom Voltaire's ideas on freedom are central to his thought, influencing both his social activism and his foray into systematic philosophy (Shank, 2022). In 1734, in response to the scandals sparked by the "Lettres Philosophiques," he authored a "Traité de Metaphysique." This work tackled the concept of freedom, a central theme in the European philosophical discussions of the time, referencing thinkers like Hobbes and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz while exploring issues of materialism, determinism, and providential purpose, essential for deists like John Toland and Anthony Collins. Corresponding to Shank (2022), the debate between Samuel Clarke and Leibniz on Newtonian natural philosophy also influenced Voltaire, who examined human existence and ethics in a universe governed by rational and impersonal laws. In his work, he positioned himself between the determinism of rationalist materialists and the voluntarism of contemporary Christian natural theologians, arguing that humans are not mere machines but possess free will (Shank, 2022). However, humans are also natural beings governed by inexorable natural laws, and his ethics anchored right action in a self with the natural light of reason, distancing him from radical deists and leading to an elitist understanding of religion's role in society. He believed that those capable of understanding their own reason could find the right course of action independently. However, as many were incapable of such self-awareness and self-control, religion was a necessary guarantor of social order. According to Shank (2022), this stance distanced him from republican politics, reaffirming his position as a liberal and reformist monarchist, skeptical of republican and democratic ideas. In the "Lettres Philosophiques," he adopted a more radical stance regarding human determinism, especially when discussing Locke's materialist reading of the soul, popular in the radical philosophical discourse of the time (Shank, 2022). Locke's view sparked controversy and was also reflected in Diderot and d'Alembert's "Encyclopédie," as well as his own "Dictionnaire Philosophique." He also defined his own understanding of the soul in similar terms in his own "Dictionnaire philosophique." While Voltaire publicly defended controversial views, his private correspondence revealed a more nuanced understanding of his positions. In these cases, according to Shank (2022), Voltaire was often seen not so much defending a reasoned position on a complex philosophical issue as adopting a political stance designed to affirm his conviction that freedom of expression, regardless of the topic, is sacred and cannot be violated. Voltaire never actually said, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (Shank, 2022). However, the myth associating this dictum with his name remains powerful, and his legacy is still invoked through the re-declaration of this statement that he never actually made. Through his correspondence and controversial writings, Voltaire promoted a vision of intellectual and civil freedom, influencing modern libertarian ideas. According to Shank (2022), although he did not write a specific treatise on this topic, his influence is evident in arguments such as Kant's in "What is Enlightenment?", which emphasizes the importance of free and public use of critical reason, an idea clearly influenced by Voltaire. Hedonism He grounded his hedonistic morality in the notion of freedom, a key characteristic of his Enlightenment philosophy (Shank, 2022). This was expressed in his salacious poetry, which included eroticism and sexual innuendos, reflecting libertinism in his life. Additionally, he contributed to philosophical libertinism and hedonism by celebrating moral freedom through sexual freedom. His libertine writings and behaviors were used by detractors to accuse him of subversion and social disorder. Nevertheless, he defended libertinism, providing a positive philosophical program and exerting considerable influence. He promoted a happy libertine identity and used philosophical reason to defend this stance, employing poetry and witty prose. He excelled in spreading Enlightenment ideals, promoting a morality that valued personal pleasure and an ethic of maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. Furthermore, according to Shank (2022), he attacked traditional Christian asceticism, especially priestly celibacy and moral codes of sexual restraint and bodily self-denial. His hedonistic ethics also influenced liberal political economy during the Enlightenment, arguing that luxury and the pursuit of private pleasure could benefit the public. In the 1730s, he wrote the poem "Le Mondain," praising the hedonistic life as positive for society, in contrast to traditional Christian views. In his "Essay on the Manners," alongside other Enlightenment thinkers, he celebrated the role of commerce and material acquisition in the progress of civilization. While not an economic theorist like Adam Smith, Voltaire significantly contributed to philosophical discussions that placed freedom and hedonism at the center of intellectual thought in his time. He celebrated commerce and material acquisition as drivers of civilizational progress. According to Shank (2022), personal and philosophical freedom, a major theme in Voltaire's philosophy, intertwines with skepticism and empirical science as antidotes to pernicious dogmatism and authority. Skepticism His skepticism derived from the neopyrrhonian revival of the Renaissance, influenced by Montaigne, whose essays fused doubt with the positive construction of a self based on philosophical skepticism (Shank, 2022). Pierre Bayle also significantly influenced Voltaire, who insisted on the value of skepticism as a complete and final philosophical stance in its own right. He criticized the philosophical trends of Descartes, whom Voltaire argued began with skepticism but abandoned it in favor of positive philosophical projects. According to Shank (2022), he called these projects "philosophical romances," arguing they are fictions rather than philosophy and that often the best philosophical explanation is to offer none. This skepticism defended freedom, challenging any authority, even the sacred (Shank, 2022). Voltaire's views on religion, as revealed in his private writings, are complex, and according to these texts, it would be wrong to label Voltaire as atheist, or even as anti-Christian, as long as a broad understanding of what Christianity implies is accepted. However, he maintained a firm stance against the authority of the church and clergy. For similar reasons, he also became hostile towards the sacred mysteries that underpinned the authority of the Old Regime. In these cases, according to Shank (2022), Voltaire's skepticism served to support his libertarian convictions by challenging these "superstitions" and authority through critical reason. He also criticized philosophical figures such as René Descartes , Malebranche, and Leibniz, emphasizing that his defense of skepticism and freedom was the main driving force, rather than opposition to religion (Shank, 2022). From this perspective, Voltaire can be fruitfully compared to Socrates, who also rejected systematic philosophical positions and admitted his ignorance. Both defined philosophy as a tool to liberate individuals from authoritarian dogmatism and irrational prejudices. However, while Socrates promoted rigorous dialectics, Voltaire saw this rationalism as the core of the dogmatism it sought to overcome. According to Shank (2022), Voltaire often used satire and wit to discredit philosophical dialectics, considering these methods essential to undermining the sophistry that supported traditional philosophy. Newtonian Empirical Science Voltaire, in opposition to rigorous skepticism and sophistical knowledge, proposed careful empirical science as a solution (Shank, 2022). Influenced by Newtonianism, Voltaire criticized imaginative philosophical romances, a critique that originated among English and Dutch Newtonians, many of whom were French Huguenot expatriates. In his "Principia Mathematica," Newton mathematically and empirically described the behavior of celestial and terrestrial bodies. When questioned about how bodies acted according to his mathematical and empirical demonstrations, Newton responded, "I do not feign hypotheses." However, according to Shank (2022), Newton's primary philosophical innovation challenged this epistemological foundation. Newton's position, especially defended by Voltaire, was central to the 18th-century philosophical shift (Shank, 2022). Newtonian epistemology relied on a new skepticism towards rationalist a priori narratives and on asserting empirical facts as valid understanding. 17th-century European natural philosophers dismissed Aristotle's metaphysics and physics, introducing a new mechanical causality that explained the world through mechanisms of inert matter. This approach led to the vortical account of celestial mechanics, where bodies swam in an ethereal sea that pushed and pulled objects. Shank (2022) mentions that, although the ethereal sea and other agents of the integral mechanical cosmos could not be observed, rationality dictated their existence to avoid reverting to hidden causes and Aristotelian teleological principles. Discovering these mechanisms and their functioning was the task of 17th-century mechanical natural philosophy, with figures such as Descartes, Huygens, and Leibniz. Newton pointed natural philosophy in a new direction (Shank, 2022). Newton steered natural philosophy towards a mathematical analysis based on empirical facts, criticizing both Aristotelian philosophy and vortical mechanics for not strictly adhering to empirical facts. Newtonians argued that natural philosophy should focus on what is empirically demonstrable rather than rational imaginations. Furthermore, they argued that accepting empirical truth, though harsh, was not a philosophical failure but a display of rigor. According to Shank (2022), such epistemological battles intensified with Newton's theory of universal gravitation, which mathematically described the attraction between bodies based on their masses and distance between them. In the 18th century, the mathematical and empirical description of moving bodies sparked philosophical debates. Critics like Leibniz argued that the mathematical description alone was insufficient to explain gravity. Newton's defenders, however, asserted that phenomenal descriptions were adequate as long as they were based on empirical facts. Although explanatory facts about gravity had not been established, they accepted Newton's theory. According to Shank (2022), Voltaire also participated in these debates, promoting Newtonian epistemology in France and Europe. Both Hume and Voltaire shared skepticism towards rationalist philosophy and adopted the Newtonian criterion that considered empirical facts as the basis of philosophical truth (Shank, 2022). However, Hume's goal remained within traditional philosophy, and his contribution extended skepticism to the point of denying the viability of transcendental philosophy itself. This argument would awaken Kant's dogmatic slumbers and lead to the reconstitution of transcendental philosophy in new terms, but Voltaire had different fish to fry. According to Shank (2022), his attachment was to the new Newtonian empirical scientists, and although he himself was never more than a dilettante scientist, his devotion to this form of natural inquiry made him in some respects the leading philosophical defender and ideologue of the new empirical-scientific conception of philosophy that Newton initiated. Voltaire, along with other 18th-century Newtonian thinkers, dedicated himself to defending empirical science as an alternative to traditional natural philosophy (Shank, 2022). Unlike Hume, Voltaire promoted empirical induction and experimental reasoning as the epistemological basis of modern enlightened philosophy. In his work "Candide," Voltaire criticized philosophical optimism, arguing that it resulted from disconnecting reason from empirical facts. As an alternative, he proposed a life focused on simple tasks with practical and useful purposes, aligning with the utilitarian discourse of the Newtonians. His public campaigns, including promoting inoculation against smallpox in his "Lettres philosophiques," were based on empirical facts to combat prejudices and pre-established understandings. According to Shank (2022), this approach reflected the profound influence of Newtonianism on his philosophy. Towards Metaphysics-Free Science Voltaire played a crucial role in the relationship between science and philosophy during the Enlightenment, criticizing metaphysics and advocating for its removal from science (Shank, 2022). At the heart of Newtonian innovations in natural philosophy was the argument that questions of the body per se were irrelevant or distracted from a well-focused natural science (Shank, 2022). Following Newton's ideas, Voltaire argued that physics should focus on measurable empirical effects, avoiding speculations about the invisible. According to Shank (2022), this removal of metaphysics from physics was fundamental to the overall Newtonian stance towards science, but no one fought more vigorously for it, or did more to clarify the distinction and give it a public hearing than Voltaire. In the 1740s, Voltaire opposed Du Châtelet's efforts to reconcile Leibnizian metaphysics with Newtonian physics (Shank, 2022). During the same period, he published "Newton's Metaphysics," celebrating the absence of metaphysical speculations in Newton's work. He also accused Leibniz of being misled by his zeal to make metaphysics the basis of physics. According to Shank (2022), in the definitive 1745 edition of his "Éléments de la Philosophie de Newton," Voltaire also appended his treatise on Newton's metaphysics as the introduction to the book, thus framing his own understanding of the relationship between metaphysics and empirical science in direct opposition to Châtelet's Leibnizian understanding. During the 1750s, Voltaire criticized Maupertuis for his turn towards metaphysical approaches in physics, vigorously defending the separation between metaphysical reasoning and scientific work (Shank, 2022). His approach significantly contributed to two subsequent philosophical trends: Kant's transcendental philosophy and the marginalization of metaphysics through philosophical positivism. Furthermore, his legacy consolidated the perception of a link between positivist science and secularization. Thus, according to Shank (2022), Voltaire must be recognized as the pioneer of a philosophical tradition extending from him to Auguste Comte and Charles Darwin, and then to Karl Popper and Richard Dawkins in the 20th century. The Pseudonym "Voltaire" The origin of the pseudonym "Voltaire," adopted by François-Marie Arouet in 1717, is the subject of multiple theories (Montagud Rubio, 2020). One version suggests it derives from the affectionate nickname "Petit Volontaire" used in his childhood. However, the most plausible hypothesis proposes that it is an anagram of "AROVET L(E) I(EUNE)," a stylized version of "Arouet, le Jeune." Other theories include: the name of a maternal fiefdom, a verbal phrase in Old French meaning "desired to silence," or a variation of "revoltair" (troublemaker). In any case, Montagud Rubio (2020) mentions that in 1717, young Arouet adopted the name Voltaire after an arrest, possibly combining several explanations. References Cartwright, M. (2023). Voltaire. World History Encyclopedia . https://www.worldhistory.org/Voltaire/ Montagud Rubio, N. (2020, noviembre 4). Montesquieu: Biografía de Este Filósofo Francés . Psicología y Mente. https://psicologiaymente.com/biografias/montesquieu Shank, J. B. (2022). Voltaire . Stanford.edu. https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/voltaire/#Lib

Charles Louis de Secondat, better known as Montesquieu, was an influential French thinker during the Enlightenment (Montagud Rubio, 2020). His vision of the separation of political powers has left an indelible mark on many modern liberal constitutions. Montesquieu (1689 - 1755) lived in a crucial era: while the English Monarchy evolved towards a constitutional regime to survive, France, following the absolutist reign of Louis XIV, was heading towards what would become the seeds of the French Revolution. In his works, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he could not help but detail how the events of his time influenced his thought and political vision. Biography Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brède, known simply as Montesquieu, was born into a noble family near Bordeaux, France, on January 18, 1689 (Cartwright, 2023). He was the son of Jacques de Secondat and Marie-Françoise de Pesnel, and his family belonged to the so-called nobility of the robe (Montagud Rubio, 2020). His mother, who died when he was only seven years old, was the heiress to a significant fortune that brought the barony of La Brède into the Secondat family. He studied at the Catholic school of Juilly and later followed the family tradition by studying law. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), he first studied at the University of Bordeaux and then at the University of Paris, where he came into contact with the intellectuals of the French capital. After his father's death in 1714, he returned to La Brède and became a counselor in the Bordeaux Parliament. He lived there under the protection of his uncle, who at that time held the title of Baron de Montesquieu. In 1716, he married Jeanne Lartigue, a Protestant who brought him a significant dowry when he was only 26 years old. That same year, upon his uncle's death, he inherited a fortune and the title of Baron de Montesquieu and Président à Mortier in the Bordeaux Parliament, a position he held from 1716 to 1727. At that time, England had already established itself as a solid constitutional monarchy after the Glorious Revolution and had united with Scotland in the Union of 1707, forming the Kingdom of Great Britain. Meanwhile, in France, Louis XIV died in 1715 and was succeeded by Louis XV. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), these national transformations had a significant impact on Montesquieu, who mentioned them in several of his writings. Montesquieu received literary recognition for his work "Lettres Persanes," a satire based on the fictional correspondence between a Persian visitor in Paris, highlighting the absurdities of contemporary European society (Montagud Rubio, 2020). He later published "Considérations sur les Causes de la Grandeur des Romains et Leur Décadence." In 1748, he anonymously published "De l’Esprit des Loix," a text that quickly elevated him to a position of great influence. Although its reception in France was rather limited, both by supporters and detractors of the regime, it had a greater impact in the rest of Europe, especially in Great Britain. In fact, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), it caused quite a stir in the Catholic world, to the point of being banned by the Catholic Church, which included this book in the "Index Librorum Prohibitorum." Montesquieu was also popular in the New World (Montagud Rubio, 2020). He was highly valued among the enlightened British colonists, who saw him as an example of liberty, though not yet as a reference for the Independence of the Thirteen Colonies. In fact, he was the most cited person on government and political matters in pre-revolutionary British colonial America, cited by the American founders more than any other source, except for the Bible. After the American Revolution, his works continued to strongly influence many of the thinkers and founders of the United States, including James Madison of Virginia, one of the fathers of the United States Constitution. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), Montesquieu's philosophy promoted the idea that a government should be formed where no man need fear another, an aspect that Madison emphasized when drafting the Constitution. He was admitted to the prestigious Academy of Sciences of Bordeaux (Montagud Rubio, 2020). There, he presented a series of innovative studies on topics as diverse as the adrenal glands, gravity, and echo. Although he initially worked as a magistrate, this profession did not satisfy his intellectual interests, leading him to sell his position. Instead, he decided to embark on a journey across Europe, where he had the opportunity to closely observe the customs and institutions of different countries. During his later years, he devoted his time to traveling and completing several of his works. His travels took him to various countries, including Austria, Hungary, Italy, and England. As he gained a deeper understanding of other cultures, new ideas for explaining and understanding society and politics emerged in his mind. Moreover, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), he sought ways to promote freedom among men. Despite being a man of great lucidity, enlightened by the Age of Enlightenment, there was a moment when light could only be imagined by him (Montagud Rubio, 2020). This was because he progressively lost his sight until he became completely blind. Montesquieu died on February 10, 1755, in Paris, at the age of 66. According to Montagud Rubio, his body rests in the Church of Saint-Sulpice in the French capital. Philosophy of History Montesquieu's philosophy of history is characterized by minimizing the role of individuals and events (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In his work "Considérations sur les Causes de la Grandeur des Romains et de Leur Décadence," he presents his point of view, arguing that each historical event was inspired more by a particular event than by the actions of a specific person or group of people. This principle is exemplified by situations that occurred during the era of classical Rome. Analyzing the transition from the Republic to the Empire, Montesquieu proposes that if Julius Caesar and Pompey had not worked to usurp the government of the Republic, other men would have taken their place. Montagud Rubio (2020) mentions that, according to Montesquieu, the cause of the beginning and end of major historical events was not the ambition of specific characters, in this case, Caesar and Pompey, but the inherent ambition of human beings in general. Politics and the Separation of Powers Montesquieu developed and expanded the ideas that John Locke had previously cultivated about the separation of power (Montagud Rubio, 2020). In his work "The Spirit of the Laws," he expressed his deep admiration for English political institutions, arguing that the law was the most important element in a state. With the publication of his "Persian Letters" in 1721, he achieved rapid success and gained renown in French society of the time, which was concerned about the regency of the young Louis XV of France, a king still learning to rule. "The Spirit of the Laws," considered Montesquieu's main work, was originally published in Geneva in 1748 after fourteen years of work (Montagud Rubio, 2020). This work was the subject of harsh criticism, especially from the Jansenists and the Jesuits. Nevertheless, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), Montesquieu did not remain idle and responded to these attacks, publishing in 1750 a defense of this work, which was later censored by Rome in 1751. Based on this work, Montesquieu is considered to have made two major contributions to Western thought and the scientific study of human societies (Montagud Rubio, 2020). The first is his scientific approach to describing social reality based on an analytical and positive method, which does not limit itself to mere empirical description of facts but attempts to organize the diversity of social reality data by reducing them to a specific number of types or variables. Likewise, he tried to give a sociological response to the diversity of social facts under the idea that there is an order or causality of these facts that can be interpreted rationally. In other words, according to Montagud Rubio (2020), a social phenomenon must have a cause, and this can be addressed without resorting to mystical or supernatural explanations. However, his most important legacy is his theory of the separation of powers, which has led many to consider him one of the precursors of liberalism, along with figures like John Locke (Montagud Rubio, 2020). Although he was not the first to speak of the separation of powers, it is noteworthy that his theory had the most influence on this idea, making him the leading exponent of this issue. His theses served as a model for the rulers of the 18th and 19th centuries when drafting constitutions. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), his structure was clearly influenced by the British constitutional system, which at that time was relatively new. The political system was divided into three distinct powers, which acted as checks, balances, and controls over those who exercised such powers (Montagud Rubio, 2020). The intention behind this division was to prevent a single person from accumulating all the functions of the state, as this could lead to an absolutist regime where it would be difficult to counter a malicious ruler. He attributes the legislative power, that is, the power to create laws, to the Parliament; the executive power, that is, the power to exercise political authority, to the government; and the judicial power, that is, the power to apply the laws and determine whether they have been followed, to the courts of justice. According to Montagud Rubio (2020), it is through this separation of powers that it is sought to prevent the Parliament, the Government, and the Courts from committing abuses, which would make people less free in the country that should precisely guarantee them freedoms, protection, rights, and obligations. Defense of Nature and Liberty In his contributions, Montesquieu's defense of the relationship between nature and liberty in the formulation of laws stands out (Rodríguez, 2019). According to him, the specific nature of a people, including factors such as climate, the size of the country, the number of inhabitants, religion, and social structures, should be considered when establishing laws. In other words, according to Rodríguez (2019), legislation should adapt to the particularities of each community. The Republic The Republic is defined as a type of government in which power is distributed and represents the will of the majority in its democratic form, or is exercised by highly qualified individuals in its aristocratic version (Rodríguez, 2019). Montesquieu considers that the Republic reflects love for the homeland, with this love being its foundation. In this system, according to Rodríguez (2019), all human beings are considered equal, which reduces the possibility of corruption. The Monarchy The monarchy, according to Montesquieu, is a form of government in which power rests with a single person, as long as this person submits to the rule of law (Rodríguez, 2019). In this system, the existence of other controlling powers that supervise and prevent the corruption inherent in the concentration of government in the hands of an individual is crucial. According to Rodríguez (2019), honor, as a fundamental principle, guides rulers in the monarchy, ensuring that they remain incorruptible. Despotism In the system of government known as despotism, power rests in the hands of a single person. Unlike the monarchy, despotism is not subject to control by third parties (Rodríguez, 2019). Montesquieu, in his influential political theory, harshly criticized French despotism, which he considered synonymous with fear, violence, isolation, and misery. According to Rodríguez (2019), his ideas transformed the intellectuality of the time, and Montesquieu emerged as a fervent defender of liberty and civic happiness. References Cartwright, M. (2023). Montesquieu. World History Encyclopedia. https://www.worldhistory.org/Montesquieu/ Montagud Rubio, N. (2020, noviembre 4). Montesquieu: Biografía de Este Filósofo Francés. Psicología y Mente. https://psicologiaymente.com/biografias/montesquieu Rodríguez, P. (2019, mayo 31). Pensamiento de Montesquieu. UnProfesor. https://www.unprofesor.com/ciencias-sociales/pensamiento-de-montesquieu-resumen-3394.html

Special vigilance is required in environments where death poses a risk to the normal development of grief in childhood, such as the mental illness of a family member, limited family and/or friend support, the sudden or prolonged illness-related death of a loved one, accidental deaths, among others (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). These factors can complicate the grieving process and may indicate the child needs additional support, especially if a change in behavior or personality is observed after the loss (American Academy of Pediatrics and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 2021). However, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), the label "pathological" should be avoided until strict diagnostic criteria are met, to prevent pathologizing what may be a normal grieving process that can be overcome without specialized intervention. After losing a parent, up to 35% of children under 12 show signs of depression within a year (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Before considering grief as complicated, it is advisable for both the child and their family to allow time to start the process, accept the new reality, and face the inevitable difficulties that will arise. Additionally, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), it is important for the child to have the opportunity to integrate the loss and the relationship with the deceased into their personal history, with the support of their family and educational environment. To determine whether it is necessary to seek professional help, certain guidelines, although not infallible, can serve as orientation (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). It is recommended to consult a specialist if any of these situations occur: the loss is highly significant because the deceased had an important role in the child’s or adolescent’s daily life and their death will cause many changes in the family, or the loss is very impactful due to the circumstances in which the death occurred. In line with Díaz (2016), reactions that appear after the loss prevent the child from leading a normal life. Up to Six Years Old Reactions in children up to 6 years old after a significant loss can be diverse (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). They may show an inability to perform tasks they previously did independently, such as sleeping alone, turning off the light, or giving up their pacifier. There may be constant and exaggerated crying that doesn’t stop. Persistent separation anxiety can also arise, manifesting in reluctance to participate in activities that involve separation from the caregiver, either out of fear something might happen or fear of another abandonment (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). In such cases, according to Díaz (2016), children may avoid games or activities to spend more time with their primary caregivers. Additionally, debilitating fears and terror towards everyday things that didn’t exist before can appear (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). These fears may relate to death, changes, cars, illnesses, darkness, ghosts, among others (Díaz, 2016). Sleep problems such as prolonged insomnia or recurring nightmares may occur (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Consequently, they may not want to stay alone in their room and tend to get into their parents’ bed (Díaz, 2016). If one of the caregivers has died, they often want to sleep with the surviving parent, and once this happens, it can be very difficult for them to return to their own room (Díaz, 2016). Depressive symptoms such as apathy, deep sadness, and refusal to engage in enjoyable activities may also arise (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Finally, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), they may show a refusal to eat and significant weight loss. From Six Years Old From the age of six, various reactions can be observed in children after a significant loss (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). One reaction may be isolation, where they shut down communication. Extreme social isolation can also emerge, where they do not want to interact with others because they believe they won’t be understood. Emotional numbness, where they are barely able to express emotions associated with the death, may also occur. Additionally, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), they might assume excessive responsibility or collaboration after the death, developing an exaggerated tendency to take care of others. Persistent symptoms of anxiety and nervousness in their daily activities may appear (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Similarly, they may show constant irritability and aggressiveness, including aggression towards their peers (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). They may become more violent in play, respond angrily, lose their temper easily, and destroy things they previously did not (Díaz, 2016). Depressive symptoms such as insomnia, regression to earlier stages, apathy, and loss of interest in previously enjoyed activities may persist (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). According to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), they may show a drastic reduction in activity, with no desire to participate in anything. They may also have difficulty reintegrating into the academic environment, with prolonged concentration problems, and a significant, sustained drop in school performance (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). This may include difficulty attending school, new complaints about school, or discomfort at leaving home (Díaz, 2016). Prolonged fears and separation anxiety that do not cease may also be present (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Finally, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), they may show persistent somatization without a medical explanation, such as headaches, stomachaches, vomiting, and muscle pains. In Adolescence In adolescence, various reactions can arise after a significant loss (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). However, adults around the adolescent should be guided by the degree of interference it causes: if minor issues do not interfere significantly, it is usually advisable to allow time to see if normalization occurs, understanding that these are logical reactions to death (Díaz, 2016). According to Díaz (2016), in cases where interference is a problem, it is important to intervene to help the adolescent regain their routines and habits as soon as possible. They may feel anger towards those who delivered the news or towards healthcare professionals who couldn’t do more, blaming them directly for the death (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Recurrent negative thoughts about death that do not stop, and engaging in risky behaviors because life has ceased to matter to them, may occur. Suicidal ideation that leads to the formulation of a suicide plan may also arise. Additionally, depressive symptoms may persist, they may feel relentless guilt, and exhibit sustained reactions of inappropriate enthusiasm or joy. They may begin or increase substance use (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). They may also struggle to return to their usual routines. A notable reaction is a significant drop in academic performance, provided this was not a pre-existing issue (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). Problems related to attention, concentration, exam anxiety, academic disinterest, and errors may arise after the death (Díaz, 2016). Extreme isolation may also be observed (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). According to Díaz (2016), adolescents may be reluctant to participate in social events they used to attend and spend time with peers, reduce their leisure activities, stay with adults, or take on responsibilities they previously didn’t. Another behavior that may emerge is assuming responsibilities they did not have before, which can affect their social life (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). They may also avoid touching the deceased’s belongings, preferring to leave everything as if the person were going to return. Additionally, somatic complaints related to the deceased’s illness may arise (Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al., 2017). These may involve minor ailments requiring medical attention, such as headaches, abdominal pain, gastrointestinal issues, and general discomfort (Díaz, 2016). Finally, according to Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui et al. (2017), other somatic, obsessive, anxiety, and separation disorders may appear, which were previously non-existent or insignificant. References American Academy of Pediatrics and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. (2021). El Duelo en la Infancia: Cuándo Buscar Ayuda Adicional. Healthy Children. https://www.healthychildren.org/ Spanish/healthy-living/emotional-wellness/Building-Resilience/Paginas/Grieving-Whats- Normal-When-to-Worry.aspx Artaraz Ocerinjaúregui, B., Sierra García, E., González Serrano, F., García García, J. Á., Blanco Rubio, V., & Landa Petralanda, V. (2017). Guía Sobre el Duelo en la Infancia y la Adolescencia: Formación para madres, padres y profesorado. Colegio de Médicos de Bizkaia. https:// www.sepypna.com/documentos/Guía-sobre-el-duelo-en-la-infancia-y-en-la-adolescencia-1.pdf Díaz, P. (2016, febrero 25). Signos de Alerta que Indican Cuándo Llevar a los Niños a Terapia de Duelo. Fundación Mario Losantos del Campo. https://www.fundacionmlc.org/signos-cuando- llevar-ninos-terapia-duelo/