Who is Oliva Sabuco?

Members of the Board, professors, students, ladies and gentlemen:

I would like to start by thanking the Board for selecting Oliva Sabuco. Her work that consists of a single volume which comprises four treatises and one summary to a total of nearby 800 pages, was written in the 16th century in Spain, and dedicated to as well as welcomed by King Phillip the Second. It has been republished since 1587 several times; in fact every 50-60 years. The last one in 1981. Yet, the philosophical ideas fostered in it, have never been the subject of discussion in this country. I am aware of the responsibility involved, and admit my apprehension in accepting the challenge. Yet, it should not warrant this, long time due, opportunity of presenting Sabuco. It is thus with great pleasure that I dare to bring to you today an overview of the holistic philosophy of Oliva Sabuco.

Let me first tell you about the process that has led to this presentation. For the last three years I have been fortunate to work with Dr. Marry Ellen Waithe who as you all probably know through her remarkable books "History of Women Philosophers", was the first in the U.S. to discover Oliva Sabuco ( Vol. II) . When we decided to go further in the study of Sabuco's philosophy, our first endeavor was to examine original manuscripts, and contextual evidence in order to understand in depth what Oliva Sabuco's philosophy of medicine involves. The results were so impressive that we decided to expand our project into the translation of all her works from archaic Spanish to English.

Oliva Sabuco writes about the role of human nature in medicine. Sabuco argues for a psychosomatic view of medicine that involves a holistic perspective of mind and body. This clears new grounds on the subject. Sabuco enhances her perspective of holism to include politics as well as the interrelations between humans and the universe.

There are strong reasons for considering the work of Sabuco worth of philosophical discussion not only in philosophy of Medicine but also in philosophy of mind and body, ethics, political philosophy and metaphysics. Her contribution is related to a holistic perspective of human nature in tune with the new spirit of the sixteenth century when the philosophical status quo was being challenged. Radical changes to the prevalent system of thought sprung from these challenges. It is on this context that I see the work of Oliva Sabuco.

The goal of this presentation is not to provide with conclusive answers to what Oliva Sabuco's philosophy means for I am aware of the difficulties of attaining a reliable, if not a definitive evaluation. I will try to convey a tentative summary of her work and will emphasize some crucial points.

Given the premier characteristics of this presentation, I feel pressed to advance some biographical data before presenting Sabuco's ideas. Please forgive my pretentiousness in trying to answer four questions at once, as follows:

1). Who is Oliva Sabuco?

2). Why is that for the last 400 years, Oliva Sabuco's work has not been exposed to a wider philosophical audience? 3). What is involved in Oliva Sabuco's "new philosophy of human nature"?

4). Which is Oliva Sabuco place in the history of philosophy?

QUESTION 1). - Who is Oliva Sabuco?

Oliva Sabuco was born in Alcaraz Spain in 1562, the fifth child of a family of six. Her father, bachiller Miguel Sabuco, and her older brother Alonso Sabuco were pharmacists. In 1585 she got married to Acacio Buedo. She kept her maiden name, as it is still today the rule in Spain (so much for Spanish machismo . . . ). The same year, she traveled to Madrid to ask King Phillip the Second for protection in order to publish her work. She claimed that it provided with a new philosophy of human nature that improved human life and health. The protection was granted by the King in 1586 and the next year a book was published under the following title:

"NEW PHILOSOPHY OF HUMAN NATURE, NEITHER KNOWN TO NOR REACHED BY THE ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS, WHICH IMPROVES HUMAN LIFE AND HEALTH"

Sabuco proposes a new approach to medicine ruled by philosophy. Her work is in the form of Colloquies written in simple lay language for common people. Its archaic lexicon and peculiar syntaxes present today some problems of interpretation and translation. With respect to methodology, it can be said that the work is written in an empirical form, where philosophical issues are not singled out and have to be inferred. It is not to say that Oliva Sabuco lacks methodology, rather than her work is not organized in what would today be considered an axiomatic form. Sabuco is consistent in the ideological, maintaining a focus and a regular vocabulary although she constantly moves from an inductive to a deductive system of analysis. Her literary skills are rich in form, yet of questionable grammar.

Sabuco insists in that her work is based on common sense for she never studied medicine, a claim that she does not make about philosophy. The fact that she did study philosophy is evident throughout her work for she constantly uses examples and quotations from Greek and Latin philosophers like Pliny, Plato and Aristotle, just to mention a few. She talks about Seneca and Cicero, as well as about historical figures that show the vastness of her culture and knowledge. She also quotes Galeno, Averroes and Hippocrates.

Little is known about how and where Oliva Sabuco acquired such knowledge. There are no university records of her, although this is not unusual for women in Spain were not welcomed at universities at the time, and when they did attend them, they were not considered for diplomas. She was 25 years old when her work was published. The depth and quality of it demanded a thorough education. We do know, from our in situ research, that at the time when Oliva Sabuco was writing, one of the greatest Spanish philosophers, Simon Abril, was teaching at a school in Alcaraz (Albacete), her hometown. It is interesting to notice that although Sabuco's work follows Abril's in methodology, it deals with medicine, a subject that Abril chose to ignore.

Oliva Sabuco's abilities are praised in the sonnets written by Juan de Sotomayor, a well-known clergy lawyer of the largest Church in town, next door to Oliva's home. These verses are quoted at the beginning of Oliva's book. Sabuco had easy access to libraries of the eight convents in Alcaraz at that time, and had daily contact with the medical community at the pharmacy at home. Even more, Alcaraz , about 80 miles south of Madrid in the direction of the Mediterranean Sea, was a unique military and intellectual enclave where many of the armies of the Spanish King, and countless visitors went back from and forth to their missions all around the world. The exchange of foreign and domestic publications was as important there than it was in Madrid.

Oliva Sabuco had not only profound interests but also a mighty will. Imagine a twenty- five years old woman, in Spain, during the Inquisition in the sixteenth century, traveling to Madrid to ask the King's protection for she has written a work that deals with a new approach to human nature and to medicine that she claims was neither known to nor reached by the ancient philosophers. On top, Sabuco claims that her work written by a woman, is greater in quality than that of many men.

Thus, Oliva Sabuco is a sixteenth century woman philosopher who wrote a comprehensive work that deals with a new philosophy of human nature which as she stated had been missing since the beginning. By her new philosophy, she says, human health and life will be improved. Medicine had been wrongly approached, she claims, for it had grown detached from philosophy. She proposes a holistic approach to human nature. In this process, knowledge in Medicine, Philosophy and other fields become relevant.

This undertaking was thrown in the midst of the existing profound controversies related to holism, in budding debate in the sixteenth century. Sabuco's book, in my opinion, grows from a concern of philosophy of medicine, to an important work on philosophy of mind and body.

So, why is that Oliva Sabuco's work has not been exposed to a wider audience in philosophy? I will try to give some reasons, next,

QUESTION 2). -

... Her views in philosophy of Medicine have been discussed for centuries in Spain where she has not always been accepted as a formal philosopher. Today there is a renaissance of the relevance of the work. Academic organizations read her work in conferences and it is the subject of a doctoral thesis. In 1987 many publications in Spain commemorated the 400 years of her work. There is a book published in 1992 in Spain by Mercedes Caridad that discusses the concept of human nature in Sabuco.

The challenging nature of Oliva Sabuco's work has since the beginning provoked strong reactions. Some philosophers and physicians have praised her as a genius, such as Alonso Castro, President of the Spanish Royal Academy of Language, who sponsored her membership in that Academy. Others have tried to belittle her work, and worse, gone to the extreme of denying her authorship ( a topic on which I will elaborate a bit later). Some of her critics . . .

Let us examine some of the reasons which have contributed to her isolation, as follows,

A) The religious pressures put by the Inquisition in relation to certain subjects which if not forbidden, lived in a narrow space, a condition that lasted in Spain for years to come. Sabuco stood corrected by the Inquisition several times because parts of her work were suspected of heterodoxies. The 1587 first edition copy we have been using, clearly shows the correction of the year 1634.

B)The fall of the Spanish Empire, that left Spain isolated for centuries.

C) The professional controversies related to the subject of her work. Just imagine the problems that Oliva Sabuco had to face when publishing a work related to the condition of human nature that challenged the medical status quo by presenting a radical new approach to Medicine.

D) The lack of English translations of Oliva Sabuco's work has also contributed to its limited exposure. We are presently working to solve this problem.

And last but not least,

E) The gender biases, which as you can easily figure out, have besieged this work for more than four hundred years. It is not difficult to imagine the consequences of those biases. In many ways, it makes you wonder how Sabuco's work has survived as far as our times.

And talking about gender, I would like now to take a brake from the main topic of this paper and comment on the problems that Oliva Sabuco's authorship has lately endured. The will of her father, Miguel Sabuco, was found in 1904. There, he claims that he is the author of "New Philosophy of Human Nature . . . " He does not produce any valid support to the claim. Yet, some journalists and philosophers have made a case of it, to the extent of convincing the famous Spanish cataloguer Palau to change the authorship in the nineteen -eighties. Libraries do not necessarily examine authorship, but simply follow catalogs. Hence, when looking for this work remember that it could have been filed under Oliva Sabuco, or under Miguel Sabuco, or under both names. Dr. Waithe already acknowledged the problem in her book "Women Philosophers" and it was the first subject of our attention, a project than involved in situ research. We did not find any justified evidence for Miguel's claim. A discussion on this controversial issue may soon see the light.

It has never been easy for women in Philosophy. We all know about that, right?!

How has Sabuco's work survived all the mishaps? Let us move to the next question in order to find it out.

QUESTION 3). -What is involved in Oliva Sabuco's philosophical ideas? Let me try to explain what I consider to be of some relevance.

Sabuco introduces five philosophical works in Nueva Filosofía. The first is a treatise called "Colloquy of the knowledge of thyself." It is in there where in a lay manner, the core of her philosophy of human nature is disclosed. Medical, mind and body, psychological, ethical, and metaphysical philosophies are discussed. The second treatise "A brief treatise of the world as it is constituted" presents a view of the universe and its elements as well as its connection and influences upon humans. This treatise is followed by a political treatise named "About the things that improve this world and its republics", where some advanced political views are discussed, and where the legal and social status quo is challenged. After it, comes the treatise "Vera Medicine" where Sabuco recapitulates her philosophy of medicine. Sabuco also adds at the end a summary of her work, titled "Dicta Brevia" written in Latin.

Sabuco in her book argues among others the following,

a) against the wrong approach that medicine had taken at the time, growing detached from philosophy, and

b) for the significance of considering human nature as a whole, mind and a body.

Oliva Sabuco defines in her work a specific new approach for medicine based on a reconsideration of human nature. Medicine, she claims, had been considering the individual only as a body, forgetting that he has also a mind and that this mind has effects upon and it is related to the body.

She introduces new rationale in the mind and body interrelations. Sabuco's main subject is the psycho/physiological relation in the individual. This issue is examined in detail and supported by numerous examples.

Sabuco advocates for the knowledge of oneself as well as for the knowledge of the characteristics of affections. Sabuco uses the word "affections" with a double meaning, as passions and as virtues. Sabuco explains how "affections" as virtues maintain and support health and life while as passions bring illness and death.

In the first treatise, "Colloquy of the knowledge of thyself", the core of her philosophical ideas is exposed by the talk of three peasants. Each of them has a role, and represents a different philosophical perspective; two propose questions and the third provides answers. One is interested in the body, the other in the mind, and the last one, Antonio, the wiser, answers. Let me quote Sabuco,

On page 5,Peasant one, says:

-"How few and rare are the humans that live the long of their lives and die of natural death . . . , and we see those other animals that usually live the long of their lives until natural death arrives with none or infrequent sicknesses"-

On page Peasant Two says

"....elucidate for me that adage . . . at the Temple of Apollo "NOSCE TE IPSUM" (Know Thyself) . . . for I look to me and I do not understand myself, neither know myself nor my nature, and also I want to learn how I could live happy (!)in this world"

Then on page 9, Antonio answers:

-"Because humans have a rational soul (that animals do not have), and from it they posses the powers, reminiscence, reason and will, located in the head, divine part of the body, . . . They love and desire: fear and hate . . . only humans have spiritually understood pain of the present, sorrow about the past, fear, dread and worry about the future . . . for this reason . . . they have so many kinds of illnesses, and so many sudden deaths when anger and sorrow are so grave that are enough to kill in one moment. And when is minor, kills them in a few days . . . and if it is so minor . . . it leaves behind . . . , ill- humors in the body that are the causes of diseases.

Sabuco describes how memory, understanding and judgement constitute the human rational soul, and that is why humans are not only affected by past and present harms but also by future ones. She presents an array of negative and positive humans' affections with opposite effects upon health and life, such as those which harm like anger, sadness, sorrow and hate, and those which bring health and life, like trust, hope, joy and content. Sabuco however begins this treatise setting forth a larger variety of mind actions and characteristics, like imagination, reality, truth, etc. The psycho/physiological relation in Sabuco is broad and intends to cover a significant part if not the whole of the mental activities.

Because of the nature of this presentation, I will unfortunately not be able to discuss Sabuco's philosophical ideas in the depth and length they deserve. I will concentrate on specific fields of philosophy, as follows:

a) Mind and Body, and

b) Ethics.

A) Concerning the Mind and Body, Sabuco depicts an interrelation between them, based on a psychological broad account of mental activities. Among these she includes the affections which may be passions or virtues, as well as others such as imagination, reality and truth. She relates all of them to understanding, knowledge and judgement, and insists that they have effects not only upon the mind but also upon to the body.

Sabuco follows Aristotle's definition of the characteristics of the soul related to the vegetative, the sensitive, and the intellectual systems Sabuco explains the effects of each mental activity upon the intellectual the sensitive and vegetative. She uses multiple examples mainly from Pliny, in order to define pertinent lines. Sabuco shows clear elements of empiricism in her arguments. Sabuco emphasizes the power of judgement and the will in the rational soul. Sabuco sees the power of the human mind over the body as responsible not only for the intellectual but also for the physical well being. Sabuco sees the harmony of the mind and the body as health, and their disharmony as illness. She holds the individual responsible for harms under his control, related to his life and health. She prescribes the following concerning this control,

a) the knowledge of oneself (mind and body),

b) good understanding and judgment, and

c) the practice of virtue.

And this is the foundation of her theory.

Sabuco presents a detailed functional explanation of how mental activities affect the body. She argues that they have an influence over the increment or decrement of the brain "vegetation." Its growth or increment comes from positive affections such as joy, hope, content, as well as truth, reality and good judgement, and its decline or decrement from their opposite.

The mind and body harmony is dictated by the level of the brain vegetation. The increment allows the brain and the body to accomplish their functions. The decrement does the opposite. Brain vegetation is a direct result of the level of its sap. The decrement provokes the draw of this sap into specific channels throughout the body. This sap because of its nature, causes illnesses, and eventually what she calls "premature violent death" as opposed to "natural death." She talks for example about the stomach being closely affected in its performance by this sap, and about other body functions being blocked or interrupted by it.

Sabuco also acknowledges other forces responsible for unbalances in the body, some leading to illnesses, such as environmental and airborne diseases like the Plague, others, such as natural decay, leading to aging.

Sabuco does something never done before: she links human life and nature not only to society but to the universe. From being a naturalist, Sabuco becomes a holist and an ecologist. In the treatise On how the world is constituted, Oliva Sabuco talks about the "macrocosm" which she defines as the universe and the "microcosm" which she defines as the human lot. Oliva Sabuco discloses influences by the universe over the individual and vice versa. Among them, she includes lunar and solar effects as well as those of the Earth and its elements and movements. Sabuco also advocates an ecological discipline.

Sabuco talks about the roles of humans in the universe as the "microcosms" where their functions are influenced by, and a reflection of the universe or the "macrocosm." Sabuco insists on the nonsense of human arrogance, and restates human submission to God and to the whole.

Sabuco prescription to control disharmony or what is responsible for illnesses and premature death, relates to morals and ethics and this is my next field of discussion.

b) In what concerns to Sabuco's ethics, she is mainly influenced (compelled?) by Christian doctrines, and by Greek concepts of knowledge and virtue. Sabuco uses Aristotle's golden rule of the "mean" when discussing the importance of moderation. She insists on the position of temperance and wisdom among the ornaments of the soul. Sabuco bases her moral philosophy on "common sense" using Aristotle's "phronesis", or practical wisdom . Sabuco gives emphasis to the "will" that -in her philosophy- goes as far as controlling the life and health body.

Sabuco finds that extending the soul/mind into the body does not jeopardize its divine attributes, and can only be beneficial. Sabuco enlarges the idea of the good, related in her philosophy not only to the spirit and the mind but also to the body. The good brings, through ethical/moral values, health and successful living.

Sabuco also extends her ethical views to the socio-political realm. In her treatise about the "World and its republics" she states how the laws being so many and contradictory negatively affect the well being of society and individual. She argues against the number of laws that aim at ruling all human activities. She alleges against inconsistency in time and circumstance in contemporary jurisprudence. Sabuco also expresses her concern for justice, revealing a quasi-Marxian position on the rights of the peasants when she argues against the little protection and scant provisions warranted by the law.

Sabuco incorporates Ethics to physiology through psychology. She spreads Ethics to the political and to the ecological. In her treatise about the "World as it is constituted" Sabuco enlarges the scope of human actions and responsibilities to the macrocosm.

Sabuco says that the microcosm - the human lot-, is a direct reflection of the macrocosm-i.e., the universe-. Hence, the Christian vision of humans made at the image of God is, in Sabuco, presented in a parallel form of humans being the image of the universe. To Sabuco the ethical becomes holistic. She introduces a metaphysical-psychological- physiological- social-ecological-ethical perspective.

QUESTION-4)In order to find out where Oliva's Sabuco place, if any, in history is, let us examine some contextual philosophical views

It cannot be claimed that the idea of harmony between the mind and the body was at the time, completely new. Plato had already discussed it in the Alcibiades . . . (?) supporting his theory on humors. Also in the Carmides? Plato contemplated relations between the mind and the body when he explains the case of mind and happiness being close to the body. The Stoics had discussed this idea before and considered the link of the mind to the body, seen in "pathos" (passion), as a pathological phenomenon. Vives, Huarte, Paracelso, had already advanced this issue.

Vincent Vives ( ), regarded as a pioneer in psychology, had already stated that the passions could affect the body to the degree of producing serious diseases

Huarte linked the mind to physiology and argued that different "sciences" were natural to different people. Huarte examined this issue when talking about the powers of ingenuity, and warned about how people should know their psychological and physical abilities in order to succeed.

Petrach, in the fourteenth century, presented in his work called "Des Remedis" Stoic techniques in healing the passions. This work is based on morals and psychotherapy and has virtue and knowledge at its foundation. Petrach follows the Greek intellectual ethics of incorporating a criterion of rationality.

In contrast with the Greeks, we find the Augustinians who argued that it was the "will" the one responsible for the evil in humans. This idea went on to Aquinas who expanded on it and created a classification and a categorization of the affections (passions) differentiating the ones that originate in the body and end in the soul, from those which originate in the soul and terminate in the body. Aquinas feared that all passions undermined salvation. By the 15th and 16th Century, philosophy and theology had merged. It was often difficult to distinguish one from the other.

Sabuco, keeps this dialectic but includes in her work the perspectives of Greek and Oriental philosophies. From the Greeks, she emphasizes the importance of knowledge. From the Orientals, in Sabuco we do find interesting perspectives that could be linked to Tibetan Buddhism. This group had, in the eleventh century, enlarged its scope from a mere religious one to medicine, emphasizing the influence of some psychological conditions upon health. Unfortunately, we do not have any factual support for the claim to this link for Sabuco never mentioned Oriental philosophies in her work.

There are many influences in Sabuco's work. In fact, Oliva Sabuco never professed having discovered anything. She just seems to aim to prove that in order to understand the body, medicine had to adopt a holistic approach to human nature that should include the mind.

As I have explained before, Sabuco emphasizes the psychological/physiological interrelation in an innovative and detailed manner. She locates the mind and the soul in the brain, not in the heart. Sabuco's explanation of the brain functions, the nervous system, and the rest of the body functions is close to that valid today in medicine and psychology.

Sabuco is aware of the importance of conceiving a relationship between the mind and the body that encompasses a broad spectrum of mental activities. She discusses activities of the mind related to knowledge, understanding, judgement and memory which she argues affect the individual's mind and body. Sabuco is aware of the qualities of the soul, of acting and being acted upon.

Descartes in a letter to Elizabeth of Bohemia in 1643 ( May, 16. 1643) wrote:

There are two things about the human soul on which the entire knowledge of its nature depends. The first is that it thinks, the second that being united to the body, it can act and be acted upon with it. I have said almost nothing about the second one, trying only to provide a proper understanding of the first, for my principal aim was to demonstrate the existence of a distinction between the soul and the body, and to this end the first one was needed, the second being a potential hindrance . . .

Tom Sorell (Descartes, p.100) says that Descartes considered not only "mechanics" but also "medicine" and "morals" as principal branches of the tree of philosophy; from where he advanced that the principal benefits of philosophy were going to come. Sorrel argues that Descartes never really succeeded in giving a finished account of either subject.

Descartes has been considered by most as the first dualist-interrelationist. Descartes dealt with the issue of passions in the mind and body interrelations at the end of his life. His last work "The Passions of the Soul" (1649) introduces a detailed list of the passions that he reduces only to two, joy and anger, as the ones that affect the body (11.347). Descartes recommended virtue as a remedy against passions, and personal morality for the preservation of the health of the soul. Descartes wrote to Elizabeth of Bohemia advising her on melancholy. He prescribed -as Oliva Sabuco did half a century before-the practice of joy instead of sadness, because -he said- " . . . a mind full of joy causes the body to enjoy health . . . - Yet Sabuco had assigned passions and virtues accountable for health or illness, and for life or death.

Descartes, however, in a letter to Chanut in 1646, says": ...-instead of finding ways to preserve life, I have found another much more easier and sure way, which is not to fear death...." We can see that Descartes struggled trying to move from a somatophysic position ("Discours") into a psychosomatic one as supported by Sabuco who explained in detail how affections and passions affect the mind and the body. She saw the relevance of this interrelation mainly in one direction, from mind to body, and not from body to mind as had been argued by the Augustinians, and, to a degree, by Descartes .

But before I finish, let us hear how Sabuco is considered by some today,

In an article that appeared in the Journal of the History of Ideas 1996, by Timothy Reiss of the University of New York, titled "Denying the Body? Memory and Dilemmas of History in Descartes", Oliva Sabuco is presented next to Descartes on the context of understanding origins of, and devices that set forms for change in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries related to holism, where he believes history played a very important role. Descartes -says Reiss- elected to ignore that there was a trend toward holism already present in Europe. Reiss cites Sabuco -among others- as belonging to this trend when he says: -"Oliva Sabuco found the soul and its powers- understanding, memory, reason and will, as well as its passions, to be firmly set in the cerebrum and compact with the senses. Indeed the crucially human rational soul was in body alive before taking on a mental thinking and feeling nature thanks to the senses . . . -" (Page 592) I do find that Reiss -even that in my opinion he considers Sabuco from a reduced perspective- makes here an outstanding remark worth discussing for he talks about the different stages of holism prevalent at that time.

Hence, could it be said that Sabuco's reconsideration of human nature sets new grounds of interrelationship between mind and body, and that her innovative ideas move further into the next century?

CONCLUSION

Well, let me finish this presentation by summarizing what I have submitted here in regards to the four questions put forth:

1) that -in relation to the first question that deals with who is Oliva Sabuco- it could be said that Oliva Sabuco is a sixteenth century woman philosopher who argues for a new approach to human nature in order to improve health, life and medicine. And that in that process she portrays a new vision to the relations between mind and body which clears new holistic grounds for it.

2) that the reasons why Oliva Sabuco is not being well known to a wider philosophical audience, relate to her times, gender and philosophical ideas, as well as to the lack of an English translation of her work.

3) that in relation to the third question about what is involved in Oliva Sabuco's philosophy, it could be said that,

A) Oliva Sabuco expands the subject of her work to a larger scope than the one she claims for she introduces new rationale into the interrelation between the mind and the body, and.

b) Oliva Sabuco presents a holistic position where her philosophy of medicine contains a moral psychology that is consistent with her mind-body interactionalism-dualism, and that these in turn support a general socio-political and ecological philosophy which considers humans linked to all of the above.

4) that in relation to the fourth question about her due place in the history of philosophy, we could say that,

A) Oliva Sabuco examines the effects of affections (passions and virtues) and basic mental activities upon the body not only from Christian but also from Greek and Oriental perspectives, changing somehow the prevalent emphasis of the effects of passions being from the body upon the mind, to the great significance of their effects from the mind upon the body.

b) Sabuco brings a new dimension to human nature, relating the psychological to the physiological and extending its characteristics to the socio-political and macrocosmic level in a manner not done before at once.

c) In a detailed empiricist manner, Sabuco describes a broad Psychological/ Physiological relation between mind and body (1587) that involves Medicine and Morality, more than fifty years ahead of Descartes.

Although I do believe that Oliva Sabuco deserves a better place in history, the decision on where -if at all- should Oliva Sabuco be placed in the history of philosophy, it is -of course- not for me to decide but for you and the future to tell.

Well, I hope that in sharing with you the results of this research on Oliva Sabuco so warmly endorsed by Dr. Waithe, I have at least arisen some interest on her work and if that is the case, I would feel deeply gratified.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH