We propose to show that, although we think of Descartes as a modern Parmenides or as the father of Modernity , otherwise for excellent reasons, this condition is at least as ambiguous as different are the cultures or societies that arose from the breakdown of Christianity. Where the Protestant Reformation triumphed, the dominant conception of philosophy is manifestly anticartesian, although they recognize, curiously, a debt to Cartesian philosophy; for example, we recognize this due in Wittgenstein and Heidegger. Neither empiricist nor rationalist, neither analytical nor continental, nor national or identitarian either, more than a French , European or Western philosopher, Descartes would be a philosopher of ours, that is, a philosopher of the universalist Counter-Reformation or Catholic Reformation. Also, even if we stick to what the professional and hegemonic practice of philosophy means today, Descartes would be known as a pre-or paramodern philosopher, that is, an “filósofo del arrabal”, an outskirt philosopher
