The subversion of neo-stoicism and skepticism in 'Part I' of 'Don Quijote'

According to the overwhelming majority of critics don Quijote was read as a fool during the Golden Age. At the same time, many critics have shown that Cervantes was very familiar with neo-stoicism and skepticism; therefore, it is a worthy enterprise to discover the extent to which Cervantes subverted both doctrines when he gave life to the knight. This is a worthy goal because if we know how Cervantes subverted both philosophical systems, then we obtain a reading of the text that approximates the kind of reading that would have been popular during the Golden Age. In short, in this work I explain how the text was read during the Golden Age in relation to two very popular systems of the time: skepticism and neo-stoicism.;In today's critical opinions it is common to conceive don Quijote as someone who is a good Christian to at least some extent, and/or a good stoic, also to at least some extent. But this is not the way in which he was conceived by the readers of the Golden Age: During that period the knight was a nothing but a fool, and given that it is absurd to maintain that good Christians and/or good stoics were fools during the Golden Age, it follows that at that time don Quijote could not have been either; Therefore, there must have been a powerful change after the Golden Age that explains the current positive conceptions of Don Quijote. I will show that this change took place during the Enlightenment (and not during the Romantic period, as it is now currently maintained). I will show as well that the Enlightened approach to don Quijote is still viable because the influence of the Enlightenment continues to be very strong to this day.;To sum up, this work explains in detail two possible ways of approaching Part I of Don Quijote: According to the Golden Age the knight is nothing but a fool because he violates the dictates of neo-stoic and skeptical doctrines, and after the Enlightenment it became possible and even reasonable to perceive the knight as morally admirable to at least some extent.