The severe
economic-sanitary crisis of Covid-19 is teaching the human race important
lessons that it first learned at the first moment of its initial emergence in
more than remote times, this is, our lives are tangled with each other and with
other species. I understand that this is the source of our singular strength,
but also of our vulnerability, understand this axiom and practicing it seems to
be the way to prevent the destruction of the planet.
Protagoras of Abdera
458-411 BC stated that "Man is the measure of all things", thus,
under this focus, the human being came to be seen as the center of attention.
For Socrates who defied the prevailing order in the social circles of his time,
the relativism of sophists and once again life makes us understand, through a hard
lesson, that what we have left is agree with the incomparable Socrates on the
relativism of the Sophists and consequently the maxim in which the human being is above all and so
we do in this important moment thanks to COVID 19 , which showed us how fragile
is the anthropocentrism and how necessary is for the humanity to live under a
new aegis biocentrism. Under this angle of view, that of biocentrism humanity
would not be the focus of existence, because anthropocentric tendencies defend
the responsibility of the human being towards nature, while biocentric, his
duties before nature and understanding that urges that without this
understanding the human being is doomed to serious risks to his survival. In
other words, nature owns rights. This brings us almost instantly to rethinking
our destructive practice.
According the professor Dr. Ludwig Schmidt H, in his work BIOCENTRISMO: UN PARADIGMA EMERGENTE DEL
CONOCIMIENTO HUMANO, Revista de Bioética Latinoamericana / 2016 / volumen 18
/Página 41-106 / ISSN: 2244-7482. Rev
Bioet Latinoam 2016; vol 18: 41-106 /1/, "Science" along with
"Life" is the two pillars or trees of Eden that men should have, but
not eat fruit. Two macro-concepts-disciplinary nature and misunderstood even by
humans. The story illustrates three major evolutionary paradigms of knowledge:
theocentric, anthropocentric, and biocentric, which emerge gradually and
covertly each other. In the age of biology, the development had in the 70s of
XX century, generated the need for Interdisciplinary and 90, transdisciplinares,
multi-preferentiality growing, the crisis of the project of modernity, the
established paradigms Posthumanismo emerging that have created unrest and
distortions to traditional knowledge. New ways to observe, analyze, interpret
and synthesize knowledge in certain contexts. Generate new challenges for
dialogue, understanding in Science without disciplinary borders and
multi-criteria.
All
this new reality brought to us by COVID19 has given us great uncertainty about
life on our planet and the human being's relations with the planet, perhaps our
contact with uncertainty can also serve as a gateway to solidarity with those
who regularly live in uncertain and precarious circumstances. Some of us may
have to deal with closed schools, modified liturgies, canceled congresses and
vacations, and work from home. Think of those who, even when there is no
crisis, live on the edge, in the low-wage sector, voiceless and dependent on
what companies think is best for them.
At a time when the common good becomes paramount, and when the only entity
large enough to accommodate this good is government, we are delivered to the
confusion of a government committed to the gross decline of institutions and
the degradation of the governmental role.
The contrasts and shortcomings that can irritate the margins in normal
times become egregious in a crisis.
Kierkegaard
believed that anxiety is the root of sin, and when we consider many aspects of
this crisis, we can see that it was at least partially correct. It is through
anxiety that politicians distort what is happening in the public sphere; it is
because of anxiety that desires seem dissatisfied and comfort is sought in
products of animal origin; it is through anxiety that we remain paralyzed in
our everyday lives, uncertain about what to do; it is through anxious desires
to relax that we disregard social distancing regulations, remember us Celia
Deane-Drummond, director of the Laudato Si' Research Institute, University of
Oxford. The article was published in Thinking Faith, a publication of the
English Jesuits, 30-04-2020.32/2/
Understanding
what a new world this is is important to prepare for what's next. Because one
thing is certain: the world will not be as it was before, as biologist Attila
Iamarino4 warned us "The world has
changed, and that world (before the coronavirus) no longer exists. Our life
will change a lot going forward, and someone trying to maintain the status quo
of 2019 is someone who has not yet accepted this new reality," he said in this
interview with BBC Brasil Attila, who holds a Ph.D. in microbiology from the
University of São Paulo and a postdoctoral fellow from Yale University.
"Changes that the world would take decades to pass, which we would take a
long time to implement voluntarily, we are having to implement in the scare, in
a matter of months," he says.
Please note, that Martin
Luther King’s Acceptance Speech, on the occasion of the award of the Nobel
Peace Prize in Oslo, December 10, 1964, said and teache us when talking about
the violence and its consequences, we are being violent between nations,
towards our planet when we destroy our natural resources, because of our greed
and when despite the rights of all human beings to a dignified life. He said, Civilization and violence are antithetical
concepts. .. nonviolence is not sterile passivity, but a powerful moral force
which makes for social transformation. Sooner or later all the people of the
world will have to discover a way to live together in peace and thereby
transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood...I
refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a
militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction. I believe that
unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This
is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant.
But the power struggle and rich seems to have
no end despite the cry for help of the planet and human suffering and in the
face of this historical crisis that we are going through governments seem to
ignore reality and dispute control and primacy, let's see what happens today
when in the midst of the return of protectionism, customs barriers and the
anti-globalization of the largest , and for now, the world's most influential
economy, Trump hands over a vacuum in Xi Jinping's china-coveted global
leadership. Since his unexpected election, Trump's controversial administration
has remained on its "America First" motto: it has already withdrawn
the country from the Trans-Pacific treaty, Obama's Asian diplomatic-economic
bet, renegotiates NAFTA, cuts funding to the World Bank and pressures (and even
threatens) U.S. companies to re-produce in their own country. Xi Jinping, in
turn, re-electing himself for another term and establishing enough power for
his indefinite perpetuation in the leadership of the Communist People's Party[4],
takes another path, recreating the Silk Road, a project aimed at maintaining
infrastructure across the East.
While one withdraws the country from major
treaties, renegotiates terms of trade with its main trading partners with
aggressive and one-sided discourse, another makes the largest foreign
investment plan ever seen, estimated at a trillion dollars and seven times the
Marshall Plan when the U.S. sought its hegemony after World War II. The dispute
(if it can still be called) becomes not only economic but a dispute of totally
distinct systems. China's doomed single-party dictatorship clashes head-on with
the competitive capitalism of American democracy. In fact, America's troubled
democracy. China seeks international acceptance of its regime disapproved by
the West at the time of the democratic system's most unpopularity, emerging as
an alternative to continued economic growth through a government-driven
economy.
If in
the United States Trump cuts funding in scientific research, thus leaving
dozens of large companies competing to overlap in the future with massive
investment in artificial intelligence, coalescing hundreds of startups every
year, China spends more than $150 billion for such technologies on a five-year
plan. The United States can still remain the frontier of global technology
through competition from its giants, but China comes right behind threatening
it with its policy of sharing patents from international companies, and the
possibly unrestricted use of information and data from domestic companies with
the Chinese
The West is already showing signs of Xi's
acceptance: Gallup's latest Global Leadership Approval poll shows China ahead
of the U.S., which has fallen 18 percentage points in a year. The Chinese
leader's speeches advocating globalization at conferences such as Davos are
nearing the speech of two leading European leaders Merkel and Macron, while
Trump laughs with Theresa May.
Despite efforts and approaches, the eastern
giant still has barriers to be faced to achieve its goal. The Chinese regime,
which restricts individual freedoms and persecutes critics, is still a little
accepted by the West. In addition, China has a much smaller military force
still under construction than the American one (it's two aircraft carriers
against twelve, respectively). Overcoming such barriers and there being no U.S.
reaction, we may have new global leadership.
1.Dr. Ludwig Schmidt H, in his work BIOCENTRISMO: UN PARADIGMA EMERGENTE
DEL CONOCIMIENTO HUMANO, Revista de Bioética Latinoamericana / 2016 / volumen
18 /Página 41-106 / ISSN: 2244-7482. Rev
Bioet Latinoam 2016; vol 18: 41-106 2.
2.
https://gazetanews.com/dez-tendencias-para-o-mundo-pos-pandemia/
3.https://www.meionorte.com/curiosidades/mudanca-de-habito-as-dez-tendencias-para-o-mundo-pos-pandemia-388282
[5]https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21729429-industries-and-consumers-around-world-will-soon-feel-their-impact-chinas-audacious-andhttps://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/08/making-china-great-again
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário