Teoría Gaia

Muchos científicos atribuyen a seres extraterrestres la creación de estas civilizaciones avanzadas de la antigüedad.  Desde el punto de vista humano, los alienígenas son seres que proceden de un lugar ajeno a la tierra. Para otros, del espacio exterior. Muchos más los asocian con platillos voladores.
    Hay incontables explicaciones en todo tipo de textos y disciplinas que se han formado alrededor del tema. Por ejemplo, ufología, xenobiología, alienígenas ancestrales y las llamadas religiones ovnis. Han dado origen a una cantidad respetable de teorías conspirativas e historias de ciencia ficción.

    Algunos de estos autores usan la Biblia para sustentar sus conjeturas.  Por ejemplo, Ezequiel 1 describe una rueda color topacio en el cielo con fuego envolvente, cuatro animales fantásticos con semejanza de hombre y una figura en un trono también con semejanza de hombre. La interpretación que hacen es que son alienígenas que vinieron a fundar las antiguas civilizaciones.

    Nuestra tesis es que los responsables fueron ángeles que tomaron forma de hombres y se rebelaron contra Dios. Este estudio se circunscribe a la Biblia y libros mencionados en ella. 

Te recomiendo leer mi libro titulado Cosmovisiones y su influencia en el cristianismo. 

También el estudio que forma parte del libro, titulado Extraterrestres en la Biblia.

This is the Introduction to the volume Ecosexuality: When Nature Inspires the Arts of Love.  It is written with the volume's co-editor, Lindsay Hagamen.

Ecosexuality is the first world wide collection on the topic I edited with Lindsay Hagamen.  The book explores the relationship between sex, ecology, and social change.  Its versatility of styles and diversity of genres convey a compelling variety of perspectives on Ecosexuality.  The collection integrates seductive, inspiring, and practical approaches for creating a love-based, sustainable culture.  It brings together the voices of 30 diverse leaders to converge the multiple energies of the Ecosexual Movement.

Negli studi sulla nascita della filosofia greca e sul suo rapporto con l'epica teogonica, la figura di Gaia risulta piuttosto trascurata. Eppure essa è la figura di maggior rilievo nella Teogonia esiodea, tanto da poter essere assimilata alla φύσις. I naturalisti ionici ne fanno invece principalmente un oggetto di misurazione geometrica. Dalla lettura dei testi risulta chiaro che già  Esiodo basava la propria narrazione sull'osservazione diretta (oltre che sulla tradizione): non si tratta quindi di una novità introdotta dai Milesii. Il passaggio dal λόγος al μῦθος non poggia solo sull'uso dei nuovi strumenti logico-matematici e tecnici, ma su una diversa visione della Terra e della Natura.

Gaia theory proposes that a cybernetic system including the biota and the physicochemical environment regulates environmental variables at a global scale, keeping them within a range that makes Earth inhabitable by living beings. One can argue that this theory can play an important role in school science, since it bears upon current environmental problems, contributes to cross-disciplinary learning, and may help students understand the nature of science. Nevertheless, discourses about Gaia include both scientific and non-scientific ideas, and, consequently, this theory has been seen as pseudoscience, or even antiscience, as an unwarranted view, entangled with mysticism. But an informed view about the contributions and risks associated with Gaia as part of science education depends on a general analysis about the treatment of this theory in school knowledge. Here, we offer the first analysis of this sort, critically evaluating how Gaia is addressed in a representative sample of Brazilian textbooks (n = 18). We present data about the presence or not of Gaia theory among the contents covered by the textbooks, the presence of the claim that Earth is living, whether and how they use analogies to justify this claim, the discussion of evidence for and against Gaia, and the treatment of its relevance to current issues. Gaia theory is explicitly addressed in ca. 39% of the analyzed textbooks. There is a general script that the textbooks that explicitly name the theory follow when discussing Gaia. First, they argue that life affects the environment, and support this argument by means of examples, then, explain what the Gaia theory proposes, discuss evidence in favor either of the idea that Earth is living or Gaia theory in general, introduce one or more analogies to justify the claim of a living Earth, and, finally, offer remarks on the current importance of Gaia. Three analogies used by Lovelock himself were found in the analyzed textbooks, Gaia as a superorganism, the analogy between Gaia and a redwood tree, and between Gaia and the Greek goddess of Earth. The most frequent was the superorganism analogy. The idea of a control system including the biota and the physicochemical environment and any discussion about theoretical and empirical advances resulting from Gaia theory were absent from most analyzed textbooks, which focused mainly on the claim of a living Earth. Although Gaia can contribute to the understanding of environmental issues, the treatment found in most of the analyzed schoolbooks puts so much emphasis on the idea that Earth is living and is so close to an animistic understanding of the Earth system that it is likely that it will bring no true contribution to the development of adequate conceptions about that system and the connections between human activities and the environmental crisis.

A teoria de Gaia apesar de ser engendrada num período de intensas mudanças e revoluções no mundo, não foi aceita de início, mas o autor desenvolveu um trabalho de 36 anos até que no ano 2001, o conceito recebeu reconhecimento parcial oficial pela comunidade científica. Sua obra Gaia: Alerta Final, apresenta o prefácio de au-toria do astrofísico britânico Martins Rees, que propõe as ori-gens que engrenaram as ideias a respeito do Planeta como um ser vivo e vulnerável. Essa tese é rejeitada por vários cien-tistas, principalmente os neodarwinistas, que não aceitam a hipótese de autorregulação do planeta para mantê-lo ha-bitável.

All’interno del progetto «La Rete della Vita» incontriamo il Prof. Albrile, noto storico e antropologo delle religioni che nel corso delle sue ricerche si è occupato in particolare delle interazioni fra mondo iranico ed ellenismo attraverso lo studio dell’orfismo, manicheismo e gnosticismo. Come egli stesso scrive «L’universo culturale dell’antico gnosticismo è un complesso intersecarsi di insegnamenti misterici, mitologie e filosofie ellenistiche, un crocevia erudito il cui fine è dimostrare un unico assunto: la “discesa” e l’imprigionamento nel nostro mondo di un principio spirituale superiore, una scintilla luminosa che solo attraverso la vera “conoscenza” l’uomo può riconoscere e ritrovare in se stesso» (cit. da Albrile E., “Questo mondo non è il mio mondo. lo gnosticismo tra ineffabilità e ritualità”).

In this paper, we discuss the role of teleological explanations in Gaia theory. We show that its main proponent, James Lovelock, intends to avoid them due to a misinterpretation of the nature of teleological explanations. In order to avoid a commitment to teleology, Lovelock appeals to the concept
of emergent properties. This is not a consistent solution, however, since the concepts of emergent properties and teleology are not mutually exclusive. We also discuss difficulties in an interpretation of Gaia from a teleonomic perspective, discussing problems such as that of the notion of
superorganism. In order to appraise the status of teleological explanations in Gaia, we examine the case of the interaction between algae and clouds, which gave birth to a new research field and show the theoretical and empirical contributions that Gaia can bring. Based on the arguments developed in the paper, we suggest a reorganization of the structure of Gaia research program, in order to go on with its theoretical and empirical progress.
Key words: Gaia; teleology; teleonomy; emergence; functional explanation.

Ai tempi del Coronavirus, il paziente che pone la domanda di cura è un po' particolare, è un paziente che tutti noi conosciamo. Il paziente è GAIA, il nostro pianeta Terra, che in queste ultime settimane ha manifestato una "malattia" che nella sua drammaticità esprime la crisi, la tensione, l'unilateralità che sta dominando il sistema nel suo complesso, una "malattia" che porta con sé un duplice "messaggio": da un lato denuncia il problema e dall'altro propone una soluzione.

Anthropocentrism holds that the only things valuable in themselves are: human beings, their desires and needs, and the satisfaction of those. In turn, Gaia theory holds that the Earth and all creatures on it constitute something akin to a vast living being. Many layfolk maintain that Gaia theory implies the falsity of anthropocentrism, and thus puts the kibosh on that doctrine. But philosophical writers deny this implication. This paper therefore argues for what we may call “the Kibosh Thesis”—that Gaia theory, when correctly understood, does indeed put the kibosh on anthropocentrism. It defends this thesis by appealing to “the Part-Whole Thesis”—that no parts of a living being which do not constitute the whole being can have as much intrinsic value as the being itself has. Since the evidence supporting Gaia theory is mounting, this thesis appears to provide a fairly strong argument against anthropocentrism. In arguing for this position, I show why anthropocentrism is a plausible doctrine, specify Gaia theory’s main claims, meet the main philosophical objections to the Kibosh Thesis, and develop the argument from the Part-Whole Thesis.