Lo que necesita ser incluido en el proceso educativo

22/03/2015 Leonardo Boff3 Comentários

Generalmente el proceso educativo de la sociedad y sus instituciones como la red de escuelas y de universidades están siempre atrasadas en relación a los cambios que se producen. No anticipan eventuales procesos y les cuesta hacer los cambios necesarios para estar a la altura de ellos.

Entre otros, los grandes cambios que están ocurriendo en la Tierra son dos: la aparición de la comunicación global vía internet y redes sociales, y la gran crisis ecológica que pone en peligro el sistema-vida y el sistema-Tierra. Eventualmente podemos desaparecer de la Tierra. Para impedir ese apocalipsis la educación debe ser otra, distinta de la que ha dominado hasta ahora.

No basta el conocimiento. Necesitamos conciencia, una nueva mente y un nuevo corazón. Necesitamos también una nueva práctica. Urge reinventarnos como humanos, en el sentido de inaugurar una nueva forma de habitar el planeta con otro tipo de civilización. Como decía muy bien Hannah Arendt: «podemos informarnos la vida entera sin educarnos nunca». Hoy tenemos que reeducarnos.

Por eso, a las dimensiones referidas añado estas dos: aprender a cuidar y aprender a espiritualizarse.

Pero previamente es necesario rescatar la inteligencia cordial, sensible o emocional. Sin ella, hablar del cuidado o de la espiritualidad tiene poco sentido. La causa está en que el sistema de enseñanza moderno se funda en la razón intelectual, instrumental y analítica. Esta es una forma de conocer y de dominar la realidad, haciéndola un mero objeto. Con el pretexto de que impediría la objetividad del conocimiento, la razón sensible fue reprimida. Con esto surgió una visión fría del mundo. Se dio una especie de lobotomía que nos impide sentirnos parte de la naturaleza y de percibir el dolor de los otros.

Sabemos que la razón intelectual, tal como la tenemos hoy, es reciente, tiene cerca de 200 mil años, momento en que surgió el homo sapiens con su cerebro neocortical. Pero antes, hace cerca de 200 millones de años, surgió el cerebro límbico, cuando aparecieron los mamíferos. Con ellos entró en el mundo el amor, el cuidado, el sentimiento que dedican a su cría. Nosotros los humanos hemos olvidado que somos mamíferos intelectuales, por tanto, somos fundamentalmente portadores de emociones, pasiones y afectos. En el cerebro límbico reside el nicho de la ética, de los sentimientos oceánicos, como son los religiosos. Todavía antes, hace 300 millones de años, irrumpió el cerebro reptil que responde de nuestras reacciones instintivas; pero no es el caso de abordarlo aquí.

Lo que importa es que hoy tenemos que enriquecer nuestra razón intelectual con la razón cordial, mucho más ancestral, si queremos realizar el cuidado y la espiritualidad.

Sin estas dos dimensiones no nos movilizaremos para cuidar de la Tierra, del agua, del clima, de las relaciones inclusivas. Necesitamos cuidar de todo, sin lo cual las cosas se deterioran y perecen. Y entonces iríamos al encuentro de un escenario dramático.

Otra tarea es rescatar la dimensión de espiritualidad. Esta no debe ser identificada con la religión. Subyace a la religión porque es anterior a ella. La espiritualidad es una dimensión inherente al ser humano como la razón, la voluntad y la sexualidad. Es el lado profundo, de donde surgen las cuestiones del sentido terminal de la vida y del mundo. Lamentablemente estas cuestiones han sido consideradas como algo privado y sin gran valor. Pero sin incorporarlas, la vida pierde irradiación y alegría. Además hay un dato nuevo: los neurólogos concluyeron que siempre que el ser humano aborda estas cuestiones del sentido, de lo sagrado y de Dios, hay una aceleración sensible de las neuronas del lóbulo frontal. Llamaron a esto «punto Dios» en el cerebro, una especie de órgano interior por el cual captamos la Presencia de una Energía poderosa y amorosa que liga y re-liga todas las cosas.

Alimentar ese «punto Dios» nos hace más solidarios, amorosos y cuidadosos. Él se opone al consumismo y al materialismo de nuestra cultura. Todos, especialmente los que están en la escuela, deben ser iniciados en esta espiritualidad, pues nos vuelve más sensibles a los otros, más ligados a la madre Tierra, a la naturaleza y al cuidado, valores sin los cuales no garantizaremos un futuro bueno para nosotros.

Inteligencia cordial y espiritualidad son las exigencias más urgentes que nos plantea la amenazadora situación actual.

What should be included in the educational process

22/03/2015 Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

Generally the educational process of society and its institutions, such as the network of schools and universities, lags behind the changes they produce. The eventual processes are not foreseen, and it is hard to make the necessary changes to keep up with them.

Among others, two great changes are occurring: the appearance of global communication, via the Internet and social networks, and the great ecological crisis that endangers the life-system and the Earth-system. We could eventually disappear from the Earth. To avoid that apocalypse, a new educational system is needed, one that is very different from that which has prevailed until now.

Knowledge is not enough. We need consciousness, a new mindset and a new heart. We also need a new paradigm. It is urgent that we re-invent ourselves as humans, in the sense of finding a new way to inhabit the planet, with a different type of civilization. As Hannah Arendt put it so well: «we can inform ourselves our whole lives without ever educating ourselves». We have to re-educate ourselves now.

This is why, besides those dimensions I add these two: learning to care and learning to become spiritual.

But first we must restore the cordial, sensible or emotional intelligence. Without that kind of intelligence, it makes little sense to talk of caring or spirituality. This is because the modern educational system is grounded in intellectual, instrumental and analytical reason. That is a form of knowing and dominating reality which converts it into a mere object. With the pretext that it would undermine the objectivity of knowledge, sensible reason has been repressed. What emerged was a cold vision of the world. A sort of lobotomy occurred, that prevents us from sensing that we are part of nature, and perceiving the pain of the others.

We know that intellectual reason, as it now exists, is recent, beginning about 200 thousand years ago, when homo sapiens with its neocortical brain appeared. But prior to that, some 200 million years ago, the limbic brain accompanied the appearance of mammals. With the mammals, love and caring – the feelings mammals dedicate to their young – entered the world. We humans have forgotten that we are intellectual mammals. Consequently, we are fundamentally carriers of emotions, passions and affections. In the limbic brain resides the niche of ethics, of oceanic feelings such as religious feeling. Even earlier, some 300 million years ago, there appeared the reptilian brain, which is responsible for our instinctive reactions; but we will not deal with that here.

What is important now is that we must enrich our intellectual reason with our much more ancestral cordial reason, if we want to realize caring and spirituality.

Without these two dimensions we will not mobilize to care for the Earth, the water, the weather, or inclusive relationships. We need to care for everything, otherwise, things will deteriorate and perish. And then we would face an encounter with a dramatic scene.

Another task is to rescue the spiritual dimension. This should not be identified with religion. Spirituality underlies religion because spirituality precedes religion. Spirituality is a dimension inherent to the human being, like reason, will, and sexuality. It is the profound site from where arise the questions of the ultimate meaning of life and the world. Sadly, these questions have been considered private, and without much value. But without them, life loses its radiance and joy. Moreover, there is new data: neurologists have concluded that whenever a person deals with the questions of meaning, of the sacred and of God, there is a perceivable activation of the neurons of the frontal lobe. They call this «the God point» of the brain, a kind of inner organ, through which we capture the Presence of a powerful and loving Energy that links and re-links all things.

Nourishing that «God point» makes us more solidarian, loving and caring. God opposes the consumerism and materialism of our culture. Everyone, especially those who are in the school, must be initiated into this spirituality, because it makes us more sensitive to the others, more linked to Mother Earth, to nature and to caring, values without which we cannot guarantee a good future for us all.

Cordial intelligence and spirituality are the most urgent demands that the present threatening situation poses for us.
Leonardo Boff
02-27-2015
Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Convergências nas novas democracias latinoamericanas

22/03/2015 Leonardo Boff7 Comentários

Nos dias 12, 13 e 14 de março do corrente ano o Ministério da Cultura da Argentina organizou um forum internacional sobre o tema Emancipação e Igualdade.

Estes dois temas estão intimamente ligados, pois quanto maior foi a igualdade social tanto mais se pode realizar a autonomia de um país. Dada a profunda desigualdade que ainda vigora na América Latina, estas duas realidades não encontraram até o momento uma forma satisfatória de concretização. No Brasil se deram, nos últimos anos, passos importantes, pois passamos do terceiro país mais desigual do mundo para o 15º. Mesmo assim persiste um fosso considerável que estigmatiza nossa sociedade.

A este forum acorreram pessoas de toda a América Latina e algumas celebridades mundiais como Noam Chomsky dos EEU, Gianni Vattimo, filósofo italiano, Ignacio Ramonet, do Le Monde Diplomatique, Jean-Luc Mélenchon. da França, Marisa Matias, de Portugual, representantes da nova agremiação política espanhola Podemos e um representante do novo governo da Grécia, conturbada por grave crise economico-social e por fim estava presente também o bispo Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chanceler da Pontifícia Academia de Ciências do Vaticano, representando o Papa Francisco de Roma.

Da Améria Latina estavam representantes do pensamento progressista e das novas democracias de base popular que vicejaram após as ditaduras militares. Do Brasil apontava Emir Sader e este que escreve estas linhas.

Notável foi a presença de Gabriela Montaño Viaña, presidente do Senado no governo de Evo Morales Ayma. Testemunhou um fato inédito, de ressonância mundial: mais de 50% do Parlamento boliviano é constituído por mulheres. Seguramente darão um cunho singular à política, pois a forma de as mulheres exercerem o poder vai na linha do cuidado da coisa pública e de dar centralidade às questões que têm a ver com a vida em geral e com a vida cotidiana das pessoas que mais devem lutar para atingir níveis mínimos de participação e de dignidade social.

Cada representante relatava a situação das novas democracias, cuja base social não repousa mais nas classes que detinham tradicionalmente o poder, o ter, o saber e a comunicação social, mas na vasta rede de movimentos sociais surgidos ao largo de toda a América Latina, seja como resistência aos regimes autoritários dos militares, seja como caminhada própria, levantando a bandeira de um novo tipo de democraia que vá além da mera representanção e delegação e que busca formas mais avançadas de participação, a partir de baixo.

A reunião se deu no belíssimo teatro Cervantes no qual cabiam cerca de 500 pessoas. Mas como a acorrência, especialmente de jovens, ultrapassava os espaços de teatro, dois grandes telões exteriores permitiam que centenas pudessem acompanhar os debates internos. Estes jovens criaram uma atmosfera de entusiasmo, o que revelou forte conscientização política, no sentido de pensar o destino dos diferentes países face aos desafios que nos vêm da globalização da macroeconomia neoliberal, da rearticulação dos estratos mais conservadores da sociedade que procuram voltar ao poder que pelas eleições perderam e da necessária vontade política de projetar um projeto nacional de autonomia e de superação das desigualdades sociais, mas sempre aberto à nova fase da humanidade, a fase das comunicações globais.

Dois temas expressaram a convergência dos participantes: a urgente solidariedade fraternal entre os vários povos e países. Sem essa solidariedade, vinda de baixo, dificilmente se poderá fazer frente às pressões do sistema econômico imperante, mais de cunho especulativo que produtivo e dos grupos interessados em manter o status quo que os beneficiava no passado e que retrocedeu, em parte, graças à presença de novos sujeitos históricos, vindos dos movimentos sociais que sustentam as novas democracias.

O segundo tema recorrente era o da Patria Grande, o sonho dos libertadores Bolivar e San Martin, entre outros. Para nós brasileiros esse ponto passa quase desapercebido. Mas para os demais latino-americanos trata-se de um projeto nunca abandonado e sempre de novo ressuscitado por diferentes líderes políticos de cariz libertário. É importante que o Brasil se associe a este projeto que ganhou expressão pela Tele Sur, pela ALBA e pelo Banco Sur. Finalmente pertencemos à essa totalidade latinoamericana que deverá se interconectar mais e mais para darmos um passo rumo a um Continente que tem algo a contribuir no processo de planetização da humanidade. Somos, como Continente, o mais galardoado em termos ecológicos e portador de uma riqueza natural que faz falta à humanidade.

Cabe enfatizar o sentido ético e humanístico dado às reflexões políticas. Como, juntos, podemos ser mais fraternos e solidários, especialmente, com aqueles países que mais lutam para superar a pobreza e a desigualdade e por fim mais cuidadores da riqueza natural e cultural que nos foi confiada.

Leonardo Boff escreveu Que Brasil queremos depois de 500 anos, Vozes 2000.

Limits to the freedom of expression

08/03/2015 Leonardo Boff7 Comentários

The terrorists attacks in Paris and Copenhagen earlier this year, perpetrated by Islamist extremists and precipitated by cartoons deemed insulting to Mahomet, have brought freedom of expression under scrutiny. In France there is a true, almost hysterical, obsession with affirming the limitless freedom of expression, the sacred legacy, as the French say, of illuminism and the lay nature of the State. Freedom of expression is absolute.

To the contrary, and with good reason, the prophetic bishop Don Pedro Casaldaliga asserted: «other than God and hunger; nothing is absolute in this world, everything else is relative and limited». Extending Gödel’s theorem beyond mathematics, one can affirm the insurmountable incompleteness, and limitations on everything that exists. Why would freedom of expression be different? Freedom of expression does not escape the limits that must be recognized. Otherwise, we would give free rein both to all is good, and to vendettas. The French idea of freedom of expression implies unlimited tolerance: everything must be endured. We assert that, to the contrary: tolerance always has ethical limits that preclude «all is good» and the disrespect for others that erodes personal and social relations.

The exercise of freedom that involves offending others threatens people’s lives, and even the entire ecosystem (indiscriminate deforestation). Violating what others hold sacred should have no place in a society that considers itself even minimally human. But there are French people (not all the French), who want a freedom of expression immune to any restriction. The result of this position sadly has been seen: if freedom is absolute, then it must be absolute for everyone and under all circumstances. Certainly, that is what the terrorists thought who killed the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, and those who killed other people in Copenhagen, in the name of that absolute freedom. It is pointless to claim that legal recourse exists. Once evil is accomplished, it cannot always be repaired, and can leave indelible scars.

Freedom without limits is absurd and philosophically indefensible. To counter the excesses of freedom, we often hear the phrase, considered almost as a truism: «my freedom ends where yours begins».

I never saw anyone question this belief, but we must do so. In light of its underlying assumptions, we should submit it to a more careful critique. It relates to the typical freedom of liberalism, as a political philosophy.

Let us explain it better: with the fall of socialism as it actually existed, as Pope John Paul II recognized at a given moment, certain virtues were lost that socialism, for better or worse, had promoted: the idea of internationalism, the importance of solidarity and the emphasis on the social, over the individual.

When Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan assumed power, liberal ideals and capitalist culture returned in full force, without the socialist counterbalance: the exaltation of the individual, the supremacy of private property, purely representative democracy, diminished as a result, and the freedom of the markets. The consequences are visible: there is far less international solidarity and concern for changes that favor the poor peoples of the world. What predominates is a perverse competition, and a lack of solidarity, that eliminate the feeble.

The phrase «my freedom ends where yours begins» must be understood with this background. It is about an individualist understanding of the I alone, apart from society. It is the desire to be free from the other, rather than exercising freedom with the other.

It assumes that for your freedom to begin, my freedom must end. For you to start to be free, I must stop being free. Consequently, if for any reason the freedom of the other does not start, that means that my freedom knows no limits, it expands freely because it encounters no limits in the freedom of the other. It occupies the whole space and inaugurates the empire of egoism. The freedom of the other is transformed into freedom against the other.

That understanding underlies the current concept of territorial sovereignty of national states. Up to the borders of another state, it is absolute. Beyond those borders, it disappears. The result is that solidarity no longer has a place. Dialogue, negotiation, seeking convergences and the transnational common good, are not promoted, as has been clearly shown in the different gatherings of the UN on global warming. No one wants to give up anything. That is why no form of consensus can be reached, while global warning increases daily.

When there is a conflict between two countries, the diplomatic path of dialogue is normally invoked. When dialogue is frustrated, force is considered as a means of resolving the conflict. The sovereignty of one crushes the sovereignty of the other.

Lately, given the destructive nature of war, the theory of win-win has appeared to overcome win-lose. Dialogue is established. All parties appear flexible and ready for concessions and adjustments. All wind up gaining, maintaining the freedom and sovereignty of each country.

Therefore, the correct phrase would be: my freedom only starts when your freedom also starts. This is the lasting legacy of Paulo Freire: we will never be free alone; we only will be free together. My freedom grows to the degree that your freedom also grows, and together we create a society of free and liberated citizens.

Behind this understanding is the idea that no one is an island. We are beings of coexistence. We are bridges that link one another. Therefore no one exists without the others and the freedom of the others. We all are called to be free, with the others and with freedom for the others. As Che Guevara expressed well in his Diary: «I will only be truly free when the last man has also won his freedom».