Categoria: Idiomas

From the Ilusory “Selfish Gene” to the Cooperative Character of the Human Genome

Leonardo Boff1 comentário

Times of crisis of the system such as we are now experiencing favor a revision of concepts and a desire to project other possible worlds that would make reality what Paulo Freire called “a new viability.”

We know that the current world capitalist system is consumerist, viscerally egotistical and a predator of nature. It is leading humanity to an impasse, because it has created a double injustice: ecological, since it has devastated nature, and social, because it has generated immense social inequality. Simplifying, if only a little, we could say that humanity is divided between the minorities that eat to satiation, and those who are mal-nourished. If we were to expand the type of consumption of rich countries to all of humanity, we would need at least three Earths like the one we have.

The current system purports to find its scientific basis in the research of the British zoologist, Richard Dawkins, who thirty six years ago wrote his famous The Selfish Gene (1976). New genetic biology has shown that the selfish gene is illusory, because genes do not exist in isolation, they constitute a system of interdependencies that form the human genome, which obeys the three basic principles of biology: cooperation, communication and creativity. This is the opposite of the “selfish gene.” This is what notable names in biology, such as Nobel Laureate Barbara McClintock, Joachim Bauer, Carl Woese, and others, have shown. Bauer asserted that the selfish gene theory of Dawkins «is not founded on empirical data». Or worse, «it serves as bio-psychological justification to legitimize the individualistic and imperial Anglo-Northamerican economic order» (Das kooperative Gen, 2008, p.153).

It follows from this that if we want to find a way of living that is sustainable, and just for all peoples, those who consume the most must drastically reduce their levels of consumption. This will not be accomplished without strong cooperation, solidarity and clear self-restraint.

Let us pause on the latter, self-restraint, because it is one of the hardest to accomplish, given the prevalence of consumerism, which has spread to all social classes. Self-restraint necessarily implies limitations, so as to respect Mother Earth, to protect the collective interest and promote a culture of voluntary simplicity. It is not about not consuming, but about consuming in a restrained way, in solidarity with, and responsible to, our fellow human beings, to the entire community of life, and to future generations, that also must consume.

Restraint, moreover, is a cosmological and ecological principle. The universe developed from two forces that always limit each other: the forces of expansion and the forces of contraction. Without that internal limit, creativity would cease and we would be crushed by contraction. The same principle functions in nature. Bacteria, for example, if they were not mutually limited, and one were to lose all limits, in a very short time it would occupy all the planet, creating dis-equilibrium in the biosphere. Ecosystems guarantee their own sustainability by mutual limitation, allowing all to coexist.

Then, to emerge from the present crisis we need above all to reinforce cooperation of all with all, communication among all cultures and great creativity, to design a new paradigm of civilization. We must bid a definitive good bye to the individualism that excessively expanded the “ego” to the detriment of the “we” that includes not just human beings, but the entire community of life, the Earth and the very universe.

Confronting the sixth massive extenction

Leonardo Boff4 Comentários

We have previously addressed the fact that the human being, in later times, has inaugurated a new geologic era –anthropoceno–, the era in which humans appear as the greatest threat to the biosphere, and the eventual exterminator of our own civilization. For a long time, biologists and cosmologists have warned that our aggressive intervention in the natural processes is greatly accelerating the sixth massive extinction of living species. It has been going on for several thousand years. These extinctions mysteriously belong to the cosmogenic process of the Earth. In the last 540 million years the Earth experienced five great massive extinctions, about one every one hundred million years, that exterminated much of life in the sea and on the Earth. The last one occurred 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs, among other species, were annihilated.

All previous extinctions were caused by forces of the Earth, and the universe itself, such as, for example, climatic convulsions, or meteor strikes. The sixth is being accelerated by humans. But for the presence of humans, one species would disappear every five years. Now, due to our industrial and consumerist aggressiveness, we have multiplied extinction one hundred thousand times, as cosmologist Brian Swimme advised us in a recent interview for EnlightenNext Magazin, nº 19. The data are alarming: Paul Ehrlich, professor of ecology at Stanford University, estimates that 250,000 species a year are exterminated, while Edward O. Wilson, of Harvard University, gives lower numbers, between 27,000 and 100,000 species per year, (R. Barbault, Ecologia general, 2011, p. 318).

Ecologist E. Goldsmith of the University of Georgia affirms that humanity, by making the world ever more impoverished, degraded, and less capable of sustaining life, has reversed the evolutionary process by 3 million years. The worst is that we do not even notice this devastating practice, nor are we prepared to evaluate the meaning of massive extinctions. It signifies nothing less than the destruction of the ecological basis of life on Earth, and the eventual interruption of our essay of civilization and perhaps even of our own species. Thomas Berry, the father of Northamerican ecology, wrote: «our ethical traditions know how to handle suicide, homicide and even genocide, but we do not know what to do about biocide and geocide» (Our Way into the Future, 1990, p. 104).

Can we slow down the sixth massive extinction, given that we are its principal cause? Yes, we can, and we must. It is a good sign that we are developing an awareness of our origins, some 13.7 billion years ago, and of our responsibility for the future of life. The universe elicits that in us, because it is not against us, but for us. But it demands our cooperation, because we are the ones causing so much damage. We must wake up now, while there is still time.

The first task is to renew the natural pact between the Earth and humanity. The Earth gives us everything we need. The pact calls on us to be caring and respectful of the Earth’s limitations. But, ingrates that we are, we repay her with machetazos, bulldozers, bombs and ecocidal and biocidal practices.

The second task is to strengthen reciprocity and mutuality: to seek a harmonious relationship with the dynamism of the eco-systems, using them rationally, restoring their vitality, and ensuring sustainability. For that, we need to re-invent ourselves as a species that is concerned for other species, and learns to live together with the entire community of life. We must be more cooperative than competitive, more caring than willing to subjugate, and we must recognize and respect the intrinsic value of each being.

The third requirement is to experience compassion, compassion as a form of love and caring, not only between human beings, but with all beings. Whether they will be able to continue living or be condemned to disappear depends on us. We must abandon the paradigm of domination that reinforces mass extinctions, and live the paradigm of caring and respect that preserves and prolongs life. In the middle of the anthropoceno, it is urgent that we inaugurate the ecozoic era, that places the ecological at the center. Only then is there hope of saving our civilization and of ensuring the continuity of our living planet.

The Great Global and Brazilian Contradiction

Leonardo Boff3 Comentários

More and more a conviction is growing, even among establishment economists and those of the neo-Keynesian line, that we are dangerously close to reaching the Earth’s physical limits. Even with new technologies, it will be difficult to continue the project of limitless growth. The Earth can no longer tolerate it, and we have to change direction.

Economists such as our Ladislao Dowbor, Ignace Sachs, Joan Alier, Herman Daly, Tim Jack, Peter Victor and long before them, Georgescu-Roegen, fully incorporate the ecologic moment into the process of production. Especially the British Tim Jack, has become known for his book, Prosperity without Growth, (Prosperidad sin crecimiento, 2009) and Canadian Peter Victor, for his Managing without Growth, (Managing sin crecimiento, 2008). Both have shown that the growth of debt to finance private and public consumption (as the rich countries are doing), demanding more energy and greater use of natural goods and services, is simply not sustainable. 



Nobel Prize Laureates Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, because they did not explicitly include the limits of the Earth in their analysis, fall into the trap of proposing greater public expenditure as the solution to the present crisis, supposing that this will produce economic growth and greater consumption, through which the astronomical private and public debts will be paid later on. We have said many times already that a finite planet cannot support a project of this nature, one that presupposes the boundlessness of goods and services. This is an established fact. 


What Jack and Victor propose is «prosperity without growth». In the developed countries, the level of growth is already sufficient to allow development of human potential, within the possible limits of the planet. Thus, enough growth. What can be sought is «prosperity» meaning a better quality of life, of education, health, ecological culture, spirituality, etc. This solution is rational but it can cause high unemployment, a problem they do not resolve well, suggesting a universal basic rent and reduction of work hours. There will be no solution without a prior agreement as to how are we going to have a supportive relationship with the Earth, and without defining the models of consumption so that everyone can have what is enough and decent.

That relation is inverted for the poor and emerging countries. «Growth with prosperity» is needed. Growth is necessary to attend to the minimum demands of those living in poverty, misery and social exclusion. Assuring enough indispensable goods and services is a matter of justice. But prosperity, which deals with the quality of growth, must be sought simultaneously. A real danger 
exists that they will fall victim to the logic of a system that induces greater and greater consumption, especially of unnecessary goods. The Earth’s limits would be stretched, which is just what must be avoided. We are facing a painful vicious circle, that we do not know how to make virtuous, without endangering the sustainability of the living Earth.


This is the contradiction not only facing Brazil but also the Globalization: growth is urgently needed to accomplish what the Lula’s government did, this is, to guarantee the basics, so that millions may eat and, through social policies, be incorporated into society. For the classes that have already been attended, less growth and more prosperity is needed: to improve the quality of the good life, education, less unequal social relations, and more solidarity, starting with the least among us. But who can convince them, if they are forcibly controlled by propaganda that incites them to consume?

As it happens, until now, brazilian and athor governments have had only distributive policies: unequally distributing public resources. First, 140 billion reales were guaranteed to the financial system to pay the public debt, and then for the grandiose projects, and only around 60 billion for the immense majorities that only now are ascending. Everyone gains, but unequally. Treating equals unequally is a great injustice. Never have there been redistributive policies: taking from the rich (through legal means) and passing it to the needier. Then there would be equity. 


The worst is that with our collective obsession of growth we are mining the vitality from the Earth. We need growth, but with a new ecological consciousness that can free us from the slavery of productivity and consumerism. This is our great challenge, as we face the uncomfortable Brazilian and Global contradiction.

Whither the Indignados and the Occupiers?

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

In one of the most important debates in the Thematic Social Forum of Porto Alegre, Brazil, where I had the opportunity to participate, I was able listen to the living testimonies of los Indigndos from Spain, London, Egypt and the United States. What impressed me deeply was the seriousness of the speeches, far from the anarchic tone of the 1960s, and very down to earth. The central theme was «democracy now». A different democracy was re-vindicated, very different than the one we are used to, that is more farce than reality. They want a democracy built from the streets, from the squares, from the place where real power originates. A democracy from below, organically created by the peoples, transparent in their procedures and never again corroded by corruption. To begin with, this democracy is characterized by linking social justice with ecologic justice.

Curiously, Los Indignados, the Occupiers and those of the Arab Spring do not identify themselves with the classic speeches of the left, or even the dreams of the several editions of the World Social Forum. We find ourselves in a different era, and a new sensibility has arisen. Another way of being a citizen is postulated, powerfully including women, who were previously made invisible, citizens with rights, with participation, with horizontal and transversal relationships facilitated by the social networks, by the mobile media, twitter and facebooks. We find ourselves facing a true revolution. Relationships were previously organized in a vertical form, from top to bottom. They are now created horizontally, towards the edges, in the immediacy of communication at the speed of light. This form represents the new times we are living: of information, of the discovery of the value of subjectivity; instead of modernity, encapsulated in itself, one of relational subjectivity, of the emergence of a consciousness of the kind found within the selfsame and unique Common House, that is threatened with collapse, as a result of the excessive thievery practiced by our system of production and consumerism.

This sensibility no longer tolerates the system’s methods for overcoming the economic crisis and its derivatives, salvaging the banks with the money of the citizens, imposing a severe fiscal austerity, dismantling social security, cheapening employment, cutting investments, illusorily supposing that this way the confidence of the markets will be regained and the economy will be revived. The belief has become dogma, and in many places the stupid catch phrase is heard: “TINA: there is no alternative”. The sacrilegious high priests of the not so holy trinity made up of the International Monetary Fund, (IMF), the European Union and by the European Central Bank, have dealt a financial blow to Greece and Italy, and have imposed their acolytes there with responsibility for the crisis, without going through the democratic rites. Everything is viewed and decided from an exclusively economic perspective, devaluing the social, and increasing unnecessary collective suffering, the desperation of families, and youth indignation because they cannot find jobs. All this can result in a crisis with dramatic consequences.

Paul Krugmann, Nobel Prize Laureate for Economics, spent some time in Iceland, studying the way this small Arctic country solved its devastating crisis. They followed the correct path that other countries should have also followed: they let the banks collapse, jailed the bankers and speculators who engaged in embezzlement, rewrote their Constitution, guaranteed social security to avoid a generalized collapse, and managed to create jobs. Consequently, the country emerged from the mess and is one of the Nordic countries with the greatest growth. News of the Icelandic path has been suppressed by the world means of mass communications, out of fear that it might serve as an example for other countries. And thus the carriage, with incorrect but coherent measures, rushes rapidly towards the precipice.

Against this foreseeable course stand Los Indignados. They want a different world, friendlier to life and respectful of nature. Perhaps Iceland will serve as inspiration for them. Wither will they go? Who knows. Certainly not in the direction of the worn-out models of the past. They will head in the direction of what Paulo Freire spoke about, the «unedited viable» that will be born from the new creativity, one that expresses itself, without violence, with a democratic-participatory spirit. In any event, the world will never be as it was before, and much less as the capitalists would like it to be.