Mutilation of the tree of life via mass extinction of animal genera.

Mass extinctions during the past 500 million y rapidly removed branches from the phylogenetic tree of life and required millions of years for evolution to generate functional replacements for the extinct (EX) organisms. Here we show, by examining 5,400 vertebrate genera (excluding fishes) comprising 34,600 species, that 73 genera became EX since 1500 AD. Beyond any doubt, the human-driven sixth mass extinction is more severe than previously assessed and is rapidly accelerating. The current generic extinction rates are 35 times higher than expected background rates prevailing in the last million years under the absence of human impacts. The genera lost in the last five centuries would have taken some 18,000 y to vanish in the absence of human beings. Current generic extinction rates will likely greatly accelerate in the next few decades due to drivers accompanying the growth and consumption of the human enterprise such as habitat destruction, illegal trade, and climate disruption. If all now-endangered genera were to vanish by 2,100, extinction rates would be 354 (average) or 511 (for mammals) times higher than background rates, meaning that genera lost in three centuries would have taken 106,000 and 153,000 y to become EX in the absence of humans. Such mutilation of the tree of life and the resulting loss of ecosystem services provided by biodiversity to humanity is a serious threat to the stability of civilization. Immediate political, economic, and social efforts of an unprecedented scale are essential if we are to prevent these extinctions and their societal impacts.

Colonialism, science, and health / Colonialismo, ciencia y salud

Abstract In addition to genocide, slavery, and the dispossession of indigenous people, colonialism, as a form of control, meant the suppression of traditional knowledge. The imposition of Christianity, the modern Western paradigm, and modern science that followed perpetrated this suppression. The universal role held by modern science is supported neither by epistemic nor social aspects. It is ineffective and complicit in the collapse of civilization, and it is worsened by comprehensive and unifying ideas to be reduced to an input-process of technological innovation for the benefit of social control industries such as the military, information technology, communication, or health. Furthermore, it suppresses ancestral knowledge related to health and medicine that may be beneficial and must be researched (stimulant medicines). Coupled with the health industry, it promotes the medicalization of life, spreading uncertainty, anxiety, and unease. Therefore, it is an instrument of neocolonialism that imposes its priorities, supplanting problems in subordinated countries, and extracts substantial resources, which is detrimental to social policies and programs. The biggest objection to the universality of modern science is derived from its empiricist and reductionist nature. Through the practically impossible idea of a unifying and explanatory knowledge, it impedes researchers the understanding of the complexity of the world and their historical moment and to act accordingly. It transforms great creative and liberating potential to submissiveness for the interests of capital and its representatives.

Resumen El colonialismo, como forma de dominación, significó, además de genocidio, esclavitud o despojo de pueblos originarios, la supresión de saberes tradicionales perpetrada por la imposición del cristianismo, del paradigma moderno occidental y de la ciencia moderna que le siguió. El carácter universal detentado por la ciencia moderna no se sostiene en lo epistémico ni en lo social; es inoperante con y cómplice del colapso civilizatorio; se empobrece de ideas comprensivas e integradoras para reducirse al insumo-proceso de la innovación tecnológica en provecho de las industrias del control social (militar, informática, de comunicación o de la salud); y suprime saberes ancestrales de la esfera de la salud que encierran beneficios y posibilidades que es preciso investigar (medicina estimulante). Aunada a la industria de la salud, impulsa la medicalización de la vida, preñándola de incertidumbre, angustia y desasosiego. Es instrumento del neocolonialismo al imponer sus prioridades, que suplantan las propias de los países subordinados y sustraen cuantiosos recursos en detrimento de políticas y programas sociales. La mayor objeción a la universalidad de la ciencia moderna deriva de su carácter empirista y reduccionista que, al condicionar la imposibilidad práctica de un conocimiento integrador y explicativo, aleja a los investigadores del entendimiento de la complejidad del mundo, de su momento histórico y de actuar en consecuencia, y transforma la gran potencialidad creativa y liberadora de este enorme contingente en docilidad a los designios de los intereses del capital y sus agentes.

Colonialism, science, and health.

In addition to genocide, slavery, and the dispossession of indigenous people, colonialism, as a form of control, meant the suppression of traditional knowledge. The imposition of Christianity, the modern Western paradigm, and modern science that followed perpetrated this suppression. The universal role held by modern science is supported neither by epistemic nor social aspects. It is ineffective and complicit in the collapse of civilization, and it is worsened by comprehensive and unifying ideas to be reduced to an input-process of technological innovation for the benefit of social control industries such as the military, information technology, communication, or health. Furthermore, it suppresses ancestral knowledge related to health and medicine that may be beneficial and must be researched (stimulant medicines). Coupled with the health industry, it promotes the medicalization of life, spreading uncertainty, anxiety, and unease. Therefore, it is an instrument of neocolonialism that imposes its priorities, supplanting problems in subordinated countries, and extracts substantial resources, which is detrimental to social policies and programs. The biggest objection to the universality of modern science is derived from its empiricist and reductionist nature. Through the practically impossible idea of a unifying and explanatory knowledge, it impedes researchers the understanding of the complexity of the world and their historical moment and to act accordingly. It transforms great creative and liberating potential to submissiveness for the interests of capital and its representatives.

El colonialismo, como forma de dominación, significó, además de genocidio, esclavitud o despojo de pueblos originarios, la supresión de saberes tradicionales perpetrada por la imposición del cristianismo, del paradigma moderno occidental y de la ciencia moderna que le siguió. El carácter universal detentado por la ciencia moderna no se sostiene en lo epistémico ni en lo social; es inoperante con y cómplice del colapso civilizatorio; se empobrece de ideas comprensivas e integradoras para reducirse al insumo-proceso de la innovación tecnológica en provecho de las industrias del control social (militar, informática, de comunicación o de la salud); y suprime saberes ancestrales de la esfera de la salud que encierran beneficios y posibilidades que es preciso investigar (medicina estimulante). Aunada a la industria de la salud, impulsa la medicalización de la vida, preñándola de incertidumbre, angustia y desasosiego. Es instrumento del neocolonialismo al imponer sus prioridades, que suplantan las propias de los países subordinados y sustraen cuantiosos recursos en detrimento de políticas y programas sociales. La mayor objeción a la universalidad de la ciencia moderna deriva de su carácter empirista y reduccionista que, al condicionar la imposibilidad práctica de un conocimiento integrador y explicativo, aleja a los investigadores del entendimiento de la complejidad del mundo, de su momento histórico y de actuar en consecuencia, y transforma la gran potencialidad creativa y liberadora de este enorme contingente en docilidad a los designios de los intereses del capital y sus agentes.

Crítica de la causalidad mecanicista en las ciencias de la vida / Criticism of mechanistic causality in life sciences

Resumen El empirismo reduccionista (ER) subyacente al habitus científico actual, al imponer la causalidad mecanicista (CM) como principio explicativo de las ciencias de la vida, ha oscurecido la comprensión del proceso vital al equipararlo al de una máquina. Se analizan las formas diversas que toman las ideas en el conocimiento como paradigmas (antropocéntrico y de disyunción, reducción y simplificación): lógicas implícitas de las formas de pensar y actuar humanos y como teorías comprensivo-explicativas. Se plantea que el ER, al desestimar las ideas, suplanta la significación biológica de lo observado por la significación estadística de la CM y las matemáticas lineales y probabilísticas. Se argumenta que la objetividad no deriva del control experimental, sino de un marco interpretativo pertinente al tipo de sucesos bajo estudio, y que la convicción de que la objetividad radica en el cómo se observa constituye el gran mito del ER que soslaya los paradigmas y su influencia. Se propone la causalidad contextual y se contrasta con la CM para realzar sus limitaciones y explicar la complejidad biológica. La coincidencia del colapso civilizatorio y la apoteosis de la ciencia reduccionista justifica tacharla de mayormente indiferente, omisa, impotente, acomodaticia o cómplice de la dominancia de los intereses de lucro sin límites, que todo lo degradan. Se concluye que son tiempos de definiciones: integrarse a fuerzas que apuntan, de modos diversos, a contrarrestar esa dominancia y preservar nuestro hábitat común o persistir en la complicidad individualista y suicida de «cada quién lo suyo y sálvese quien pueda¼.

Abstract The reductionist empiricism (RE) underlying the current scientific habitus by imposing mechanistic causality (MC) as an explanatory principle of life sciences has obscured the understanding of the life process by equating it with that of a machine. The shapes ideas can take within knowledge are analyzed: as paradigms (anthropocentric and of disjunction, reduction and simplification), implicit logics of human ways of thinking and acting, and as comprehensive-explanatory theories. It is proposed that, by dismissing the ideas, the RE supplants the biological significance of what is observed by the statistical significance of the MC and the linear and probabilistic mathematics. It is argued that objectivity does not derive from experimental control, but from an interpretative framework pertinent to the type of events being studied and that the conviction that objectivity lies in the method of observation constitutes a myth of the RE that circumvents paradigms and its influence. Contextual causality is proposed and contrasted with the MC to highlight its limitations to explain the ungraspable biological complexity. The coincidence of the ongoing collapse of civilization and the apotheosis of reductionist science justifies dismissing it as mostly indifferent, ominous, impotent, accommodating or complicit with the dominance of profit interests without limits that degrade everything. It is concluded that it is time for resolutions: integrate with forces that aim, in various ways, to counteract this dominance and preserve our common habitat or to continue with the suicidal individualist complicity of "each their due and every man for himself."

Criticism of mechanistic causality in life sciences.

The reductionist empiricism (RE) underlying the current scientific habitus by imposing mechanistic causality (MC) as an explanatory principle of life sciences has obscured the understanding of the life process by equating it with that of a machine. The shapes ideas can take within knowledge are analyzed: as paradigms (anthropocentric and of disjunction, reduction and simplification), implicit logics of human ways of thinking and acting, and as comprehensive-explanatory theories. It is proposed that, by dismissing the ideas, the RE supplants the biological significance of what is observed by the statistical significance of the MC and the linear and probabilistic mathematics. It is argued that objectivity does not derive from experimental control, but from an interpretative framework pertinent to the type of events being studied and that the conviction that objectivity lies in the method of observation constitutes a myth of the RE that circumvents paradigms and its influence. Contextual causality is proposed and contrasted with the MC to highlight its limitations to explain the ungraspable biological complexity. The coincidence of the ongoing collapse of civilization and the apotheosis of reductionist science justifies dismissing it as mostly indifferent, ominous, impotent, accommodating or complicit with the dominance of profit interests without limits that degrade everything. It is concluded that it is time for resolutions: integrate with forces that aim, in various ways, to counteract this dominance and preserve our common habitat or to continue with the suicidal individualist complicity of "each their due and every man for himself."

El empirismo reduccionista (ER) subyacente al habitus científico actual, al imponer la causalidad mecanicista (CM) como principio explicativo de las ciencias de la vida, ha oscurecido la comprensión del proceso vital al equipararlo al de una máquina. Se analizan las formas diversas que toman las ideas en el conocimiento como paradigmas (antropocéntrico y de disyunción, reducción y simplificación): lógicas implícitas de las formas de pensar y actuar humanos y como teorías comprensivo-explicativas. Se plantea que el ER, al desestimar las ideas, suplanta la significación biológica de lo observado por la significación estadística de la CM y las matemáticas lineales y probabilísticas. Se argumenta que la objetividad no deriva del control experimental, sino de un marco interpretativo pertinente al tipo de sucesos bajo estudio, y que la convicción de que la objetividad radica en el cómo se observa constituye el gran mito del ER que soslaya los paradigmas y su influencia. Se propone la causalidad contextual y se contrasta con la CM para realzar sus limitaciones y explicar la complejidad biológica. La coincidencia del colapso civilizatorio y la apoteosis de la ciencia reduccionista justifica tacharla de mayormente indiferente, omisa, impotente, acomodaticia o cómplice de la dominancia de los intereses de lucro sin límites, que todo lo degradan. Se concluye que son tiempos de definiciones: integrarse a fuerzas que apuntan, de modos diversos, a contrarrestar esa dominancia y preservar nuestro hábitat común o persistir en la complicidad individualista y suicida de «cada quién lo suyo y sálvese quien pueda¼..