The arrival of a prospenomic economy is inevitable and is related to human socioeconomic interactions, but, above all, closely related to the way we interact with the planet: 1- how we use the available natural resources, in the first place; 2- the way we relate to other forms of life, in the background; and, finally, 3- the way we culturally interact with each other.
The way we interact with each other has, if not well directed, the potential to undermine the first two interactions, an example is the process that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 or how we indiscriminately use the CFC, causing damage to the shield offered by the ozone layer, with the potential to sterilize life on the planet. In these two examples we see that human social interactions can endanger all forms of life on the planet, human and non-human.
Carl Sagan once said “We are fortunate: we are alive; we are powerful; the welfare of our civilization and our species is in our hands. If we do not speak for Earth, who will? If we are not committed to our own survival, who will be?”
So let's talk about that first.
The prospenomic social economy emerges as a result of the conception of a global civilization, predicted by Samuel Hutington, which even though each culture is different and unique, cultivates elements of its own culture of origin, respects and interacts positively with other cultures, and understands DIVERSITY as RICHNESS, understands that the planet is a single organism THAT CAN ONLY PROSPER IN UNION and that belligerent actions, of all kinds, are highly harmful to the whole system.
Day-to-day situations tell us that, from a practical point of view, intelligent actions that promote prosperity and good coexistence are gaining more and more prominence in global relations, at all levels: 1-since the origin of commercial flights, he realized the need for a single language for flight controllers, with the aim of organizing routes and reducing accidents; 2-global trade rules are discussed, today in an elitist way in Davos, but in the near future in a more democratic way, with perspectives of being mutually accepted and, mainly, the growing social interactions via applications available on the Internet, today quite polarized, which demand the need for routines to mitigate individual conflicts, making them tools for valuing differences, beliefs and values, with evolutionary purposes and not just a forum for offending those who think differently.
But how did we get here and how do we proceed from there?
Since the 'Axial Age' (500-300 BC), which corresponds to the period in which most of the main religious and spiritual traditions were conceived in European societies, the theme of acceptance and joint work is debated, but unfortunately little applied in practical life.
The Age of Enlightenment profoundly enriched religious and philosophical understanding and continues to influence present-day thinking. Works collected here include masterpieces by David Hume, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, as well as religious sermons and moral debates on the issues of the day, such as the slave trade.
Immanuel Kant writes “[A man], who is in prosperity, while he sees that others have to contend with great wretchedness and that he could help them, thinks:
What concern is it of mine? Let everyone be as happy as Heaven pleases, or as he can make himself;
I will take nothing from him nor even envy him, only I do not wish to contribute anything to his welfare or to his assistance in distress!
Now no doubt, if such a mode of thinking were a universal law, the human race might very well subsist, and doubtless even better than in a state in which everyone talks of sympathy and good-will, or even takes care occasionally to put it into practice, but, on the other side, also cheats when he can, betrays the rights of men, or otherwise violates them.
But although it is possible that a universal law of nature might exist in accordance with that maxim, it is impossible to will that such a principle should have the universal validity of a law of nature. For a will which resolved this would contradict itself, inasmuch as many cases might occur in which one would have need of the love and sympathy of others, and in which, by such a law of nature, sprung from his own will, he would deprive himself of all hope of the aid he desires.”
(Immanuel Kant - Königsberg, April 22, 1724 - Königsberg, February 12, 1804)
-------
The Age of Reason saw conflict between Protestantism and Catholicism transformed into one between faith and logic - a debate that continues in the twenty-first century.
Among Protestant Christians prosperity, financial blessing and physical well-being are reflections of God's will for the faithful. It also says that faith; positive speech and donations to religious causes will increase a person's health and material wealth. Material success, and especially financial success, is seen as a sign of divine favor.
Just as World War I gave great impetus to communism, exalted liberalism and generated the so-called third wave, that of fascism, World War II generated the Cold War, with the polarization of two major world powers and non-aligned countries.
In the 1990s, the American political scientist, advisor and academic Samuel Hutington explains in 'The Clash of Civilizations' how different cultures overlapped the bipolarity if the Cold War and at least 9 other great civilizations emerged:
- Western - cultures from Europe and the United States;
- Latin American – interspersing leftist initiatives to implant communism with rightwing military forces intervening against it;
- African - virtually all scholars agree and recognize Africa as a distinct culture, with the exception of Braudel who considers Saharan Africa as Islamic, the south as European imperialism and Ethiopia as a unique culture;
- Islamic - Originally from the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century AD, Islamic culture spread throughout North Africa, the Iberian Peninsula and Southeast Asia.
- Sinic Civilization - Born 1500 or even 2500 years ago, Huttington considers this civilization that corresponds to a large part of the Chinese territory, as Confucian, which serves as a unifying component (with controversies);
- Hindu - exists since 1500 BC, more than a religion or social system, Hinduism is the core of Indian culture. Like Sinic they are cultures that expand beyond the state of origin;
- Orthodox - is the civilization of countries whose predominant religion is the doctrine of Christianity that emerged in Byzantine and Tartar rulers, composed mainly by Russia and Eastern Europe.
- Buddhist – Based on Buddha's teachings, differs from Buddhism by two central elements - the first is because Buddhism rejects the preaching of religious leaders and ministers, has meditation as a key element, and the second because it rejects the Indian system of houses;
and - Japanese - which, although very close to China, had its prominence greatly reinforced in the 1970s/80s and early 90s with great technological and economic advances;
We tend to perceive that our civilization defines us more by what we are not than by what we are:
-If two South Americans talk to an Englishman, the difference is the Englishman, although they are all earthlings;
-If two Brazilians talk to an Argentinean, the Argentine is different, although they are all South Americans;
-If two Yanomamis talk to a Brazilian from the city, the difference is the guy from the city, even though they are all Brazilian.
According to Huntington, all these civilizations will continue to perceive themselves as different according to their origins, their languages will distance themselves from each other as they gain power. However, a Universal Civilization will arise when a different form of life presents itself (for example, an extraterrestrial), so we will unite as a terrestrial civilization different from the extraterrestrial.
This can also happen when we realize that other beings who share the planet with us also have their own civilizations, which, although not as elaborate as ours, are of fundamental importance to the planet, such as underground mycelial networks, bees, whales.
Prospenomics and the Refit of Universal Civilization to the Planet Earth
All these differences at sociocultural levels must be seen as insignificant point compared to all the dynamics of the planet that we ignore. The human being is unique in its genus and species, as well as all other live species on this planet.
“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” – Aldous Huxley
We only got here because there was a balance between different forms of life that evolved together in the last 4.5 billion years of evolution.
It's not just because our society has evolved more intensely than that of other life forms on Earth, that we should ignore or belittle them.
We must, like any other form of life on this planet, act collaboratively, respecting the extinct that brought we here and accepting those that we see as a substitute for the less adapted of now.
The subject seems to have taken a leap from the human sociocultural theme to the issue of evolution on Earth - this is deliberate, it is better for this scare to be given in a text than in demonstrations of the planet, with the potential to cause great damage to humanity.
