The aim of this article is to make a theorice reflection upon the experience of evolutionary values in the democratic process of a country. For that, the content here presented was elaborated considering specific
studies of the theme, lessons on the subject taught at the CI where the author volunteers and the daily applicability of these values within the democratic regime in which the author is living in this present life.
The main idea is to show readers, especially intermissivist readers, the importance in identifying our evolutionary values and the feasibility of this concept for the proexological complexis. The text shows readers
where these values come from, how to identify them, what the relation between Ethics and Cosmoethics is, in addition to giving applicable examples to the democratic process in which we are inserted. The article
still talks about the axiological theses which help us to understand the formation of values in the history of the western culture and an upgrade which we can make to take our values to another level. In the last part,
the text highlights an evolutionary value, solidarity, and shows how we can theorice it in our daily life.
In the conscientiological discourse upon which cosmoethic principlology is based, two principles, among many others, are fundamental: “may the best happens to all” and “the thing that is not worth is not worth indeed”. Although such principles integrate the same discourse and are used to solve the same problem of moral order and simultaneously, both highlight completely opposite approaches. To better explain this opposition,
such principles are brought closer, by analogy, to two philosophical trends which rival in the area of Ethics: utilitarianism, by Jeremy Bentham; and the Kantian Ethics, by Immanuel Kant. In view of that, the aim is to verify whether it is possible to make them compatible with the principles that inform the democratic political regime.
To begin with, the article develops the fundamentals of democracy, analysing the word, the historic context and presenting its meaning. The methodology used for this work was: bibliographical revision, cosmogram, debates and paraperceptions. Secondly, criticisms concerning the flawed use of this word will be presented, instigating critical debate with the purpose of deconstruct or present a new perspective. Is democracy really being applied? Do we live in a Democratic Constitutional State? And how is world perception influenced? Continuing the analyses, the text demonstrates that the evolutionary level of the group influences in the quality of democracy and that democracy, on its own, is not a cosmoethic component. Lastly, the concept of democracy will be broaden, in accordance with consciential paradigm and its multidimensional application, taking into consideration cosmoethic principles.
“Cosmoethos” Thiago Silva Cunha v1. n.1 (2019) (2019)
This present article is based on personal reflection of the author about the relation of consciential paradigm, democratic pillar of liberty, regime of democratic govern, considering section of the Encyclopedia of Conscientiology, Politicology, mainly Cosmoethicracy. Such reflection is founded in the experience of more than two decades of conscientiology volunteering, essential consciential laboratory to the experimentation of
Cosmoethics. The present text suggests the concept of Cosmoethic Liberocracy in the condition of an intermediate stage between Democracy and Cosmoethicracy. It would be a regime of intermediate govern, a consequence of reflected, continuous, multidimensional, cosmoethic experience of free will, up to the consciential achievement of an Evolutionist or Serenissimus level, when Cosmoethicracy conditions are really present. Considering cosmoethic principles, the work aims to enrich the intermissivist’s reasoning about individual responsibilities and paraduties in the consolidation of more representative regimes of government of advanced dimensions, besides Democracy, once this is just a sine qua non condition, an inevitable stage, to the consolidation of Cosmoethicracy. It aims to cooperate with the political holothosene change bringing
homeostatic variables to the understanding of these regimes of government aiming to exemption of unnecessary, anachronistic self-mimeses. To exercise free-will, considering cosmoethic principles, turns it into
a substantial path to theorice establishment of Cosmoethic Liberocracy and, afterwards, to the consolidation of Cosmoethicracy. This personal and group victory, especially of the Cosmoethical Conscientiological Community
(ICCC), in Foz do Iguaçu, PR, where most of the pioneering intermissivists are, will produce beneficial holokarmic effects to those involved in this evolutionary challenge.
The article presents research on self-cognition of the maximized conditions in the cosmoethic libertarian actions experienced by a senior practitioner of penta in the light of mundane repercussions in the daily democratic politics. Aiming to encourage self-reflection to qualify personal acts to govern and be governed, to lead and be led, suggesting the elaborate Personal Code of Cosmoethics (PCC) in order to increase commitment with self-cosmoethic interassistantial responsibility. The research methodology of this work was conscientiology bibliography plus daily records, in addition to theorice study of cosmoethic self-critic experience of penta self-experimentation.
This article brings closer the concepts of Paralawlogy and Parapoliticology, specialties of Conscientiology, aiming to present basic fundamentals to the development and implementation of Worldwide Cosmoethic Government on this planet, concomitantly happening along with extraphysical reurbanization (base year 2019). It is suggested how importance it is for conscins to identify Consciential Self-politics and techniques are presented to help consciousness to broaden their cosmovision. Democracy appears as the best method for the development of Worldwide Government for the future, yet to be perfected from a more lucid community in relation to its own extraphysical values, permeating life behaviour in this earthly dimension. As a reference while an evolutionary model Homo sapiens evoluciologicus e o Homo sapiens serenissimus.