Patricio Venegas-Aravena

Thinkers of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Domingo de Soto and Juan Caramuel, developed an ethical conception of value rooted in the common good, positing that any interaction between two parties is only just if there is an equality of risks. Given that this perspective lacked subsequent development, the present work formalizes Hispanic Social Justice (HSJ) to apply it to a contemporary context. Various dynamics of the Anglo-Saxon free market—including marketing, banking interests, social media, gender roles, pension systems, American historical narratives, child-rearing, labor exploitation, and warfare—are analyzed to demonstrate that in each case, the gain of one party is maximized through the covert capitalization of the risks and vulnerabilities of the other. From this analysis, three primary conclusions are derived: 1.- The risk asymmetry inherent in these dynamics renders the modern economic structure a fundamentally unjust system from the perspective of HSJ. 2.- The deliberate concealment of such risks allows for the reinterpretation of the dominant economic ethics as a Theory of Value Based on Implied Risk. 3.- In the absence of internal mechanisms that promote an equitable balance of risks, a reformulation of value is proposed in which maximum profit is aligned with risk equity.

The traditional dispute regarding the existence of God has historically hinged upon the foundations of logic and epistemology, wherein principles such as causality and non-contradiction have proven crucial for arguments both supporting and opposing divine attributes. Umberto Eco’s critique of theism, representative of Western rationalism, assumes a classical logic of universal and timeless validity. However, recent advancements in multiscale thermodynamics, specifically the concepts of Physica Mutabilis (changing physical laws) and Scientia Præteriti (structural time lag between knowledge and the physical present of the universe), could potentially alter the very structure of logic. This paper explores a scenario wherein logic itself becomes contextually dependent, rendering the coexistence of a proposition and its negation (Omnis Verum Simul ) an ontological possibility. Furthermore, it analyzes how this perspective challenges classical logical objections to the existence of God (omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence) as advanced by Eco, suggesting that logic, anchored to a particular set of physical laws, lacks absolute universality. The resolution of apparent contradictions in divine attributes, such as simultaneous presence and absence, within asynchronous causal frameworks is discussed. Moreover, the idea of external forces, characteristic of the Principium Luxuriæ which permits Physica Mutabilis and the dynamics of the entities composing the universe, is posited as a factor that could enable the simultaneity of presence and absence in an entity. Ultimately, while this work does not constitute proof of God’s existence, it is argued that a dynamic universe necessitates a reconsideration of fundamental philosophical distinctions and the very notion of existence under a temporally displaced logic, thereby reopening the metaphysical plausibility of the divine and challenging the limits of a metaphysics predicated upon a static logic.

The anthropic principle suggests that the universe's fundamental constants are precisely fine-tuned to allow for life. However, by incorporating a dynamic physical perspective of nature, such as the multiscale thermodynamic principle known as Principium Luxuriæ, it is found that fundamental constants and forces of the universe may evolve over time in a non-Euclidean universe. If the universe has this geometry, it would have profound implications, which are discussed in this paper. For example, that the conditions conducive to life are not static and finely tuned but rather transient, undermining the need for a fine-tuned universe. Given that multiscale thermodynamics requires external forces, it's plausible that the universe's expansion could be linked to the existence of other phenomena such as other universes acting as external forces, each with their own evolving laws of physics. This suggests that life might be a transient and coincidental occurrence across multiple universes, if they exist. Additionally, the ever-evolving physical laws limit our ability to fully comprehend the universe at any given time. As we inevitably overlook certain aspects of reality, physical systems cannot be fully explained by the sum of their parts. Consequently, emergent phenomena like consciousness could not be studied from a self-referential perspective, as there will always be elements beyond our understanding.