EVOLUTIO: A Research Center for Evolution and Development

The Unfolding of a New Vision of Life, Cosmos and Evolution

Da Vinci

Has science already answered the fundamental questions about the concepts of Life, Cosmos and Evolution? Has science not relegated these fundamental questions by following up on more immediate, “useful” and practical endeavors that ultimately ensure that the wheel of capitalism keeps spinning in its frantic search for material and economic progress? We believe that this consists of an ideological appropriation of science by capitalism (Ostachuk, 2015a, 2015b), and that science must regain its spiritual sovereignty and re-address the questions and mysteries that have possessed humanity since time immemorial. Here it should be clarified that applied science and technology have their importance and value, but must be organized and subject to the maximum value of Life and the progress of human well-being (Ostachuk, 2018b).

There is something terribly wrong with the current theory of evolution, understood as the Darwinian theory with its successive versions and extensions. The concept of natural selection, the cornerstone of Darwinism, is logically inconsistent. This has been demonstrated in some of my latest academic publications (Ostachuk, 2019, 2020). Darwin did not explain the “origin of species”, but rather their preservation through the supposed mechanism of natural selection. But both preservation and selection are processes subsequent to the origin of a new species. In this manner, it does not consist of a cause but of a consequence and, therefore, natural selection does not consist of a causal mechanism for the generation of new species (an effect cannot be the cause of it). In reality, the entire conceptual framework of Darwinism is inadequate. Organisms do not compete with each other for the survival of the fittest. The fundamental relationship in Nature is not competition or confrontation, but interconnectivity, complementarity, and relational meaningfulness (Ostachuk, 2013). Nature is not a battlefield in which conflict, disorder and scarcity reigns, and which is occupied by individuals isolated and separated from each other. Nature is a meaningful and senseful relational field, in which any alteration and damage in a region of it extends and spreads to the rest of the system with consequences whose severity is difficult to anticipate.

For all this, a new theory of evolution is necessary to explain how it is possible that organisms as simple as bacteria, protozoa and diatoms could have generated organisms as complex as primates, and among them, the human being, with his intellectual capacity that allowed him to develop the technological and digital society in which we live. A theory that explains how it is possible that such a complex Universe has arisen from such simple materials, and even from an origin and a starting point before which the only thing that existed was nothingness itself. A theory that explains how it is possible that a being capable of asking these questions and wondering about the origin and development of all things has appeared in the Cosmos and in Nature, which is the same as asking how it is possible that a being capable of feeling and thinking, of suffering and enjoying, a being capable of having ideals and purposes and fighting for them for a cause superior to himself, even to the point of giving his life for it, how is it possible that this being so complex, rich, and to some extent still unknown, has emerged from a single cell, an egg-cell, lacking all the capacities, riches and depths of human existence (Ostachuk, 2018a). Such a theory already exists (Ostachuk, 2020). The remaining question is to know if we are willing to abandon our old clothes and prejudices, the ideological matrix with which we have been formed and educated through years and centuries of cultural heritage, to open our consciousness to new possibilities, to new realities, for more incredible and fantastic they may seem to our current materialist consciousness. Perhaps it is time for metamorphosis, and for the chrysalis to give way to the butterfly, in order to fly and finally be free, free from the mental and ideological colonization in which we are induced to live day by day. The choice is yours.

This article is a translation of the following academic paper:

Ostachuk, A. (2018). El despliegue de una nueva visión de la vida, el cosmos y la evolución. Ludus Vitalis. 28(53): 81–83. [Evolutio] [PhilPapers]


Ostachuk, A. (2013). El Umwelt de Uexküll y Merleau-Ponty. Ludus Vitalis. 21(39): 45-65.

Ostachuk, A. (2015a). La teoría de las dos ciencias: ciencia burguesa y ciencia proletaria. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad. 10(suppl. 1): 191-194.

Ostachuk, A. (2015b). Bogdanov e a teoria das duas ciências. Sociologia em Rede. 5(5): 114-118.

Ostachuk, A. (2018a). The evolution concept: the concept evolution. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy. 14(3): 354-378.

Ostachuk, A. (2018b). La vida: el centro de nuestra existencia. Ludus Vitalis. 26(50): 257-260.

Ostachuk, A. (2019). The ideological matrix of science: natural selection and immunity as case studies. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy. 15(1): 182-213.

Ostachuk, A. (2020). A theory of evolution as a process of unfolding. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy. 16(1): 347-379.