The concept of buen vivir as a conglomerate of ecophilosophical worldview ideas of the indigenous peoples of Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article mentions examples of significant changes in the legislative practices of Latin American countries as the beginning of the process of interaction between people and nature on the basis of equality and justice. The article considers the content of the concept of buen vivir as a quintessence of the traditional worldview of the autochthonous population of South America. The world interest to these eco-oriented ideas is explained by the vision in them of an alternative way of development of modern mankind with a radical departure from developmentalism and consumerism to the harmonization of relations within the basic triad “man − society – nature”. A number of works by the Uruguayan philosopher Eduardo Gudinas Silinskas on this issue are considered, and his thoughts on the specifics of understanding the term buen vivir in Bolivia and Ecuador are given. It is concluded that the concept of buen vivir, being archaic in origin, is at the same time characterized by relevance and ultramodernity, representing not a formal reference to the past of indigenous peoples, but a well-thought-out practical strategy for moving towards an ecophilic future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".