We investigate whether age profiles of ethnobiological knowledge development are consistent with predictions derived from life history theory about the timing of productivity and reproduction. Life history models predict complementary knowledge profiles developing across the lifespan for women and men as they experience changes in embodied capital and the needs of dependent offspring. We evaluate these predictions using an ethnobiological knowledge assessment tool developed for an off-grid pastoralist population known as Choyeros, from Baja California Sur, Mexico. Our results indicate that (...) while individuals acquire knowledge of most dangerous items and edible resources by early adulthood, knowledge of plants and animals relevant to the age and sex divided labor domains and ecologies (e.g., women’s house gardens, men’s herding activities in the wilderness) continues to develop into middle adulthood but to different degrees and at different rates for men and women. As the demands of offspring on parents accumulate with age, reproductive-aged adults continue to develop their knowledge to meet their children’s needs. After controlling for vision, our analysis indicates that many post-reproductive adults show the greatest ethnobiological knowledge. These findings extend our understanding of the evolved human life history by illustrating how changes in embodied capital and the needs of dependent offspring predict the development of men’s and women’s ethnobiological knowledge across the lifespan. (shrink)

The “power of the real”, which Zubiri conceptualized in the final period of his philosophy, is “inspired” in the creation concept of the Greek Fathers, according to Zubiri’sexposition of Greek Patristics in “Supernatural Being: God and Deification in Pauline Theology”. In addition, Zubiri makes that concept his own in a course on Christianity, published posthumously. That inspiration can be detected when Zubiri radicalizes his philosophical approach. This implies purifying his philosophy of elements from Latin theology,whose notions he contrasts with those (...) of Greek theology in the aforementioned work. InOn Essence, these elements do not permit Zubiri to elude the horizon of nihility, in hisview in force in Western thought from St. Augustine to Hegel, but not genuinely philosophical because it originates with Revelation. A consequence of this radicalization is toconside r “creation” as a revealed datum. At the same time, and insofar as this radicalization implies sticking only to the facts, Zubiri elaborates a proof of the reality of God, fromwhich follow as intellectually legitimate non-theistic options.El “poder de lo real”, que Zubiri conceptualiza en el último período de su filosofía, está “inspirado” en el concepto de creación propio de los Padres griegos, según la exposiciónque hace de la Patrística griega en “El ser sobrenatural: Dios y la deificación en la teologíapaulina”. Además, hace suyo ese concepto en un curso sobre el Cristianismo, publicadopóstumamente. Dicha inspiración puede detectarse cuando se radicalizan sus planteamientos filosóficos. Esto implicó depurar su filosofía de elementos provenientes de la Teología latina, cuyas nociones contrapone a los de la Teología griega en el trabajo mencionado. A la altura de Sobre la esencia, esos elementos no le permitirán sustraerse al horizontede nihilidad, a su juicio vigente en el pensamiento occidental desde San Agustín hastaHegel, y no genuinamente filosófico porque se origina con la Revelación. Consecuencia deesa radicalidad es considerar la “creación” como un dato revelado. Al mismo tiempo, y en lamedida en que esa radicalización implica atenerse sólo a los hechos, Zubiri elabora unaprueba de la realidad de Dios desde la que resultan intelectualmente legítimas las opciones no teístas. (shrink)

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-021-09399-4.