**2. Ethics of Pachamama**

The ethics of Pachamama, as a model of a holistic life, has as its backbone the principles of relationality, complementarity, balance, and reciprocity, which are reviewed below:

#### **2.1 Relationality**

For Andean philosophy, the individual as such is "nothing" (a "non-entity"). It is part of a network of multiple relationships [28]. Disconnecting from the natural and cosmic nexus (a postulate of the Enlightenment) would mean for the Andes people to sign their own death warrant [28]. This principle has to do with a holistic conception of life. Everything is related, linked, and connected to each other. This fact can be stated negatively and positively. In the first, there is no unrelated entity; therefore, all are necessary. In the positive way, what one entity does or does not do will affect others. The relationship is not causal but ontological. This means that the important thing is not that one entity can alter the other but that all entities "are" one. There is no causal relationship but an essential one.

#### **2.2 The correspondence**

Andean thought involves a mutual and bidirectional correlation between two elements manifesting at every level and aspect of life [28]. Meanwhile, the rational or causal explanation is only one way—and not exclusive—of understanding the world and of knowing [33]; the Andean interpretation is symbolic, ritual, celebratory, and affective. When the correspondence manifests in all areas of life, there is a cosmic, an earthly, and an infra-terrestrial reality. There is correspondence between the cosmic and the human, the human and the extra-human, the organic and the inorganic, life and death, the good and the bad, the divine and the human, etc. The principle of correspondence has universal validity, in gnoseology, cosmology, and anthropology, as well as in politics and ethics [28].

#### **2.3 Complementarity**

All entities coexist [28]. An element depends on all the others to be absolute or complete. To be an element requires the one that could be considered opposite, and within the opposite, precisely so as not to consider it that way, we have in the centre the point of the different. That is, the elements are not exactly opposite but complementary and harmonious. All aspects "suffer" from an ontological deficiency. Thus, for example, the author Boaventura de Sousa Santos, to exemplify this approach, mentions that the principal countries are developed in technology but underdeveloped in social communitarianism. In this sense, ignorance of rational knowledge can mean emotional wisdom [34].

#### **2.4 Reciprocity**

It is the practical form of interaction between the other principles briefly stated [28]. In every interaction, human and non-human, every time an act or phenomenon occurs, a reciprocal action is manifested as a complementary contribution. Every human action has cosmic transcendence and is part of a universal order. This way of seeing the world does not make sense for Western thought, which is profoundly individualistic and promotes, on the contrary, the autonomy of the will and the freedom to make decisions. The acts of human beings, like those of nature, are mutually conditioned in such a way that the effort or "investment" in action by one doer will be "rewarded" by an effort or an "investment" of the same magnitude by the receiver [28]. From this, it follows, for example, that barter makes much sense in economic relations between people. The basis of reciprocity is what Estermann calls "cosmic justice" [28], which would bring together all our compartmentalised ways of understanding justice (economic, judicial, social, among others). Therefore, the basis of all relationships is the cosmic order, and an improper act can alter the global order.

Cosmic balance (harmony) requires reciprocity of actions and complementarity of participants. For the Andean people, a (unilateral) relationship in which one party only gives or is active, and the other only receives or is passive is neither imaginable nor possible [28]. The principle of reciprocity can be appreciated, lived, and applied in any sphere of life, from the daily and seemingly personal to the transcendent and cosmic. As for the relationship with nature, the human being, when interrelated with the soil when sowing or harvesting, does not do so as with an object but as a subject with whom he works and transforms. The sowing ritual is an interrelationship of deep respect and reciprocity. If nature is reciprocal with the human being and vice versa, preserving this interrelation through the notion of law is appropriate, whereas, if neglected, it deprotects and damages nature and irreparably affects the principle of reciprocity. The Andean philosophy does not start from the conception that the human being is the only and exclusive recipient of the benefits of the discourse of rights. On the contrary, Andean logic does not consider and, therefore, anthropocentrism is discarded in the foundation [35].
