• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
permaculture forums growies critters building homesteading energy monies kitchen purity ungarbage community wilderness fiber arts art permaculture artisans regional education skip experiences global resources cider press projects digital market permies.com private forums all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
master stewards:
  • Anne Miller
  • Pearl Sutton
  • r ranson
  • Nicole Alderman
  • Mike Haasl
stewards:
  • paul wheaton
  • Joseph Lofthouse
  • James Freyr
master gardeners:
  • Carla Burke
  • John F Dean
  • jordan barton
gardeners:
  • Jay Angler
  • Greg Martin
  • Leigh Tate
  • Likes 3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


Listen Online
Download

Get all of the Podcasts in convenient, giant zip files
Subscribe on iTunes

Summary

Paul Wheaton and Alan Booker continue their review and discussion of the big black book, Bill Mollison's Permaculture - a designers' manual.

1.2 Ethics (continued)

Would it have been better if the ethics had been implicit, not explicit? Paul tries to change things from the demand side. For this, you need explicit ethics.  In the Book of Eli, the antagonist believes that if he has the Bible, he can control people through faith. Any powerful tool can be reduced to dogma when written word is all they have. The people who aren't doing things first hand create cognitive dissonance, which allows dogma. Hands-on approaches keep you from reducing stuff to dogma. There is no single answer. No powerful tool is perfect. Reality intrudes on theories and keeps them from seeming perfect. Do-ers can use a tool despite the theory and dogma, and, if used wisely, get a lot done with it.  

Possible to have both ethics and profit. Ethics feed the soul when you first discover permaculture, but it drives people away too.  Two ways of looking at profit motive: 1 - all about short term gains;  2 - make whole systems more profitable. Sepp did this. Humans are a keystone species, but everyone/thing can benefit. Is it possible to apply the ethics and have many more people have a richer and more abundant life? Yes! Culture needs to be richer, not just us.  We can do more together than apart, and community is vital, but challenging. Get 100 people to help figure out how permaculture grows beyond Mollison. Maybe throw out 20% of it along the way else our growth will be impeded and we arrive back at dogma.  

Success is not just short-term profit. How do we agree how to move forward?  If permaculture were only for single individuals, would be possible for only implicit ethics. But scaled up, they need to be explicit.  Paul wants to arm people to defend themselves from the 'that's not permaculture' people.  


Relevant Threads

"Permaculture - a designers' manual" forum

The Big Black Book - summary, reviews,and where to buy

Ethics forum


Support the Empire

Help support the empire and get all of the podcasts in a bundle here in the digital market at permies.

To support production of these podcasts, make a donation here at Paul's Patreon page.



This podcast was made possible thanks to:

Dr. Hugh Gill Kultur
Eivind W. Bjørkavåg
Suleiman, Karrie, and Sasquatch
Bill Crim
anonymous
Kerry JustTooLazy
Jocelyn Campbell
Wade Luger
Sasquatch
Kyle Neath
Chris Sugg
havokeachday
Bill Erickson
Dominic Crolius
Julia Winter, world's slowest mosaic artist
G Cooper
Penny McLoughlin
Ash Jackson
Mehron Kugler
Lisa Goodspeed
Mark
Pasquale DeAngelis
Sean Benedict
Greg Martin
Rita Bliden
Dana Martin
Candace Dahlk
Keith Kuhnsman
Eric Tolbert
Ruwan Nanayakkara
Polly Jayne Smyth
COMMENTS:
 
pollinator
Posts: 1531
Location: Massachusetts, 6b, suburban, nearish coast, 50x50, full sun, 40" year-round even distribution
142
kids purity trees urban writing
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
This was illuminating!  I recall seeing an intro of Bill Mollison's to a PDC where he laid out the ecological problems, problems with human manipulation of nature and imbalances reaching tipping points, and said you need to understand this before you can get to the part about swales and techniques.  He didn't present it as joy, but just as the pill you have to swallow first before you get to the fun part.  This prologue addressed ethics.  

It was interesting to hear that this initially brought you joy.  I think if you ever taught a PDC you could just say what you said here: this is how Bill wanted this taught, it used to give me joy, it's given me much more pain over time.  And then people can learn from Bill's words and from your experience as well.  That's double the value.

As for the question of whether people become productive when they are given all the money they need, it seems there's an apples-to-oranges comparison there to the Lab.  You've talked about people whose parents paid for their tuition at the bootcamp so they could get them out of their house, since it was monetarily incentivized for them more than for the mission.  Who's been attracted to the Lab is a different set of people in some quality from a group of people who were just living their lives and then had a contribution of money given to them in their place.  It brings to mind the concept of non-doing.
 
Joshua Myrvaagnes
pollinator
Posts: 1531
Location: Massachusetts, 6b, suburban, nearish coast, 50x50, full sun, 40" year-round even distribution
142
kids purity trees urban writing
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The cooperation vs. watching out for ignobility conversation seems to be apples to oranges.  With nature/non-human elements, there's no problem with anticooperative elements.  They're always both self-interested and providing yields to the system.  Only humans have a unique ability to be anticooperative.  

In the big picture, it's a learned behavior rather than an innate one.  I believe people are good at heart, but that doesn't mean I trust most people off the bat--they have to build that trust with me.

We also haven't had education in cooperation.  There is one MBA program that includes cooperation in its degree options, according to Carl Ratner, one on the planet.  Cooperative cultures around the world have been attacked and trust has been broken.  It can be rebuilt, though, using slow and small solutions and recognizing the problem as the solution.
 
Posts: 61
Location: Huntsville, AL
42
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Joshua Myrvaagnes wrote:The cooperation vs. watching out for ignobility conversation seems to be apples to oranges.  With nature/non-human elements, there's no problem with anticooperative elements.  They're always both self-interested and providing yields to the system.  Only humans have a unique ability to be anticooperative.  

In the big picture, it's a learned behavior rather than an innate one.  I believe people are good at heart, but that doesn't mean I trust most people off the bat--they have to build that trust with me.

We also haven't had education in cooperation.  There is one MBA program that includes cooperation in its degree options, according to Carl Ratner, one on the planet.  Cooperative cultures around the world have been attacked and trust has been broken.  It can be rebuilt, though, using slow and small solutions and recognizing the problem as the solution.



Joshua, I agree that modern educational systems teach competition instead of cooperation in most cases. I have been studying how approaches like sociocracy can help people set up cooperative systems, but I haven't heard of the drL approach mentioned in your sig line. Any pointers to more information?
 
Joshua Myrvaagnes
pollinator
Posts: 1531
Location: Massachusetts, 6b, suburban, nearish coast, 50x50, full sun, 40" year-round even distribution
142
kids purity trees urban writing
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Thanks Alan.  They haven't put the info on the web just yet, but I can purple-moosage you a copy of the document I have written up on it.  Anyone else welcome to too, they just "launched" things today for using drL in pandemic/telecommunications times.


Alan Booker wrote:

Joshua Myrvaagnes wrote:The cooperation vs. watching out for ignobility conversation seems to be apples to oranges.  With nature/non-human elements, there's no problem with anticooperative elements.  They're always both self-interested and providing yields to the system.  Only humans have a unique ability to be anticooperative.  

In the big picture, it's a learned behavior rather than an innate one.  I believe people are good at heart, but that doesn't mean I trust most people off the bat--they have to build that trust with me.

We also haven't had education in cooperation.  There is one MBA program that includes cooperation in its degree options, according to Carl Ratner, one on the planet.  Cooperative cultures around the world have been attacked and trust has been broken.  It can be rebuilt, though, using slow and small solutions and recognizing the problem as the solution.



Joshua, I agree that modern educational systems teach competition instead of cooperation in most cases. I have been studying how approaches like sociocracy can help people set up cooperative systems, but I haven't heard of the drL approach mentioned in your sig line. Any pointers to more information?

 
He baked a muffin that stole my car! And this tiny ad:
Rocket Mass Heater Plans - now free for a while
https://permies.com/goodies/7/rmhplans
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic