permaculture

[blissv@nmhu.campus.mci.net]

imho,
again, diversity creates stability. 

 **Not all of us have "unity" or "alignment" with all humans as a goal.** 

whether we have this as a 'goal' or not isn't what I'm suggesting... cutting
edge cosmolgy indicates that our evolutionary directive requires a
collective awareness of the Whole, of 7 generations, of our planet as one
sentient being... permaculture, in my experience, provides a framework
within which this can activate effectively. I don't have to have personal
unity with 'all' humans, yet I do know we had better cultivate working
skills to co-operate as a functional unit, with agreements for a future on
the planet so that we don't re-create the same problems dis-unity, greed,
anger,  competitiveness have created. Survival, in the past, has been about
a concept of Lack..not enough to go around so that warring occurs to secure
'enough'. The 3rd ethic of permaculture speaks to this. I propose this
concept of Lack is the false belief that we must let go. How do we allow for
Plenty?
 
again, the idea of yin/yang representing warring factions and/or a Whole,
integrated IN the duality of life as we have known it.  There is a place for
all of it. I just don't think we need to be rude. perhaps my skin is thin
after a life of witnessing and experiencing strife and anger causing
devastation and, willingly, dipping into the black hole that anger and
sadness are. I hold that humanity is capable and called to the task
immediately of a different enactment. 

**I will not personally "support others to feel good about themselves and
their ideas" if their ideas are unworkable.**

no, of course not.. Ask anyone I work with. I'm a tough nut, not sitting
around espousing love and light at the expense of the hard work required.
results are what we go for, sometimes at the expense of some hurt feelings
but NOT with the intention of hurting, rather, with the intention of serving
the bigger picture. When ones' ideas or values are pushed against,  it can
serve as a honing and a sharpening, thus, serving growth. There are
effective ways of doing this and there are ways that damage. The intention
of a growing workable system, effective and diverse, is worth working
towards and not adding damage.

simply put, I don't think as a species that we do require anger, strife,
retaliation, or competitiveness to evolve, create, survive. perhaps you do.

hooray for diversity!


At 12:24 PM 11/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Vicky wrote:
>
>... I find it disturbing that devisive and
>>judgemental word usage, as in:
>> **... in the case of your flighty cosmology statemeit, if they seem utterly
>>unconnected to permaculture.** 
>>creates separation instead of alignment. You are certainly entitled to your
>>opinions...There is a way that you can communicate that would be less
>>abrasive and, certainly, if it was in your interest, with the enormous
>>creativity you have, you could mightily support others to feel good about
>>themselves and their ideas rather than leaving them feeling attacked. This
>>kind of care and co-operation is required on the planet... Is not lack of
>>these a primary cause for our collective problems?
>
>Well I won't speak for Dan, but in my opinion, no.  Permaculture is about
>survival, and survival has never been about "being nice" or "being in
>alignment."  Dissonance between individuals has never been what threatens
>our survival or any other species' survival.  In fact, competition, testing
>of mettle, periodic retaliation between groups to defend territory, and
>other such strategies represent key factors in survival and continued
>evolution.
>
>Not all of us have "unity" or "alignment" with all humans as a goal.  In
>fact no ecosystem has ever depended on complete unity and alignment to
>function - it depends on both beneficial and antagonistic relationships.  I
>will not personally "support others to feel good about themselves and their
>ideas" if their ideas are unworkable.  If they want to try to prove me
>wrong by testing the idea, they're welcome to.  If it works, it works.  It
>shouldn't need my endorsement or anybody else's.
>
>On the other hand if I attack someone's idea or the logic behind it, that
>doesn't mean I'm attacking that person as a person.  A lot of people seem
>to mistake one for the other as Dan pointed out, and I think that's sad.
>
>= Lee =
>
>
>***************************************************************************
>Lee A Flier                            "The greatest fine art of the future
>lflier@mindspring.com                   will be the making of a comfortable
>Atlanta and Ellijay, Georgia, U.S.A.    living from a small piece of land."
>http://lflier.home.mindspring.com                 -Abraham Lincoln
>
>