permaculture

[jeff <jko@bsn1.net>]

On Friday 28 May 2004 08:38 pm, Chad Knepp wrote:
>  I am distressed by an attitude here
> and elsewhere that because something is a green technology or "eco"
> than it's not only OK to use, it's encouraged

Ah... this comment about "eco products" triggered an
interesting thought.  If we view Permaculture as a collection
of techniques or tools, then we can label them as "eco"
and define Permacutlure using words like: guilds, edges,
stacking, solar, etc.  This definition would allow us to ask
the question: Do solar cells fit within Permaculture?

But.. if we define Permaculture as a process including observation,
feedback, education, then we enter a different world.  Permaculture
only exists when we are inside the process and doing design.  It also
suggests our life should be a continuous design process.  If a tool
doesn't fit or better ideas comes along the process uses them
and old ideas are discarded.  This process view is more dynamic and
avoids stagnation.  In the process world we would ask if any solar cells
fit our present needs and evaluate options.  Our queries would have
a specific site in mind and avoid generalities.

What we seem to have today is a combination of tools
and process thinking.  Our discussion of
solar cells is a good example.  Our process mind says to look
at each site and evaluate.  Our tools mind wants all the facts
about solar cells, then categorizes them as useful or not.

Science seems to have this same problem.  It can be viewed
as the "scientific method" or we can look at technology and
call that science.

With religion we may ask if a church is religion or is religion
our actions?  The church would be a tool and our actions the
process of living.

My conclusion is a little mind boggling.  I think we should apply
process thinking to the definition of Permaculture and use
whatever fits our current situation.  Explaining Permaculture to
a novice may be easier using examples (stacking, swales, etc.)
and not process.

 food for thought.. jeff