Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] Wikipedia's Permaculture Problems

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: rrandall1 <rrandall1@houston.rr.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] Wikipedia's Permaculture Problems
  • Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 11:03:37 -0600

Friends,

One of the problems in defining "permaculture" is related to the problem of defining anything. Years ago when I was studying a part of linguistics known as ethnosemantics (essentially an effort to understand the meaning of words especially in exotic languages where concepts including activities themselves had no English close equivalent), it was generally acknowledged that word meanings have quite different structures even in the same language.

This is best illustrated by some English examples

1. conjunctive attribute definition:to call something X, it has certain necessary and sufficient traits. Example, "An apple is the fruit of a member of the species Malus ....

2. Disjunctive attribute definition: item has either these traits or some others: Example: a wild card is either a two or a joker

In terms of the way people think and speak however, these types of definitions are fairly rarely found in real languages and tend to be the result of literate activities rather than everyday thought processes.

3. Prototypic definitions: something is defined by a best example with other examples being more or less like the best example. For example, "a real forest" has a complex species diversity with climax conditions and multiple connections etc. and for some people may be "like the one I saw in Mindanao" or on the Vancouver Island Coast or whatever This allows for a lot of other examples to be more or less forests including a Houston "urban forestry" unit. For me "real trees" are maples while in some parts of California, palms are.It is certainly possible to think about better and worse permacultural examples. I have heard city planners say Houston isn't really a city because of sprawl.

4. Schematic definitions: something is defined as part of a complex of ideas and really cannot be understood unless the whole schema is discussed. The common examples are "a shortstop" and "steal a base" which area totally meaningless concepts outside of a schema for baseball. But it is also true of common actions. Try to imagine explaining "xeroxing" or "googling" to a person in 1910 or even 1955.

So how do we define permaculture? My ambivalence toward answering that question in classes or elsewhere is that it is a name for a design activity--as Paul says a complex one-- we do in relation to a schema that the listener often has almost no knowledge of. I think it is an error to seek a conjunctive attribute definition for a complex schema-- though listing the traits and attributes of a permacultural design certainly helps the beginner get an idea. Graham says it is "a set of ethics, principles, and design methods." I would say rather it is not a set of anything, but an activity or its mental representation as a schema we do as part of a complex plan best learned through much guided practice. We can tell you about the ideas that characterize it, but understanding permaculture's meaning comes out of the engaged educated practice.

In short, I can't tell you what the word "xeroxing" really means if you have never done it or seen it. We would be better off telling people that pc is a complex design activity whose purposes are ..., that like reading, calculus or Arabic, it cannot be understood clearly except by a lengthy course of study and practice. We could add that we believe with justification that it is the only likely way our of the mess the planet is in. So everyone should become a practitioner and learn what the word means.

Bob Randall


On Dec 12, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Paul Cereghino wrote:

Thanks Graham,

Here here! I've always noticed that within permaculture talk there is
often a sense of mystery about what permaculture is, and that mystery
and a resulting 'over-inclusiveness' leads to conversational divergance
that can decrease the power and focus of the analysis. I suspect that
this has a lot to do with that permaculture is just really hard work,
wrestling with enormous complexity, and is relatively solitary due to
the amount of observation, and alternatives analysis required. It takes
design into the realm of natural history and ecosystem science, which
also has had tremendous trouble translating itself into a vernacular
without loosing meaning.

I would suggest that ironically that despite this, the development of
effective 'permaculture ready' tools and techniques is absolutely
necessary to the expansion of use (i.e. creating more 'designers')...
however tools and techniques may necessarily be developed at a
bioregional level (or even sub-bioregion) and involve the crunching
information to identify what local technological elements are most
effectively incorporated into a permaculture design or can be imported
from other places with desireable outcomes. For example -- something
which I have been looking for -- taking the available breeds of poultry,
understanding their variable adaptation to my local climate, and then
deconstructing the differences between the various breeds in terms of
variations in input/process/output analysis. In other words, doing some
of the preliminary assessment work to reduce the information load, so it
is easier to pickup a tool and use it in a permaculture design network.
Perhaps this understanding of poultry is currently or are at risk of
becoming 'lost knowledge', and gainful information reduction is time
consuming to do without compensation.

I have found that Permawiki struggles because it picks a topic, and then
tries to provide a 'encyclopedia entry' on that topic, which is better
accomplished in other venues. I'd rather see a 'permaculture analysis'
using well cited, high quality sources of information, but really I'd
like to see someone doing some of the hard work of permaculture for me ;)

Paul

Graham wrote:

Hi Larry, probably I didn't express myself too well last night as had
after all imbibed a few fine ales!

What I meant by my comments was more that permaculture is a set of
ethics (earthcare, peoplecare, fairshares), principles (work with
nature, problem is solution, minimum effort:max effect, everything
gardens, or Mr Holmgren's newer definitions) and design methods (zones
and sectors, OBREDIM, input and output analysis, making links and
connections etc, etc). Specific tools and techniques (such as say, herb
spirals, no dig beds or creating forest gardens) on the other hand may
be used within permaculture frameworks but are not, as of themselves
'permaculture'.

On the permaculture introductory courses that I run I start with a
session called "What is permaculture?" wherin I get particpants to talk
about various problems encountered in cities, and possible solutions,
eg;
Problem; lack of access to good quality, locally grown organic food -
solution; get an allotment
Problem; lack of economic power caused by unemployent, low wages, etc
Solution; Join a LETS system
Problem; lack of decent transport links - Solution; Create safe cycle
networks
Problem; lack of access to green space - Solution; create community
gardens on unused urban space
Problem; Waste and polllution - Solution; Set up community composting
and recycling projects.

We discuss these ideas for 20 or 30 minutes, talking about what good
ideas they are and sharing personal experiences of involvement with such
ideas.

I then make the point that these are 5 excelent solutions to 5 problems,
but they are NOT permaculture...

BUT when we begin to make links and connections, eg, situating allotment
and veg growing beds in the community gardens, sell excess produce via
LETS, set up bicycle trailer delivery systems to drop off veg and take
away green waste for composting, etc, etc, these 5 ideas and strategies
become ELEMENTS WITHIN A PERMACULTURAL SYSTEM.

In other words, tools, techniques and strategies aren't of themselves
permaculture, they are simply elements and its how they are linked and
connected with each other that defines whether they are part of a
permacultural system.

Hope thats clarified my thinking a little...

Cheers Graham


On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 22:37 -0500, Lawrence F. London, Jr. wrote:


Graham wrote:



i've always maintained (and I hope my review
reflects this) that permaculture is a set of ethics, principles and
design methodologies applicable to any circumstances or situations, and
shouldn't be confused with techniques and strategies which are location
specific.


Graham:

This doesn't seem to fit my view of permaculture. I'll explain why in a reply to
any response you make to this post. So, could you elaborate on why you think techniques and strategies
aren't part of a definition of permaculture but ethics, principles and design methodologies are?

LL



_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page