permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: permaculturethinktank <comment-reply@wordpress.com>
Date: Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 9:35 AM
Subject: [New post] The Unescapable Anthrocentrism



permaculturethinktank posted: "The way I see it, there is no way to escape
the anthropocentrism when designing with the land. Let's take a cold hard
look at the concept of a better world without human beings. A world that
allegedly is much better than a world full of humans could be. I"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on *permaculturethinktank*
The Unescapable Anthrocentrism
<https://permaculturethinktank.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/the-unescapable-anthrocentrism/>
by
permaculturethinktank
<https://permaculturethinktank.wordpress.com/author/permaculturethinktank/>

The way I see it, there is no way to escape the anthropocentrism when
designing with the land. Let's take a cold hard look at the concept of a
better world without human beings. A world that allegedly is much better
than a world full of humans could be. I think this world that lacks human
beings is a construct in the mind of human beings, an ideal that cannot
even be contemplated without a human brain.

While it is certain that our activities are not always aligned with
patterns that emerge in nature, let's not throw out the baby with the
bathwater in our search for the ideal mother earth. There is a reason why
if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, it does not
make a sound. It's an age old riddle that has two answers that are equally
valid. Yes the tree does make a sound because physics instructs us that
anything falling with that kind of mass in an atmosphere like ours must
make a sound. No the tree does not make a sound because no one was around
to corroborate the experience and communicate it to others.

...

The fact of the matter is, there is no real tangible benefit to viewing our
existence here as hopelessly antagonistic. This type of riddle is along the
same lines as the tree falls in the woods. Both answers are equally valid,
yet we come to understand that this is a purely theoretical exercise. Yes,
a planet without humans would indeed be without the antagonistic qualities
wrought by humans. No, the planet would not be better because there is no
one to determine if it is or not anyway.

Therefore, if we are to really start getting into the tangible meat of how
to design more ecologically, it is always going to be one that is
anthropocentric. It is utterly an inescapable aspect of how we view any
system to be managed. I exist here on this planet, and I have needs that
are met by the environment which means I have this fundamental, inescapable
affect on the environment. Not only that, but when I look into the land it
looks back at me. The environment has a fundamental, inescapable affect on
me. Which leads me to the conclusion that it will take understanding the
patterns within myself just as much as the patterns within the environment
to do good design.

I exist here and there is no reason I will contemplate a world without me,
I will design with the land, together.
*permaculturethinktank
<https://permaculturethinktank.wordpress.com/author/permaculturethinktank/>*
| February 19, 2016 at 2:35 pm | Categories: Uncategorized
<https://permaculturethinktank.wordpress.com/?cat=1> | URL:
http://wp.me/p3O3SU-71




https://permaculturethinktank.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/the-unescapable-anthrocentrism/






-- 
Lawrence F. London
lfljvenaura@gmail.com
https://sites.google.com/site/avantgeared/