permaculture

[joao pedro goncalves <joaovox@gmail.com>]

"nature is not simply amoral"

We could expand this by saying, "nature, has we conceive it, is simply
amoral".

We might accept that, humans as observers, specify the boundary of what
"nature" is and is not.

By selecting arcs of circuits of systemic effects.

And by doing this - conceiving nature as amoral - we humans keep ourselves
out of that "boundary".
Because we conceive humans as moral beings.

So we need another word to express the sum of "nature+humans" perhaps
Cosmos?

But if we choose to be inside that boundary
then we might conceive "nature" has including the culture and morals
specific to this very special being, humans.
then in this sense we conceive Nature as the Cosmos ?
But if it does not include other phenomena we need another word and so on.

It is up to us to see "nature as amoral" or "nature as moral",
as you chose to be "nature" or "anature".

For lack of better words we use these ones, and words are filters to make
sense of your experience,
when sense is needed for us to work together (and humans together with the
Cosmos as we conceive it).

Francisco Varela (biology of cognition) put it: "world and observer specify
each other"
when we need to be specific ...

worth looking at:
http://www.enolagaia.com/UMUArchive/Tutorial.html

http://global-vision.org/philosophy/index.php

"The [industrial] world begins by making splits, then drawing boundaries,
then solidifying these boundaries. Then we fool ourselves into believing
what we have made ourselves see. Solidifying boundaries is very
comfortable, because it allows us to deny our experience... We miss the
whole system."
– Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of Mind


http://asc-cybernetics.org/about/

"We understand cybernetics as being profoundly interested in and shaped by
circularity, recursion, construction and reflexivity, and we constantly
consider what cybernetic actions might be and when they should and should
not be taken, continuing to consider how to behave in a cybernetic
manner—without denying the value, on occasion, of behaving in more
traditional ways."

It is useful to be specific about the future when we speak "in more
traditional ways".

Because we need the "future" as we engage children, eachother and all ages
and grow together with them in traditional ways towards less traditional
ways.
The traditional future when you plant Araucaria, because in the future
you'd like your children or other to harvest from that tree.

Should we keep talking about the future ?
It depends ...first - what future you are talking about?

It looks like it got mixed up, what is what, in this thread.

Regards,





On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 10:31 PM, dhondt <dhondt@eircom.net> wrote:

> It is not as simple as the big ones eat the small ones in nature Michael.
> The big predators are necessary for the health of ecosystems. Take out the
> apex predators and often you see everything collapsing with some of the
> smaller ones that were kept in check now exploding and pushing out several
> entire species. In other words, making the whole a lot poorer.
> Nature is not simply amoral. It strives for maximal biomass and that means
> maximal diversity. And that means lots of eating and getting eaten.
>
> Then some new species like our own comes along with one new trick that
> nature had never seen : long distance weapons. At first spear throwers and
> bow and arrow and shortly afterwards rockets and rifles that can kill from
> more than a mile distance. And bing a new species that not yet fits in to
> nature we are causing the sixth extinction and maybe the destruction of the
> world.
>
> Our ideas of justice or injustice only cover our own species up to a point
> and when there were very few of us that made survival sense. Now it is
> lethal.
> And no, I do not know what to do about this except think about it.
> John
>
> On 03/08/16 14:12, Michael Elvin wrote:
>
>> I don't like to put a kink in the consensus, but this seems to be a
>> common view: ""Figure out a better solution," says the mind, forgetting
>> that there are no problems in the natural world and thereby making
>> conflict."
>> That's only true if you posit that the natural world has no morality.
>> Because in reality, everyone eats everybody else. The big ones eat the
>> little ones, always have. The thing that's different about people, they
>> have ideas about things like justice & injustice... and these ideas upset
>> the natural amorality.
>> Hope I'm not being too out of line.
>>
>>
>>      On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 12:56 AM, Vaidila Satvika <
>> vaidila@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>   Well said, Scott! I'm happy for you and the direction you are guiding.
>>
>> There is no such thing as "understanding" consciousness because that's all
>> beyond the little mind's capacity. Conceptualization and thinking on this
>> level are part of the chatter that miss the deeper understanding of love
>> that you're pointing to. On the level of thought we can seek and we will
>> never find. The mind's reaction to this email is to judge these statements
>> as pointless: "Figure out a better solution," says the mind, forgetting
>> that there are no problems in the natural world and thereby making
>> conflict. Our culture--Me and You--are too materialistic because we give
>> too much of ourselves to thought--the most prevalent form dominating every
>> human being. The natural world doesn't think--it's in harmony with itself.
>> In this sense the natural world operates as a perfect invisible structure.
>> (Title for your upcoming book?)
>>
>> And this all points to the direction that you seem to imply: inward focus
>> for a more harmonious external reality. (But on a deeper level it's all
>> internal to and not separate from you/me because there is only one
>> connected life in constant play.)
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> P.S. The only sane vision of the future is now. Future only exists as a
>> thought, based on the premise that tomorrow is better than today, leading
>> to a perpetual craving that has led to the dysfunctional human state. And
>> the mind cannot exit that problem, which is the most essential problem,
>> because it itself is the barrier. And that realization is healing.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 1:42 PM, <scott@permaculture.org> wrote:
>>
>>    I personally think that a separate group for this would attract little
>>> attention and soon die. To this mix is a good solution, in spite of some
>>> pleople signing off ever now and then. -- Georg Parlow
>>>
>>> Therein lies the problem, Georg.  I have been teaching permaculture for
>>> the past 30+ years and for half of that time I have been insisting on the
>>> importance of invisible structures.  Mollison taught that visible
>>> structures were those that showed us "what" to do and invisible
>>> structures
>>> taught us "how" to do it.  Without the how too we are just an
>>> encyclopedia
>>> of techniques and methods of dealing with the material world.  Once we
>>> dig
>>> deep into the invisible structures we find we are able to dance around
>>> the
>>> legal, financial, and social structures that are the primary impediments
>>> to
>>> realizing our dreams.
>>>
>>> I also include permaculture ethics in the invisible structures though
>>> they
>>> are mostly poorly taught in the Permaculture Design Course by many
>>> teachers
>>> who are not engaged in the ethics themselves.  Care of the Earth, Care of
>>> People and Return all excess yield to the Care of the Earth and People
>>> sounds simple enough but if one truly applies ones thoughts to deeply
>>> understanding these three ethics it leads us deeper into the realm of the
>>> unknown.  I, personally, think that "Care" should be replaced with the
>>> word
>>> "Love" to get the deeper significance of these ethics.
>>>
>>> I have been living on a yoga ashram for the past year seeking a deeper
>>> understanding of the invisible and have been humbled by my ignorance of
>>> the
>>> necessity to understand consciousness.  Physicists, philosophers,
>>> theologians, and gurus of all stripes have sought to understand
>>> consciousness and the deep appeal of materialism for hundreds of years
>>> but
>>> few have actually reached that pinnacle of understanding.  After a year
>>> of
>>> sitting on a zafu in meditation twice a day, 7 days a week find myself no
>>> closer to understanding anything except that I know that there is an
>>> answer
>>> and that meditation, prayer, contemplation, and altered states are all
>>> methods that are directed at self realization.  It is a difficult process
>>> to overcome the incessant chatter of the mind whose primary purpose in
>>> life
>>> is to keep us tethered to the material plane.
>>>
>>> We no longer have the Wisdom Schools of the past to provide us with
>>> direct
>>> knowledge of this process.  We have become so embedded in the
>>> materialistic
>>> plane that we all are narcissists to a greater or lesser degree.  We
>>> currently have a candidate for president of the USA who is the ultimate
>>> narcissist, while the other candidate is a narcissist in denial.  Our
>>> hunger for stuff/things has led to the destruction of our biosphere and
>>> to
>>> wars to steal the stuff from other cultures and places.  We are engaged
>>> in
>>> the final spasms of destroying ourselves and the planet to feed an
>>> insatiable appetite for something to fill the void in our existence.  As
>>> permaculture designers it is incumbent upon us to find our way back to
>>> the
>>> garden.
>>>
>>> When I haven't been meditating I have been trying to write a book titled
>>> "Dharma of Permaculture".  Dharma being the law of the cosmos as it is
>>> reflected in us.  This was what the ten commandments were attempting, and
>>> the beatitudes of Jesus Christ was trying to articulate.  Buddha, Lao
>>> Tsu,
>>> Mohammed, Yogis, and other avatars throughout the ages have sought to
>>> articulate humans role in creation and have offered rules of behavior to
>>> guide us to that understanding.
>>>
>>> I believe that permaculture ethics are an outline of how humans should
>>> survive and that the "natural principals" show us the dharma of the
>>> natural
>>> world around us.  It has been through permaculture that I have slowly
>>> come
>>> to realize that I am here to caretake or husband this incredible creation
>>> that we no longer recognize the beauty and stunning intelligence of.
>>>
>>> I would love for other to join me in seeking better solutions to life
>>> than
>>> the ones we currently worship.
>>>
>>>>    -------Original Message-------
>>>>    From: Linda Ray <lindaray@att.net>
>>>>    To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
>>>>    Subject: Re: [permaculture] [OT] My Vision of the Future
>>>>    Sent: Jul 31 '16 18:21
>>>>
>>>>    I'm with Georg on this.JMHO.
>>>>
>>>>    Namaste,
>>>>    Linda :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          From: Georg Parlow <g.parlow@gmx.at>
>>>>    To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
>>>>    Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 11:49 AM
>>>>    Subject: Re: [permaculture] [OT] My Vision of the Future
>>>>
>>>>    Lawrence,
>>>>
>>>>    >>> someone can create a Google Group PISS (permaculture invisible
>>>>
>>> systems
>>>
>>>>    >> and
>>>>    >>> structures)
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> ROTFLOL
>>>>    >>
>>>>    > ...
>>>>    > …
>>>>    > You might disagree with me Georg.
>>>>
>>>>    please do not get me wrong - sorry when I was unclear here. I
>>>>
>>> personally feel that a discussion of invisible structures is a highly
>>> impoertant part of why I am on this international list. Nut’n’bolts info
>>> is
>>> valuable, and I think none of us can ever have too much of that, but I
>>> feel
>>> that for the visible structures there are plenty of good solutions
>>> around,
>>> locally and beyond. Even 50% of what I know about them right now and my
>>> design training and experience would be ample enough IF I could and would
>>> apply them unhindered by the current invisible structures in place. So
>>> discussion on HOW we can design and implement WHICH invisible structures
>>> is
>>> highly needed.
>>>
>>>>    I think we can also all agree on the notion, that interlocking our
>>>>
>>> horns on our favoured propaganda-fed belief systems is something we could
>>> do without - BUT in order to grow in our inner freedom from those
>>> influences it might need some of that. It might be helpful in realizing
>>> or
>>> discriminating between, what are original thougths and what are
>>> propaganda-driven emotional reactions to distorted perception of reality.
>>> This is tricky business, and I appreciate these discussions.
>>>
>>>>    I interpreted that naming the invisible structures group PISS as a
>>>>
>>> Freudian sign of you being pissed about said confrontations.
>>>
>>>>    I personally think that a separate group for this would attract
>>>> little
>>>>
>>> attention and soon die. To this mix is a good solution, in spite of some
>>> pleople signing off ever now and then.
>>>
>>>>    Georg
>>>>    (Vienna, Austria, EU)
>>>>    permaculture mailing list
>>>>    permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
>>>>    subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
>>>>    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    permaculture mailing list
>>>>    permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
>>>>    subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
>>>>    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>>>>
>>>> permaculture mailing list
>>> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
>>> subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>>>
>>> permaculture mailing list
>> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
>> subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>>
>>
>>    permaculture mailing list
>> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
>> subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>>
>
> permaculture mailing list
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info:
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
>



-- 
João Gonçalves

"Ao comprar ou consumir de forma ética também está a intervir na paisagem e
a decidir quem tem trabalho."

"Eating is an agricultural act"  -  "Comer é um acto agrícola" - Wendell
Berry

"Permacultura (Cultura Permanente) é um sistema ético de design ecológico."

(+351) 96 96 80 009
Chão Sobral - Oliveira do Hospital - Serra do Açor - Portugal
http://ecotrabalho.com/
http://permacultureglobal.com/users/902-joao-goncalves
http://chaosobral.org/index_pt.htm
http://www.youtube.com/joaovox
http://agricultura-familiar-tradicional.blogspot.pt
https://picasaweb.google.com/joaovox
http://picasaweb.google.pt/uniprochaosobral

Para descobrir:
Documentário "Alface" na Aldeia das Amoreiras
http://vimeo.com/58999047
Permacultura na Serra do Açor - Portugal
http://permaculturinginportugal.net/blog/
"Comida que nunca acaba" / Permacultura no Malawi
http://www.neverendingfood.org/
Centro de Ecologia Integral
http://www.integralecology.org
Nyumbani - Kenya
http://www.nyumbani.org/about-us