I agree that many who have taken a PDC don't understand what Pc is. Some ofI couldn't agree more! For most people to shift from a linear, specialist mindset to a pattern literate, right brained mode flies in the face of
it is because lecture courses are not very effective relative to other
formats. But I believe the reasons have much more to do with 1) a 72-hour
PDC offers less time spent on the subject than a single college course (a
tough college class is roughly 32 hours in class with 2-4 hours of
homework/study for every hour in class--far more than a PDC and another
reason I can't accept the 9- or 10-day format); and 2) Pc often is so wildly
at variance with any other knowledge that the student has that there is no
place for Pc knowledge to "sit." It doesn't fit, and takes more than one
exposure for most people to grasp it.
I don't think that Green Capitalism, or Natural Step are contributing much to solving the problems of the world, and that they are successful for
I've often wondered about this, both as to why that is, and also to what
extent it is true. I'm not so familiar with eco-psychology, but ecological
design has had some very powerful advocates in this country from the get-go:
Whole Earth Review, Bill McDonough, and other vocal and charismatic voices;
the Natural Step has Paul Hawken and a wide pool of scientists and
financiers, and was specifically created at a high political level with
their input and needs in mind.
Its (/permaculture)/ followers are often unwashed, angry,I think that this is a little over stated and simplistic. A lot of the people who come to pc for answers have rejected the current social/economic
deliberately impoverished, and nearly as alienating as Mollison.
There is no reason Pc couldn't have been used to redesign Ford's River RougeI don't think that most in the pc movement have a problem with mainstream acceptance or financial prosperity, per se, but are unwilling to
plant instead of McDonough's approach. I suppose some would consider that a
good thing, as if mainstream acceptance and financial prosperity somehow
impugn our purity, but I think the ideas of Pc can coexist with prosperity.
After all, nature is very materially abundant and constantly increases its
own capital (biomass, energy capture, etc).
But also, I don't think Pc has "failed" to the extent Michael does. Pc is aAnd there are thousands of individuals around the world providing good models for decent human behaviour. The top-down
grassroots approach; Eco-design and Natural Step are top-down approaches
introduced with huge funding and big fanfare by famous people. One makes a
big noise and get glitzy results; the other builds slowly. One could also
say that the entire environmental movement is a failure: most Westerners
still drive cars, eat fast food, buy non-organic, pollute grossly, and
little significant legislation exists in the US to support it; yet its ideas
have seeped into the culture.
The same with Pc: I am seeing the word on theAmen brother!!, me too.
covers of magazines, in catalogs, in newspapers, and in schools in hugely
greater numbers than ever before. Just as it will take a while to break our
addiction to oil, it will take a while for Pc's radical notions to tunnel
into the collective consciousness. They don't fit anywhere yet. But I'm
willing to be patient.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.