[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [permaculture] Re: Permaculture: old and new paradigms
On 25-May-99 Scott Pittman wrote:
> It seems that some folks have deep insights and develop those ideas into
> functional application I think this was the case with Mollison and Holmgrin
> when they developed the concept of permaculture. This was the result of a
> lifetime of observation, in the case of Bill Mollison, and of collaborative
> exploration with his students at the University of Tasmania, one of which,
> if I remember right was David Holmgrin. They then thought that they had
> something worth sharing and wrote Permaculture One. Is this then
Didnīt they bundle old ideas to a new concept?
> Perhaps there is a need to provide pc to everyone for free or more
> affordable and that in that provision it must maintain its ethics and
> integrity. Once we all agree on this as a beginning what next? Do we write
> thousands of letters to Ted Turner insisting that he provide air time for
> the pc design course, I'm serious - is this old paradigm?
You are right: What is old? There are many old and traditional oral cultures
which allreadyhav, what was described here as "new paradigm". And I only see,
that we must get to this point of living culture. As long as we label things,
we will never reach the status, where know-how can flow freely between people.
As long as information or concepts can be owned by a person, there will be a
hierachy which allows the ill system to continue its wrong ways.
What is the foundation of society? If the foundation is week no whatever
good concept will ever succeedin changing things.
I am intersted in two things: in changing my life situation and in changing the
foundations of this planet to allow all people a betterlife. Therefore the
ethics of one concept: permaculture are nothing to bother about. Even if
poermaculture people would have perfect ethics, that would change nothing.
Some years ago I was a buddhist. And I tried to change things inside or with
buddhism. But I that realised that this allway limits the results. So iīd
rather see permaculture as a bunch of concepts and ideas for designing
landscapes and lives.
> paradigm looks like. It is not productive or reasonable to say that pc
> teaching should be radically different unless those who insist on it being
> new paradigm/not old paradigm provide some thoughtful and reasonable
> direction on how to get there - then we would have something to talk about.
We allready did: Freeing information as beeing copyleft (that means copying is
free). The richness of cultures does not come from patents. If somebody had a
patent of the wheel or of making fire. There would have been no development.
(You could also take the knowhow about how to plant or how to treat plants)
On the other hand I see the need to create more free space via politics, so
that new ideas can have in chance. In Europe the politics do not let the
agriculture out of there control. That makes it more difficulty to introduce
For permaculture I only see the value in the word that can carry many different
techniques and ideas, which otherwise would not be recognized. But I would
rather love to see permaculture as beeing one word like "ecology" or
"sustainablity". That many people know and use it and nobody owns it - and that
people can discuss the meaning - like "sustainable agriculture" (how to reach
You are currently subscribed to permaculture as: firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-permaculture-75156P@franklin.oit.unc.edu