Subject: Re: Synergistic enterprises and the testing guidelines (fwd)

From: Victor Guest <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 10:17:23 WST

Subject: Re: Synergistic enterprises and the testing guidelines
To: Recipients of CHRM-GENERAL <[email-masked]>

In the context of managing for synergistic effects, I suggest that this
discussion is too restrictive.
         First, the virtuous circle/vicious cycle dichotomy--there is no
way we can really completely anticipate all of the sequelae of any action,
but if an action passes the HM tests it will likely accomplish its task
(particularly with the "assume it is wrong" test); if the proposed action
fails the tests, it will probably not. During the "accomplishment" of the
task, countless events beyond our direct control occur...the generally
positive events accruing to the test-passing-activities, generally negative
events for those which fail the testing guidelines.
       
 When I started managing my grazing (in 1984), my goal was better
animal performance and lower cost. Until I was shown other consequences:
improvement in soil structure, improvement in riparian conditions,
improvement in humus, improvement in endangered species, etc, I couldn't
have known that I should have anticipated them. I was a little embarrassed
that I hadn't seen them, but I wasn't really surprised, because I was
working to improve the health of all of the ecosystem blocks. Conversely,
when I fertilized my hay fields with ammonium sulfate with the goal of
improving production, I WAS surprised when my field's soil began to
resemble concrete; because I was focussed on making more hay...period.
     My second point is that people aren't intentionally stupid. Once they
have broken free of whatever mental blocks which constrained them, they get
pretty creative. Once the thought of planting trees has emerged, they will
begin to think, "what variety?"..."what varietIES?"..."what species? "bugs!
bats! lumber! fruit! ad inf!!". Healthily brainstorming and positive
attitude can be pretty far ranging in its creativity and opportunity for
intentional synergy.
        Agriculture appeals to me because of the multiple approximations,
the successive iterations, possible in my efforts to achieve success as the
seasons revolve. Constantly working to do things better, fairly confident
that I've done my best to make sound decisions, humbled by my alertness to
see where I screwed up (or at least could do something even better next
time)...transcends the need for a guideline or dogma to REMEMBER SYNERGISM!
If I wasn't aware of the potential for positive synergism, I wouldn't be
making the best decisions I could.
        Frank

---

From: Victor Guest <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 12:07:25 WST

Reply-To: Conference "chrm.general" <[email-masked]>
From: [email-masked]
Synergy means: behavior of whole systems unpredicted by the behavior of their
parts taken separately.
synergy means:  behavior of integral, aggregate unpredicted by behaviors of
any of their components or subassemblies of their components taken separately
from the whole.   Mass attraction is a classic example. 

It looks to me that synergy by definition does not function as a test since it
the condition of the whole that is not predictable.  It is certainly something
that one could observe in monitoring the whole following the injection of some
action or component and if the synergy observed is desirable in terms of the
holistic goal one might attempt to replicate it in other situations
recognizing that community dynamics are constantly changing and what worked
yesterday may not work tomorrow.  As I understand synergy it describes the
fundamental nature of holism.  Since the behavior of the whole is
unpredictable from the behaviors of the sub wholes we have testing guidelines
as observational windows from several different views to attempt to make sound
decisions and in complex situations assume we are wrong and monitor. 

I find myself wondering if there wasn't a fundamental misunderstanding when
God gave the instruction to "go forth and multiply".   Humanity thought he was
talking about what they were thinking about when really he was referring to
the multiplier principle we now see in nature as people begin to manage
holistically, experiment with bio dynamics and permaculture, manage waste,
share information, collaborate with respect, develop and make use of
technology that allows us to communicate over great distance and do more with
less etc.

My daughter in fourth grade just wishes multiplying had never been invented.

Tom W.