The other day I was talking philosophy with a friend and the question of God came up. Where does God fit in my vision of how things are? In my typically flip way I said that God was irrelevant. The conversation stopped right there. I'd like to explain what I meant, and I hope my friend will read this and that we can continue talking.
My point is this...
If God created the universe then he/she created it to function according to laws and those laws apply to all of creation. We are not exempt. We should not use God or religion as a justification for trying to live in ways which are contrary to those laws. Religion, at it's core is about how to live with other people. It has been used to justify all kinds of terrible behavior. I haven't found anything in religion that exempts me from the laws of creation.
If God didn't create the universe then it is a self correcting system that tends toward balance. The laws work because they keep the system balanced. Actions that violate the laws tend to be eliminated as the system corrects it's self and returns to a state of balance. Our violating the laws of the system will result in our being eliminated from the system.
Neither one of these options require any intervention from the outside. God may have set up the system or it may have come into existence by random chance, but it is the system we live in, and we must learn to live by its rules.
My quest is to understand those rules and find ways to live in harmony with them. On this quest Gods role, or lack there of, is irrelevant.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Monday, June 25, 2007
Stories that change the world
I have to agree with Jake (see comments on last post) about the power of narrative. We act out of beliefs not because the data point us in a direction. That's why it is so hard to change what is happening in the world. We are so caught up in acting out the story that puts us in the role of the gods that we can't even see it. Joseph Campbell talked a lot about the power of stories in his work on comparative mythology. The movies are a great place to see the story we are living played out. The problem is finding a way to get people to hear a new story. (It's hard to even think of a new story, the one we are living is so pervasive and effective in eliminating any other way of thinking.) I like Daniel Quinn, especially the Story of B, for just that reason. There is nothing new in the science behind what he is saying, but the story sticks in your mind and makes you see things in a little different way. Once you can here 'Mother Culture' whispering in your ear, you can start to see the fallacies in our way of living. We need more people willing to say "NO! I will not live that way." We don't have to fight, we just have to opt to not play.
My kids love to watch Nova, National Geographic, Nature, and the like. I let them because I like them to think, and these programs encourage that. The other day they were watching something about early tool makers, and the story that brought us to this point came screaming out of the TV. "Humans are destine to dominate, shape, and control Nature." It's hard to live by a new story. It's even harder to teach others to do it.
I'd love to here examples of stories that lead to a new way of thinking, a new way of living.
My kids love to watch Nova, National Geographic, Nature, and the like. I let them because I like them to think, and these programs encourage that. The other day they were watching something about early tool makers, and the story that brought us to this point came screaming out of the TV. "Humans are destine to dominate, shape, and control Nature." It's hard to live by a new story. It's even harder to teach others to do it.
I'd love to here examples of stories that lead to a new way of thinking, a new way of living.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
The Toilet Paper Conundrum
We try to buy things that are produced locally from local resources when we can’t produce them ourselves. I spend a fair bit of time researching products trying to find out where they are made and from where the materials used in making them come. It is usually a frustrating and depressing project. So few things are made and sold locally. Even things made here aren’t sold directly here. They must first travel back and forth across the country to get to us. Take toilet paper for example. It isn’t made anywhere near here that I can find. So, logic would say look for the closest source or the most environmentally friendly one. The closest is at least 500 miles, and it is a brand that is not sold in any of the local stores. Environmentally friendly options involve mail order (at quite a high price and a lot of shipping) or a 140 mile round trip to Whole foods to pay a high price for a product that was shipped quite a way to get to the Columbus store. What is one to do? The non-toilet paper options are not very pleasant. I have looked at growing Mullen. It grows wild around here, has large soft fuzzy leaves, and I’ve been told that it makes good toilet paper. But, a field full of Mullen, and the energy and effort needed to cultivate, harvest, and process it seem a bit much right now. So we go to Wal-Mart and but the most eco-friendly brand they carry. Not the ideal, but it is probably the best use of our resources at the time.
Finding that balance between the vision and life in the ‘world as it is’ is a constant struggle for me. I know how I want to live, but it is a slow process dragging the rest of the world into a shape that allows me to live that way. It helps if I stop and list the things we have accomplished on our way to a better life. Here is a short list.
We have reduced our electricity use so far this year by 8% compared to the same time last year by turning things off, changing to compact florescent lights, and accepting a wider range of indoor temperatures.
We have found and are using local sources for all of our milk, most of our cheese, all of our eggs, most of our fresh produce, and some of our bread and grains.
We have cut our imported animal feeds to about 10% of total feed (except for dog and cat food which we still buy from non local sources.)
We have reduced our fuel consumption by 12% by driving less and making more efficient use of the trips we do take.
We have a long way to go, but we are on our way.
Finding that balance between the vision and life in the ‘world as it is’ is a constant struggle for me. I know how I want to live, but it is a slow process dragging the rest of the world into a shape that allows me to live that way. It helps if I stop and list the things we have accomplished on our way to a better life. Here is a short list.
We have reduced our electricity use so far this year by 8% compared to the same time last year by turning things off, changing to compact florescent lights, and accepting a wider range of indoor temperatures.
We have found and are using local sources for all of our milk, most of our cheese, all of our eggs, most of our fresh produce, and some of our bread and grains.
We have cut our imported animal feeds to about 10% of total feed (except for dog and cat food which we still buy from non local sources.)
We have reduced our fuel consumption by 12% by driving less and making more efficient use of the trips we do take.
We have a long way to go, but we are on our way.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Help
The other day I was talking with a friend about what we were doing here at the farm and the subject of Organic Certification came up. My friend asked why we are not certified and I, in my usual flip way, said something like Organics is not enough. That led to a bit of a philosophical discussion which went very poorly. I know why we are doing what we are doing. The reasoning is crystal clear to me. But, I don’t seem to be able to articulate it very well. I’d like to try again to lay out my philosophy. I’d appreciate it if you would rip it apart. Question it. Find the holes, the bits that don’t make sense, the leaps in reasoning that you can’t make and let me know. I need to be able to explain this to people in a way that they can understand. I sometimes think I have a different cognitive framework to hang my ideas on; that I perceive things differently. Even if that is true, I got here through the same system that everyone else is using. If I can do that I should be able to help other people do that too. So…
There was a man who came to the doctor. He had a throbbing head ache that would not go away. He had tried all kinds of medicine, relaxation techniques, yoga, prayer, everything, and nothing worked. The doctor listened to the man, took his blood pressure, waited for him to stop bashing himself in the head with a hammer, and prescribed a potent pain killer. The man took the medicine, whacked himself in the head with the hammer, and went home wondering if the head ache would stop this time.
We are very much like the man and the doctor. We have been dealing with problems of environmental degradation and population growth for a very long time. We have tried and retried a vast number of programs to fix the pain, and have never found one that really worked. Why? Because we keep bashing ourselves in the head with a hammer. We keep seeing the same effects, even though we put great amounts of effort and resources into solving the problems. We pour millions into efforts to save this animal or that one and at the same time destroy the habitat of some other creature as fast as we can. Next year we will start a program for that creature. We fund hunger relief programs all over the world. We produce more food every year but millions still go hungry. We teach about birth control to help ease the population growth but it still races on at an exponential rate. Why? Because we are still doing the thing that causes these effects. (I could go into a long discussion of history and “pre-history” to show how we got here, but it really doesn’t matter.) The thing I find interesting is that none of the other creatures living on this planet have this problem. They have been living well in every part of the globe for hundreds of thousands of years with out causing massive environmental degradation. On the whole there are not large groups of any living thing starving to death or over running their normal range. (We sometimes see animals starving, or causing environmental problems, but that is always a result of our altering the system, not their normal way of living.) We humans managed to live for several hundred thousand years without causing the kind of problems we have now. So the question is; what are we doing that none of the other creatures are doing? How are they living that is different from how we are living? I think there should be some common law that is true for elephants, trees, fish, spiders, worms, etc. (Every other system in the universe operates on simple laws, why would life be any different?) I have published those laws in the side bar. Right now our way of life, our systems of production, violates the first basic law. We go outside our range for the resources used to produce an excess of food, water, and energy. When we have used up those resources in one area we go looking for them in another. This causes the environmental degradation we are fighting. It also fuels the exponential population growth we continue to see. This population growth must be met with more production which causes more population growth… which brings us to now. So, why would I say Organics is not enough? It’s like really nice aspirin. It will mask the pain for a short time, but if we don’t change how we live, how we produce what we need to live, we will keep whacking ourselves in the head with the hammer until we die.
There was a man who came to the doctor. He had a throbbing head ache that would not go away. He had tried all kinds of medicine, relaxation techniques, yoga, prayer, everything, and nothing worked. The doctor listened to the man, took his blood pressure, waited for him to stop bashing himself in the head with a hammer, and prescribed a potent pain killer. The man took the medicine, whacked himself in the head with the hammer, and went home wondering if the head ache would stop this time.
We are very much like the man and the doctor. We have been dealing with problems of environmental degradation and population growth for a very long time. We have tried and retried a vast number of programs to fix the pain, and have never found one that really worked. Why? Because we keep bashing ourselves in the head with a hammer. We keep seeing the same effects, even though we put great amounts of effort and resources into solving the problems. We pour millions into efforts to save this animal or that one and at the same time destroy the habitat of some other creature as fast as we can. Next year we will start a program for that creature. We fund hunger relief programs all over the world. We produce more food every year but millions still go hungry. We teach about birth control to help ease the population growth but it still races on at an exponential rate. Why? Because we are still doing the thing that causes these effects. (I could go into a long discussion of history and “pre-history” to show how we got here, but it really doesn’t matter.) The thing I find interesting is that none of the other creatures living on this planet have this problem. They have been living well in every part of the globe for hundreds of thousands of years with out causing massive environmental degradation. On the whole there are not large groups of any living thing starving to death or over running their normal range. (We sometimes see animals starving, or causing environmental problems, but that is always a result of our altering the system, not their normal way of living.) We humans managed to live for several hundred thousand years without causing the kind of problems we have now. So the question is; what are we doing that none of the other creatures are doing? How are they living that is different from how we are living? I think there should be some common law that is true for elephants, trees, fish, spiders, worms, etc. (Every other system in the universe operates on simple laws, why would life be any different?) I have published those laws in the side bar. Right now our way of life, our systems of production, violates the first basic law. We go outside our range for the resources used to produce an excess of food, water, and energy. When we have used up those resources in one area we go looking for them in another. This causes the environmental degradation we are fighting. It also fuels the exponential population growth we continue to see. This population growth must be met with more production which causes more population growth… which brings us to now. So, why would I say Organics is not enough? It’s like really nice aspirin. It will mask the pain for a short time, but if we don’t change how we live, how we produce what we need to live, we will keep whacking ourselves in the head with the hammer until we die.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Giving things up to save the world
Nathan has left a new comment on your post "Nathan has left a new comment on your post "A seco...": There is a lot that can be done within the limits of a home range but there are limits and many of us don't respect them. I eat fresh fruits and vegtables from South America all winter. If I stick to the food sources from my local area I will have to give up fresh fruits and vegtables out of season. That doesn't mean I can't eat well all winter. Fruits and vegtables can be perserved. When I say that we will have to give things up I don't mean we need to move into caves but I do believe there are limits to the what technology can do for us. Todays technological solution is often tomorows environmental problem as was the case with CFC's
My point isn't that we will not have to "give some things up", but that you can't expect people to accept a lower standard of living out of some guilty need to save the world. We will have to change how we live. We will have to learn to eat things in season and to preserve things for the off season. We will have to be more creative in how we produce our energy, how we process our waste, how we use our local resources so that we can live in a truly sustainable way. But we won't achieve that by going back two hundred years, or a thousand years. We won't achieve that by trying to get people to do without things.
All over the world now we are several generations removed from local economies. The local small producers of food and goods are gone for the most part. Some of these things will have to be recreated. We can draw on skills from the past, but doing what was done in the past is what got us here. We need to go forward and find new ways. If we keep our focus on using local resources in a way that continually renews them while producing the things we want and need then we will be taking some real steps in the right direction.
My point isn't that we will not have to "give some things up", but that you can't expect people to accept a lower standard of living out of some guilty need to save the world. We will have to change how we live. We will have to learn to eat things in season and to preserve things for the off season. We will have to be more creative in how we produce our energy, how we process our waste, how we use our local resources so that we can live in a truly sustainable way. But we won't achieve that by going back two hundred years, or a thousand years. We won't achieve that by trying to get people to do without things.
All over the world now we are several generations removed from local economies. The local small producers of food and goods are gone for the most part. Some of these things will have to be recreated. We can draw on skills from the past, but doing what was done in the past is what got us here. We need to go forward and find new ways. If we keep our focus on using local resources in a way that continually renews them while producing the things we want and need then we will be taking some real steps in the right direction.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Nathan has left a new comment on your post "A second look":
I found your last post inspiring not hard core! I am working on my chart right now. What you are doing is appealing at least to me. You seem to be a likeable person who is as concerned about healthy family and community dynamics as you are concerned about fitting sustainable into you home ecosystem. Keep up the fun. I do want to take issue with your statement, "We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things." That is a tough one for me. On the one hand, it seems that you are right; people are not likely to get excited about giving up the extravagant life that most of us live. On the other hand, giving up some (or perhaps a lot) is probably the only way to achieve the goal of local sustainability. It seems to me that "sustainable" means not using up more energy than is being input into your home range. The main source of energy input for most of us is the sun. The sun's energy is then transferred and stored across the web of life and in the environment, which makes it more accessible to us. But, the bottom line is we can't sustainable use more energy than is being input into the system. Right now I use far more and so do most Americans. Right now there is a lot of excitement in the general public about going green and addressing global warming. But there is no one saying we need to consume less. Every report I hear puts a lot of faith in technology. As a culture we believe that there is an unlimited source of energy out there that we can use with no restraints and to no ill-effects. We believe it so strongly that no one is even talking about there not being one. The problem is that this kind of thinking simply defies the laws of nature and the laws of physics.
Here is a quote I like from Paul Molyneaux. “All the technology in the world could not compensate for a damaged ecosystem.”
I think that changing the world does require asking people to give up things. I think the trick is doing it in a way that is not shrill or condescending. I think you are on the right track. I like your humble approach and your genuine affection for humankind.
I stand by what I said. Here is an example. One of the biggest energy users in the home is providing hot water. I have been to a number of energy efficiency workshops where the emphasis was on reducing how much hot water was used. That would save energy, but the only way to do it effectively was to have guard with a stopwatch timing peoples showers, baths, and every other hot water activity. Anna Eddy, a writer from Martha's Vineyard, was designing a new home for herself. She wanted to lower her energy impact, but she didn't want to have to time her showers or give up her bubble bath. She designed a system that used only energy produced on her property that provided the amount of hot water she needed to maintain her lifestyle. She didn't give anything up, she just met her need a different way. Another thing she did was design a "composting" toilet that functions just like a flush toilet. If you have ever used a composting toilet you would realize that the masses are not going to adopt them unless they are forced, but a flush toilet that processes waste in a more eco-intelligent way could easily be sold to the public. Ideas get adopted by the masses because they make life better (or create the perception that life is better). You can't expect the people in developing countries to stop their march toward "development". What we need is a new way to get there.
I found your last post inspiring not hard core! I am working on my chart right now. What you are doing is appealing at least to me. You seem to be a likeable person who is as concerned about healthy family and community dynamics as you are concerned about fitting sustainable into you home ecosystem. Keep up the fun. I do want to take issue with your statement, "We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things." That is a tough one for me. On the one hand, it seems that you are right; people are not likely to get excited about giving up the extravagant life that most of us live. On the other hand, giving up some (or perhaps a lot) is probably the only way to achieve the goal of local sustainability. It seems to me that "sustainable" means not using up more energy than is being input into your home range. The main source of energy input for most of us is the sun. The sun's energy is then transferred and stored across the web of life and in the environment, which makes it more accessible to us. But, the bottom line is we can't sustainable use more energy than is being input into the system. Right now I use far more and so do most Americans. Right now there is a lot of excitement in the general public about going green and addressing global warming. But there is no one saying we need to consume less. Every report I hear puts a lot of faith in technology. As a culture we believe that there is an unlimited source of energy out there that we can use with no restraints and to no ill-effects. We believe it so strongly that no one is even talking about there not being one. The problem is that this kind of thinking simply defies the laws of nature and the laws of physics.
Here is a quote I like from Paul Molyneaux. “All the technology in the world could not compensate for a damaged ecosystem.”
I think that changing the world does require asking people to give up things. I think the trick is doing it in a way that is not shrill or condescending. I think you are on the right track. I like your humble approach and your genuine affection for humankind.
I stand by what I said. Here is an example. One of the biggest energy users in the home is providing hot water. I have been to a number of energy efficiency workshops where the emphasis was on reducing how much hot water was used. That would save energy, but the only way to do it effectively was to have guard with a stopwatch timing peoples showers, baths, and every other hot water activity. Anna Eddy, a writer from Martha's Vineyard, was designing a new home for herself. She wanted to lower her energy impact, but she didn't want to have to time her showers or give up her bubble bath. She designed a system that used only energy produced on her property that provided the amount of hot water she needed to maintain her lifestyle. She didn't give anything up, she just met her need a different way. Another thing she did was design a "composting" toilet that functions just like a flush toilet. If you have ever used a composting toilet you would realize that the masses are not going to adopt them unless they are forced, but a flush toilet that processes waste in a more eco-intelligent way could easily be sold to the public. Ideas get adopted by the masses because they make life better (or create the perception that life is better). You can't expect the people in developing countries to stop their march toward "development". What we need is a new way to get there.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
A second look
On looking over my last post I realize I came across a bit hardcore. Now that I am in a more mellow mood I'd like a chance to revisit what I wrote.
The thing I most want people to think about is living locally.
The next thing on the list is HAVE FUN!!! We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things. I've found that getting my kids involved in exploring alternatives that are locally sustainable is fun for me, fun for them, and results in things that will make a difference for a long time.
Lastly, (Connie would cringe if she knew I used that word. She doesn't read my blog because my spelling and writing style drive her crazy.) pick one thing to start with. You can't do everything all at once. It makes me crazy that I can't, but that is the way the world is.
The thing I most want people to think about is living locally.
The next thing on the list is HAVE FUN!!! We are not going to change the world by trying to get people to give up things. I've found that getting my kids involved in exploring alternatives that are locally sustainable is fun for me, fun for them, and results in things that will make a difference for a long time.
Lastly, (Connie would cringe if she knew I used that word. She doesn't read my blog because my spelling and writing style drive her crazy.) pick one thing to start with. You can't do everything all at once. It makes me crazy that I can't, but that is the way the world is.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
What do I do?
I’ve been asked the question “What do I do?” quite a few times lately. It is usually in the context of some discussion about how it is wonderful for me to do what I do here in rural Ohio where I have lots of space and a wife who gets paid well enough that I can afford to play at saving the world. But what about the people who have to work for a living? Or the people who live in the city? Or the people without the skills or inclination to be small scale eco-farmers? What do they do?
I think my philosophy still holds up in other settings. I hope some of you will experiment with it and see what can be done. I’ve some ideas about where to start. The most important thing is to live locally. Ultimately your energy, food, and water must come from your local resources and your waste must be returned to that same local area in such a way that it helps build the local resource base. For a human tribe or community I think that the local range is probably contained in a circle about 20 miles in diameter. (This is based on the amount of space we can get to know intimately. If you can’t walk there and back in a day it is probably outside what is truly local. I haven’t had any chance to test this, but it is a starting place.) Now let me lay out some ideas about what to do.
1. Look at where your food, water, and energy come from and where your waste goes. Not just where the store is located, but where the actual product is made and where the resources used in its making come from. Make a chart of how much you are importing from resources outside your local range.
2. Explore your local area and see what you can get locally. Talk with local producers to find out how local the products really are. (We have things sold at our local farmers market which are shipped up from Florida. That’s not really local.)
3. Look at things you can do at home to produce more yourself. Catch rainwater to water your houseplants. Put some tomatoes and lettuce in your flower garden or in a pot on your window sill.
4. Explore what you can do with your waste. Compost everything (use a worm bin inside if you can’t compost outside) If you buy eggs from someone locally see if they want your kitchen scraps. Chickens love them! If you can get away with a “farm animal” pet have a chicken or two in your yard. They will do quite well on your back lawn and will eat all the kitchen scraps you can give them. They will gift you with an egg most days.
5. Energy – Switch things off. Use compact florescent lights. Walk when you can. Ride the bus or a bike. Explore how much energy you need and ways you can produce it at home. Solar is getting cheaper and even if you just do some it makes a difference.
6. Network. If you find a local source for eggs, food, or what ever, share that knowledge with your neighbors. Local produces need customers. If no one buys we can’t afford to produce.
I could go on and on. The most important thing is to decide to do something. Stop waiting for “THEY’ to do it. They never will. Take responsibility for yourself.
Monday, April 30, 2007
More on Organic Certification
To answer Nathan's comment - Organic Certification doesn't protect the farmer from the government. It theoretically protects the consumer from the farmer. The whole point of certification has been to provide assurance to the consumer that the farmer who says he is providing organic food has met certain standards. The problem with the national certification system is that it has been weakened by big corporate players who want to be able to say they are "organic" with out really changing what they are doing.
I would rather build my reputation based on local knowledge. If the people who buy my produce know me and can come to my farm when ever they want, then I don't need a government program to assure them that what I produce is OK. Since I've no plan to market to anyone beyond my local area my customers should be able to get to know me.
There is a group in the Northeast who have started a certified natural program. It is more like the old style local organic certification. I may explore certifying through them, more for the grower network and advice than for the label.
If you are buying organic you really should take a hard look at where it is coming from and what organic really means for that product. Wal-mart organic isn't going to give you the same quality as local all natural. If you really are concerned with the quality of your food and the impact food production has on the environment you must get to know your food producers. Follow the whole chain from the seed to the table. Look at all the environmental impacts along the way.
I would rather build my reputation based on local knowledge. If the people who buy my produce know me and can come to my farm when ever they want, then I don't need a government program to assure them that what I produce is OK. Since I've no plan to market to anyone beyond my local area my customers should be able to get to know me.
There is a group in the Northeast who have started a certified natural program. It is more like the old style local organic certification. I may explore certifying through them, more for the grower network and advice than for the label.
If you are buying organic you really should take a hard look at where it is coming from and what organic really means for that product. Wal-mart organic isn't going to give you the same quality as local all natural. If you really are concerned with the quality of your food and the impact food production has on the environment you must get to know your food producers. Follow the whole chain from the seed to the table. Look at all the environmental impacts along the way.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Organics
People have been quizing me lately about wether or not I am going to get the farm "organicly certified" or not. I've been thinking a lot about this and have decided to not certify. I think that certification is purely ploy and not necicary for someone who markets locally. When you sell to a local market what you do is very transparent. (at least where I live. Everyone who drives by talks about all the weird things we are doing. People stop when ever they want to talk. Everyone knows someone who is related to someone who drives by our place all the time. There are no secrets.)
Besides being a marketing ploy, organic certification is not enough. I don't mean to belittle all the great work and research being done on organics and eco-agriculture. The techniques and information generated are very useful and important. However, when they are applied to our current style of farming, they will not solve the problem. Despite all the great research and innovations we are doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 10000 years - producing excess by importing resources (energy, minerals, etc.) from other places. Organics only steps us back 100 years or so. It still addresses symptoms, not causes.
I will use the best of organic techniques as well as good managed grazing and other innovations that will help me manage my land in a sane way. I will go beyond organics by marketing only my locally and drawing all needed resources from the local pool. I will return all byproducts of my production system to the land in a way that they can be recycled and used again. I do not need "certification" for this.
Besides being a marketing ploy, organic certification is not enough. I don't mean to belittle all the great work and research being done on organics and eco-agriculture. The techniques and information generated are very useful and important. However, when they are applied to our current style of farming, they will not solve the problem. Despite all the great research and innovations we are doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 10000 years - producing excess by importing resources (energy, minerals, etc.) from other places. Organics only steps us back 100 years or so. It still addresses symptoms, not causes.
I will use the best of organic techniques as well as good managed grazing and other innovations that will help me manage my land in a sane way. I will go beyond organics by marketing only my locally and drawing all needed resources from the local pool. I will return all byproducts of my production system to the land in a way that they can be recycled and used again. I do not need "certification" for this.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
A new story
Nathan said...
I can see your point about keeping everything local and networking with your community. If all my waste ends up in my own yard or in the yard of my friends, I have an incentive to be responsible with it. It sounds like you are describing a shared belief system that places a high value on living in harmony with your local eco system. If such a belief system were truly part of the culture at large it would undoubtedly have a very positive effect. I'm sorry that your brother-in-law has a hard time understanding what you are doing. I think you are light years ahead of most of us in your thinking and your actions. Thanks to some prominent national figures that have brought the environment to the fore front, more of us are now aware of these issues. You seem to eat them up with boundless energy. Most of us look on them the way we look at paying the up coming water and electric bills. "It has to be done so I guess I'll do it. Now would someone please tell me how?"
April 14, 2007 4:12 PM
The problem I see with all these high profile calls to action is that while they often succeed in raising awareness of the problem they leave us to act within the context of our 10000 year old culture/mythology. We can't fix the problem because the root of the problem lies in our cultural definition of what it means to be human. We have to live differently. To live differently we have to see ourselves in a different way. Our current mythology has us as seprate from nature. That way of thinking is embedded in our languages, in our religions, in our science, in every aspect of our global culture. Unfortunately, you can't create a new mythology and expect people to adopt it. The Story will come out of our attempts to live differently. It starts by recognizing that we are not seprate from nature. What works for all the other creatures on the planet will work for us too. We can't fix the problem with new programs. Programs come out of the old way of thinking. We need to think in a new way, and let that new way of thinking lead us to a new way of living. Try it as a mental game to start with. Look at where your food, water, and energy come from and where your waste goes. Look for choices that bring those closer to home. Look at how the rest of nature works. Look for the laws that allow complex natural systems to work. Read "Fuzzy Logic". It's a great mathematical look at the way simple rules can result in incredible complexity.
New programs frustrate me. We have programs to eliminate hunger, poverty, population explosions, environmental degradation, etc. We spend vast amounts of time, money, and energy on these programs, and they don't work. They didn't work last year. They didn't work 10 years ago. Or 30 years ago. They won't work this year, or next year. They can't because we keep acting in the same way. We keep living out the story where we are seprate from nature, and exempt from its laws. Where our measure of success is how much excess we can produce. As long as we keep living out this story our programs will fail. If we stop living out this story we wont need any programs.
I can see your point about keeping everything local and networking with your community. If all my waste ends up in my own yard or in the yard of my friends, I have an incentive to be responsible with it. It sounds like you are describing a shared belief system that places a high value on living in harmony with your local eco system. If such a belief system were truly part of the culture at large it would undoubtedly have a very positive effect. I'm sorry that your brother-in-law has a hard time understanding what you are doing. I think you are light years ahead of most of us in your thinking and your actions. Thanks to some prominent national figures that have brought the environment to the fore front, more of us are now aware of these issues. You seem to eat them up with boundless energy. Most of us look on them the way we look at paying the up coming water and electric bills. "It has to be done so I guess I'll do it. Now would someone please tell me how?"
April 14, 2007 4:12 PM
The problem I see with all these high profile calls to action is that while they often succeed in raising awareness of the problem they leave us to act within the context of our 10000 year old culture/mythology. We can't fix the problem because the root of the problem lies in our cultural definition of what it means to be human. We have to live differently. To live differently we have to see ourselves in a different way. Our current mythology has us as seprate from nature. That way of thinking is embedded in our languages, in our religions, in our science, in every aspect of our global culture. Unfortunately, you can't create a new mythology and expect people to adopt it. The Story will come out of our attempts to live differently. It starts by recognizing that we are not seprate from nature. What works for all the other creatures on the planet will work for us too. We can't fix the problem with new programs. Programs come out of the old way of thinking. We need to think in a new way, and let that new way of thinking lead us to a new way of living. Try it as a mental game to start with. Look at where your food, water, and energy come from and where your waste goes. Look for choices that bring those closer to home. Look at how the rest of nature works. Look for the laws that allow complex natural systems to work. Read "Fuzzy Logic". It's a great mathematical look at the way simple rules can result in incredible complexity.
New programs frustrate me. We have programs to eliminate hunger, poverty, population explosions, environmental degradation, etc. We spend vast amounts of time, money, and energy on these programs, and they don't work. They didn't work last year. They didn't work 10 years ago. Or 30 years ago. They won't work this year, or next year. They can't because we keep acting in the same way. We keep living out the story where we are seprate from nature, and exempt from its laws. Where our measure of success is how much excess we can produce. As long as we keep living out this story our programs will fail. If we stop living out this story we wont need any programs.
Living in a "Sustainable" world
Nathan said...
You are a farmer. Does your way forward include agriculture in some form? If so what system of checks and balances will keep you and other farmers who follow your way from producing an excess of food?NR
April 14, 2007 12:11 AM
We have always had farming of some sort. Every creature alters its environment to favor its own food supply. Ants and beavers are great examples, but if you look at the life cycle of trees you would find that they shed chemicals that prevent close competition in their own root zone, grazing animals by selecting certain plants to eat create more occurrences of those plants - the prairie was truly a creation of the buffalo. So, to answer Nathan's question, Yes, there must be some form of agriculture for us to survive.
The question of checks and balances is a good one. Who gets to be KING or GOD to decide how much to produce and who lives and who dies? We have spent the past 10000 years proving that such a system can't work. So, what's a farmer to do?
I think the key is to live locally. If I, as a farmer, only sell to a very local market and only use resources (energy, food, water, etc) from my farm or from a very local area to produce what I sell, that automatically puts a limit on how much I produce. This can't be only for the farmer. In nature everything lives locally. Every group lives on the resources available within its range. It doesn't matter what your specialty is in the group (community, tribe, pod, etc.) you live locally.
As an eco-farmer what I am trying to do is to find ways to stop importing basic resources into my operation. We have a long way to go. Right now we import all our energy, except our own labor. We import all of our water. We import most of our food. As a start we are looking at ways to reduce our energy use. We are also designing systems for the house and farm that will allow us to meet our energy needs from our own resources. We are beginning to produce our own food. Right now we produce all of our own eggs and milk, and most of the milk products we use. If spring ever gets here we will be producing most of our fresh produce. We are also seeking out and supporting local producers of things we can't or don't produce ourselves. We are also trying to deal with the "waste" produced from living. Everything that can be composted is (or it gets fed to the chickens, they eat almost anything). We recycle what we can, and chose not to buy things that aren't recyclable. We are also encouraging others to do the same. (I take eggs to my mother-in-law and she trades them for her kitchen scraps. The chickens love the scraps, and it puts some of the lost fertility back into the farm that produced the eggs as well as reducing the waste stream.) We are exploring rain catchment systems as a way to meet our water needs. And the list goes on. All of this will take time.
I am not proposing that everyone should live my life. The system wouldn't work if they did. Human groups need specialists, that is what has allowed us to adapt to so many different environments. Every time I see my brother-in-law he tells me he can't understand why I do what I do. The effort of being a farmer baffles him. I can't explain it to him. I also can't understand how anyone could do what he does. He is a dentist. The thought of spending my day with my hand in someones mouth turns my stomach. Still, I am glad there are people who specialize in dentistry, or in the thousands of other things I can't or won't do. It makes our community stronger. The key is not to have everyone become eco-farmers. The key is to have everyone take responsibility for living locally. Know where your food comes from. Find sources that are local and encourage them to use only local resources. Know where your energy and water come from. Look at ways to change how you live so you use less or produce more of your own (or both). Build networks of local people living locally. These will become the tribes, the communities of the future.
You are a farmer. Does your way forward include agriculture in some form? If so what system of checks and balances will keep you and other farmers who follow your way from producing an excess of food?NR
April 14, 2007 12:11 AM
We have always had farming of some sort. Every creature alters its environment to favor its own food supply. Ants and beavers are great examples, but if you look at the life cycle of trees you would find that they shed chemicals that prevent close competition in their own root zone, grazing animals by selecting certain plants to eat create more occurrences of those plants - the prairie was truly a creation of the buffalo. So, to answer Nathan's question, Yes, there must be some form of agriculture for us to survive.
The question of checks and balances is a good one. Who gets to be KING or GOD to decide how much to produce and who lives and who dies? We have spent the past 10000 years proving that such a system can't work. So, what's a farmer to do?
I think the key is to live locally. If I, as a farmer, only sell to a very local market and only use resources (energy, food, water, etc) from my farm or from a very local area to produce what I sell, that automatically puts a limit on how much I produce. This can't be only for the farmer. In nature everything lives locally. Every group lives on the resources available within its range. It doesn't matter what your specialty is in the group (community, tribe, pod, etc.) you live locally.
As an eco-farmer what I am trying to do is to find ways to stop importing basic resources into my operation. We have a long way to go. Right now we import all our energy, except our own labor. We import all of our water. We import most of our food. As a start we are looking at ways to reduce our energy use. We are also designing systems for the house and farm that will allow us to meet our energy needs from our own resources. We are beginning to produce our own food. Right now we produce all of our own eggs and milk, and most of the milk products we use. If spring ever gets here we will be producing most of our fresh produce. We are also seeking out and supporting local producers of things we can't or don't produce ourselves. We are also trying to deal with the "waste" produced from living. Everything that can be composted is (or it gets fed to the chickens, they eat almost anything). We recycle what we can, and chose not to buy things that aren't recyclable. We are also encouraging others to do the same. (I take eggs to my mother-in-law and she trades them for her kitchen scraps. The chickens love the scraps, and it puts some of the lost fertility back into the farm that produced the eggs as well as reducing the waste stream.) We are exploring rain catchment systems as a way to meet our water needs. And the list goes on. All of this will take time.
I am not proposing that everyone should live my life. The system wouldn't work if they did. Human groups need specialists, that is what has allowed us to adapt to so many different environments. Every time I see my brother-in-law he tells me he can't understand why I do what I do. The effort of being a farmer baffles him. I can't explain it to him. I also can't understand how anyone could do what he does. He is a dentist. The thought of spending my day with my hand in someones mouth turns my stomach. Still, I am glad there are people who specialize in dentistry, or in the thousands of other things I can't or won't do. It makes our community stronger. The key is not to have everyone become eco-farmers. The key is to have everyone take responsibility for living locally. Know where your food comes from. Find sources that are local and encourage them to use only local resources. Know where your energy and water come from. Look at ways to change how you live so you use less or produce more of your own (or both). Build networks of local people living locally. These will become the tribes, the communities of the future.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Living in harmony with natures laws
What we are trying to do is find a way to live that doesn't break the laws of nature. We, as humans, have been breaking the first law I listed for the past 10000 years or so. We can see the results. Exponential population growth and all the social effects that go with such overcrowding. We lived for hundreds of thousands of years with out ever producing such a population explosion, but our recent model of "civilization" has produced unprecedented population growth. This is a result of the philosophy behind our agriculture. The whole point of farming is to produce an excess. Excess food results in population growth. ALWAYS!
We can't go back to the way we lived 10000 years ago. We have changed the world too much (and we wouldn't want to anyway.) So, my quest is to find a way forward that doesn't break the laws of nature.
We can't go back to the way we lived 10000 years ago. We have changed the world too much (and we wouldn't want to anyway.) So, my quest is to find a way forward that doesn't break the laws of nature.
What this blog is about
Several people have asked why we are trying this eco-farm thing, and what our governing philosophy is. I've tried to explain it simply a few times, but it never comes out in a way that people quite understand. I can't down-load my brain, so I am going to try putting some of bits of my philosophy down here. Hopefully it will generate some questions and the discussion will help me flesh-out my philosophy in a more understandable way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)