Universal Platform for Developing Sustainable Earth "Vision" Co-operatively.
1 view
Skip to first unread message
hearthstone
Dec 5, 2010, 4:00:54 AM12/5/10
to modelearth
Universal Platform for Developing Sustainable Earth "Vision" Co-
operatively.
Online for newest version: http://www.modelearth.org/seed.html
"A sustainable world can never be fully realized until it is
widely envisioned. The vision must be built up by many people before
it is complete and compelling." (Meadows 2004, p273)
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To
change something, build a new model that makes the existing model
obsolete"*
(attributed to Buckminster Fuller, though I have not been able, so
far, to find the source)
We have to know what kind of a world we want to live in, if the one
that we live in now we don't like.
The challenge is to come up with an idea of a world that would
optimally suit us all; an ideal that all of us on Earth could focus on
and strive for--a harmonious, truly sustainable co-existence of us all
on Earth.
It has to be an ideal accessible, discussable, and amendable by every-
and any-body at all times--the germ of a true global (and, of course
local at the same time) governance--a government where the governing
would be done by the means of a "vision"1 in common worked on, held
and striven for by all continuously.
The valid competition would be to improve on the ideal , and to find
better ways of achieving this ideal, instead of competing for
advantage over others to the detriment of the whole, as has the
prevalent practice been till now.
There would, eventually, cease any need for "leaders" and "followers"--
everyone would have the potential to take a part in embodying their
own ideas (in concert with the wishes for an ideal existence of all
others) in the continuously being shaped collective vision. The
resulting collective vision would not be static--an ideal could not
remain an ideal without the possibility of improving on it
perpetually. It would be a space to resolve any differences,
controversies, conflicts, and any complaints that there ever might
arise among us; it would become a superior way of a collective self-
rule.
What is being referred to in the quote at the beginning of the
article--the "envisioning" and "vision" of the ideal to be realized--
are indeed essential for achieving that which is being desired:
"... Vision without action is useless. But action without vision is
directionless and feeble.Vision is absolutely necessary to guide and
motivate. ..." (Meadows 2004, p272).
The vision, indeed, " ... must be built up by many people before it is
complete and compelling. ..."--But how to do this? How to allow a vast
number of people (potentially all who live on Earth and have a stake
in the future of this world, each perhaps with their own vision) to co-
operate on creating one vision of one Earth's future?
This mind staggering task might stop many from even ever contemplating
such an undertaking--an assumption validated by the lack of any
progress in presenting a platform on which to unite all of the
possible visions of a sustainable Earth ever since Donella Meadows'
passing away (2001).
Despite Donella Meadows' "visioning"/"envisioning" being taught at
many places in the world, the one thing needed for starting to work on
a to all acceptable future--a place where all could relate their ideas
with the ideas of everyone else--is missing. Where is it that anyone
could compare their vision with the visions of others?
On a local level it might be possible (even though it is not done
properly anywhere, to my knowledge--correct me, please, if you know
otherwise), but how about co-ordinating all the local visions with the
vision for the whole world?
There is, possibly, a way that would allow to accommodate all of our
visions globally, but, only as long as we can all agree that we all
want to live truly and provably sustainably.
Consider this:
Imagine an Earth where humans exist in zero population growth
communities situated amidst wild, by humans unregulated nature, where
all the other species that we share this planet with live untroubled
by humans.
These communities could exist at what-so-ever level of complexity of
sustainability (from "hunter-gatherer" way of life to anything more
complex), as long as those communities would be transparently and
demonstrably sustainable, so that their way of living would not
adversely affect the existence of other human communities and other
life on Earth.
The basis of this "platform" for developing a vision that would
encompass all possible sustainable life-styles would be an Earth
populated by hunter-gatherers who would have a more than ample room to
live in, with a plenty of safety margin that would allow for any, even
now unforeseeable exigencies. In this way there would be no need for
having to accommodate all other species sharing the Earth with us in
any special way--those would always live in balance with humans who
would not be able to inflict much damage on them.
Any communities at a level of sustainability more complex than that of
hunter-gatherers within this universal vision would be "evolved" from
the least complex one possible step by step, demonstrating that each
more complex level of sustainability would indeed be sustainable
ecologically and socially in every aspect, all communities together
making sure not to exceed the total population level of humans on
Earth that would always remain fixed at what it would be if all humans
lived as hunter-gatherers--this as a safety measure in case that
people, if not satisfied with higher complexity level of
sustainability, would always have the opportunity to fall back to
living at less complex levels of sustainability.
I imagine that people (both--in constructing the vision, and in the
sustainable world that would be the vision realized) would be able to
"vote with their feet"--at any time when they would feel that they
would like to live, either at a different place, or at a different
level of sustainability, they would just re-group/re-locate. In this
way social sustainability would be ensured--no one would be forced to
stay at any place, or at any level of complexity of sustainability.
It must not be understood that I advocate that all the billions of
people on Earth that there are now should become hunter-gatherers and
then tried to work their way to the level of complexity of
sustainability that they would like to live at in real life! All this
above would be happening in models (of any appropriate kind, e. g.
"gedanken experiments, etc.) for the purposes of getting a practicable
"vision" together.
The what-so-ever model(s)/vision(s) that would be arrived at should
not be anything less than a portrayal of an as perfect as possible
situation. (However--"visions" should never be considered as being
static; they would evolve along with the evolution of thoughts on the
subject.) The model(s) arrived at should not be impeded by what might
be considered possible, or impossible, in our current, very imperfect
world that we are forced to live in now:
"Visioning means imagining, at first generally and then with
increasing specificity, what you really want. That is, what you really
want, not what someone has taught you to want, and not what you have
learned to be willing to settle for. Visioning means taking off the
constraints of "feasibility," of disbelief and past disappointments,
and letting your mind dwell upon its most noble, uplifting, treasured
dreams." (Meadows 2004, p272)
The ideal should not be limited by what might be thought of as
being "possible", or "impossible" at any given time!:
"... In order to conceive of what you truly want to create, you
must separate what you want from what you think is
possible. ..." (Fritz 1984, p71)
The ways of achieving the ideal depicted in the "visions"/"universal
models" should start suggesting themselves as soon as the model would
appear to be practicable enough.
A great number of variations on this "vision" suggest themselves--the
result would still be a humanity that would harmoniously exist with
itself and all other life on Earth, providing that humanity would
adhere strictly to the "zero population growth" policy, and to living
demonstrably and transparently sustainably.
A way of providing a satisfactory definition of
"sustainable"/"sustainably" would be to demonstrate transparently in
models (of any appropriate kind) that any situation would, or would
not, indeed be "sustainable", that at no point there is anything that
would be deleterious to the comfort of other humans or other species.
There is a need for such a model of what the Earth should ideally look
like that would be freely accessible by anyone on Earth, so that
everyone can, at any point, see what progress is being made towards
the ideal at any time, so that there is a reference available for any
undertaking that might concern the welfare of anyone on the planet.
"Model" - definitions:
"... 10. a simplified representation of a system or phenomenon, as in
the sciences or economics, with any hypotheses required to describe
the system or explain the phenomenon, often mathematically."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/model
A representation of a system that allows for investigation of the
properties of the system and, in some cases, prediction of future
outcomes. Models are often used in quantitative analysis and technical
analysis, and sometimes also used in fundamental analysis.
www.investorwords.com/5662/model.html
Note (1):
The "vision" in the title harks back to Donella Meadows'
"visioning"/"envisioning", which owes its being to Robert Fritz's
"Technologies For Creating" (TFC). What "visioning"/"envisioning" is
for Donella Meadows, Robert Fritz calls a "choice". Fritz' The Path of
Least Resistance (Fritz 1984) is a necessary reading for anyone who
wants to understand what Donella Meadows' "visioning"/"envisioning"
is.
I think that "model" could be a more fortuitous choice of a term in
the context of this writing.
Donella Meadows' "Envisioning a Sustainable World", in which she
explains what "visioning"/"envisioning" is, is online:
www.sustainer.org/pubs/Envisioning.DMeadows.pdf
and so is what I wrote that touches on what her
"visioning"/"envisioning" concept is:
"Visioning": Global Citizens Designing a Sustainable World Together -
www.modelearth.org/donella-vision.html.
In Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update the authors write about the
"sustainable revolution", the next biggest social change coming.
(Meadows, et al. 2004, chapter 8, p273)
The "Universal Platform for Developing Sustainable Earth Vision" is a
basis for a complete, all-encompassing vision of a sustainable Earth;
Complete, because any sustainable life-style can be accommodated
within the model, as long as that "life-style" indeed is provably
sustainable.
What is needed now is to make this all-encompassing vision of a
sustainable Earth "compelling".
Bibliography:
Fritz, Robert
1984 The Path of Least Resistance. Salem, MA: DMA Inc.,
ISBN: 0-930641-00-0
Meadows, Donella H., Jorgen Randers and Dennis Meadows
2004 Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update.
White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company
A synopsis of Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. Online at the
Sustainability Institute (founded by Donella Meadows):
www.sustainer.org/pubs/limitstogrowth.pdf (accessed 10/06/2009)
The Systems Thinker--"Moving Toward a Sustainable Future." includes
chapter 8 from Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update: www.thesystemsthinker.com/V16N9.pdf
(accessed 10/06/2009)
*) copied from http://www.siberg.net/2009/09/buckminster/
You might also, perhaps, look at what I wrote about R. B. Fuller's
"World Game" -
Buckminster R. Fuller's World Game and ModelEarth.
FINIS
operatively.
Online for newest version: http://www.modelearth.org/seed.html
"A sustainable world can never be fully realized until it is
widely envisioned. The vision must be built up by many people before
it is complete and compelling." (Meadows 2004, p273)
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To
change something, build a new model that makes the existing model
obsolete"*
(attributed to Buckminster Fuller, though I have not been able, so
far, to find the source)
We have to know what kind of a world we want to live in, if the one
that we live in now we don't like.
The challenge is to come up with an idea of a world that would
optimally suit us all; an ideal that all of us on Earth could focus on
and strive for--a harmonious, truly sustainable co-existence of us all
on Earth.
It has to be an ideal accessible, discussable, and amendable by every-
and any-body at all times--the germ of a true global (and, of course
local at the same time) governance--a government where the governing
would be done by the means of a "vision"1 in common worked on, held
and striven for by all continuously.
The valid competition would be to improve on the ideal , and to find
better ways of achieving this ideal, instead of competing for
advantage over others to the detriment of the whole, as has the
prevalent practice been till now.
There would, eventually, cease any need for "leaders" and "followers"--
everyone would have the potential to take a part in embodying their
own ideas (in concert with the wishes for an ideal existence of all
others) in the continuously being shaped collective vision. The
resulting collective vision would not be static--an ideal could not
remain an ideal without the possibility of improving on it
perpetually. It would be a space to resolve any differences,
controversies, conflicts, and any complaints that there ever might
arise among us; it would become a superior way of a collective self-
rule.
What is being referred to in the quote at the beginning of the
article--the "envisioning" and "vision" of the ideal to be realized--
are indeed essential for achieving that which is being desired:
"... Vision without action is useless. But action without vision is
directionless and feeble.Vision is absolutely necessary to guide and
motivate. ..." (Meadows 2004, p272).
The vision, indeed, " ... must be built up by many people before it is
complete and compelling. ..."--But how to do this? How to allow a vast
number of people (potentially all who live on Earth and have a stake
in the future of this world, each perhaps with their own vision) to co-
operate on creating one vision of one Earth's future?
This mind staggering task might stop many from even ever contemplating
such an undertaking--an assumption validated by the lack of any
progress in presenting a platform on which to unite all of the
possible visions of a sustainable Earth ever since Donella Meadows'
passing away (2001).
Despite Donella Meadows' "visioning"/"envisioning" being taught at
many places in the world, the one thing needed for starting to work on
a to all acceptable future--a place where all could relate their ideas
with the ideas of everyone else--is missing. Where is it that anyone
could compare their vision with the visions of others?
On a local level it might be possible (even though it is not done
properly anywhere, to my knowledge--correct me, please, if you know
otherwise), but how about co-ordinating all the local visions with the
vision for the whole world?
There is, possibly, a way that would allow to accommodate all of our
visions globally, but, only as long as we can all agree that we all
want to live truly and provably sustainably.
Consider this:
Imagine an Earth where humans exist in zero population growth
communities situated amidst wild, by humans unregulated nature, where
all the other species that we share this planet with live untroubled
by humans.
These communities could exist at what-so-ever level of complexity of
sustainability (from "hunter-gatherer" way of life to anything more
complex), as long as those communities would be transparently and
demonstrably sustainable, so that their way of living would not
adversely affect the existence of other human communities and other
life on Earth.
The basis of this "platform" for developing a vision that would
encompass all possible sustainable life-styles would be an Earth
populated by hunter-gatherers who would have a more than ample room to
live in, with a plenty of safety margin that would allow for any, even
now unforeseeable exigencies. In this way there would be no need for
having to accommodate all other species sharing the Earth with us in
any special way--those would always live in balance with humans who
would not be able to inflict much damage on them.
Any communities at a level of sustainability more complex than that of
hunter-gatherers within this universal vision would be "evolved" from
the least complex one possible step by step, demonstrating that each
more complex level of sustainability would indeed be sustainable
ecologically and socially in every aspect, all communities together
making sure not to exceed the total population level of humans on
Earth that would always remain fixed at what it would be if all humans
lived as hunter-gatherers--this as a safety measure in case that
people, if not satisfied with higher complexity level of
sustainability, would always have the opportunity to fall back to
living at less complex levels of sustainability.
I imagine that people (both--in constructing the vision, and in the
sustainable world that would be the vision realized) would be able to
"vote with their feet"--at any time when they would feel that they
would like to live, either at a different place, or at a different
level of sustainability, they would just re-group/re-locate. In this
way social sustainability would be ensured--no one would be forced to
stay at any place, or at any level of complexity of sustainability.
It must not be understood that I advocate that all the billions of
people on Earth that there are now should become hunter-gatherers and
then tried to work their way to the level of complexity of
sustainability that they would like to live at in real life! All this
above would be happening in models (of any appropriate kind, e. g.
"gedanken experiments, etc.) for the purposes of getting a practicable
"vision" together.
The what-so-ever model(s)/vision(s) that would be arrived at should
not be anything less than a portrayal of an as perfect as possible
situation. (However--"visions" should never be considered as being
static; they would evolve along with the evolution of thoughts on the
subject.) The model(s) arrived at should not be impeded by what might
be considered possible, or impossible, in our current, very imperfect
world that we are forced to live in now:
"Visioning means imagining, at first generally and then with
increasing specificity, what you really want. That is, what you really
want, not what someone has taught you to want, and not what you have
learned to be willing to settle for. Visioning means taking off the
constraints of "feasibility," of disbelief and past disappointments,
and letting your mind dwell upon its most noble, uplifting, treasured
dreams." (Meadows 2004, p272)
The ideal should not be limited by what might be thought of as
being "possible", or "impossible" at any given time!:
"... In order to conceive of what you truly want to create, you
must separate what you want from what you think is
possible. ..." (Fritz 1984, p71)
The ways of achieving the ideal depicted in the "visions"/"universal
models" should start suggesting themselves as soon as the model would
appear to be practicable enough.
A great number of variations on this "vision" suggest themselves--the
result would still be a humanity that would harmoniously exist with
itself and all other life on Earth, providing that humanity would
adhere strictly to the "zero population growth" policy, and to living
demonstrably and transparently sustainably.
A way of providing a satisfactory definition of
"sustainable"/"sustainably" would be to demonstrate transparently in
models (of any appropriate kind) that any situation would, or would
not, indeed be "sustainable", that at no point there is anything that
would be deleterious to the comfort of other humans or other species.
There is a need for such a model of what the Earth should ideally look
like that would be freely accessible by anyone on Earth, so that
everyone can, at any point, see what progress is being made towards
the ideal at any time, so that there is a reference available for any
undertaking that might concern the welfare of anyone on the planet.
"Model" - definitions:
"... 10. a simplified representation of a system or phenomenon, as in
the sciences or economics, with any hypotheses required to describe
the system or explain the phenomenon, often mathematically."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/model
A representation of a system that allows for investigation of the
properties of the system and, in some cases, prediction of future
outcomes. Models are often used in quantitative analysis and technical
analysis, and sometimes also used in fundamental analysis.
www.investorwords.com/5662/model.html
Note (1):
The "vision" in the title harks back to Donella Meadows'
"visioning"/"envisioning", which owes its being to Robert Fritz's
"Technologies For Creating" (TFC). What "visioning"/"envisioning" is
for Donella Meadows, Robert Fritz calls a "choice". Fritz' The Path of
Least Resistance (Fritz 1984) is a necessary reading for anyone who
wants to understand what Donella Meadows' "visioning"/"envisioning"
is.
I think that "model" could be a more fortuitous choice of a term in
the context of this writing.
Donella Meadows' "Envisioning a Sustainable World", in which she
explains what "visioning"/"envisioning" is, is online:
www.sustainer.org/pubs/Envisioning.DMeadows.pdf
and so is what I wrote that touches on what her
"visioning"/"envisioning" concept is:
"Visioning": Global Citizens Designing a Sustainable World Together -
www.modelearth.org/donella-vision.html.
In Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update the authors write about the
"sustainable revolution", the next biggest social change coming.
(Meadows, et al. 2004, chapter 8, p273)
The "Universal Platform for Developing Sustainable Earth Vision" is a
basis for a complete, all-encompassing vision of a sustainable Earth;
Complete, because any sustainable life-style can be accommodated
within the model, as long as that "life-style" indeed is provably
sustainable.
What is needed now is to make this all-encompassing vision of a
sustainable Earth "compelling".
Bibliography:
Fritz, Robert
1984 The Path of Least Resistance. Salem, MA: DMA Inc.,
ISBN: 0-930641-00-0
Meadows, Donella H., Jorgen Randers and Dennis Meadows
2004 Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update.
White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company
A synopsis of Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. Online at the
Sustainability Institute (founded by Donella Meadows):
www.sustainer.org/pubs/limitstogrowth.pdf (accessed 10/06/2009)
The Systems Thinker--"Moving Toward a Sustainable Future." includes
chapter 8 from Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update: www.thesystemsthinker.com/V16N9.pdf
(accessed 10/06/2009)
*) copied from http://www.siberg.net/2009/09/buckminster/
You might also, perhaps, look at what I wrote about R. B. Fuller's
"World Game" -
Buckminster R. Fuller's World Game and ModelEarth.
FINIS
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages