Responding on LinkedIn Global Foresight thread… on changes in the economic rules.
The idea that global economic change develops from local innovation, like biological evolution, is also a general rule for all environmental processes, that change is distributed and developmental in general, and *does not actually follow formulas* as the traditional natural science paradigm has tried […]
Again, I find myself agreeing with you.
BB
Responding to: 4/26/09
Brian,
You started this thread by saying you thought long term forces such as “natural cycles” would overwhelm any local developmental processes. What I had said was fairly directly that all long term forces were the accumulation of local developmental processes. There actually seems to be excellent evidence […]
John,
The big shift in thinking about our impacts you suggest looks to me to have some interesting features. What seems hard for me, though, is finding an inviting way to lead people into thinking about the problems their solutions will later create. Finding “solutions” usually results in there no longer seeming to be a problem […]
On a Global Foresight thread Tom Abeles asked if models like what science uses, but based on a reliable “bandwidth” for natural systems, might somehow have predictive properties, and noting: “The problem we have is exemplified by the poem, The Theory that Jack built which was published in an insightful set of “nonsense” poems […]
The frustration many feel about the failure of our “guardians” to be clear about the needs of our environments, our frozen helplessness when facing obvious threats, is just the kind of observation that is the stimulus for new kinds of thinking. “Changing Normal” is… for a planet stuck in the past, you might […]
A reply to Bill Dixon on Global Foresight on Soddy and changing assumptions in economics.
I do agree with you generally, but it seems that the specific forms that things take come from how they individually develop *within* the possibilities allowed by “the laws of nature” as limits on their individuality. So, though I don’t expect […]
re: Mr. Soddy’s Ecological Economy NY Times Op-Ed, Sun 4/12, mentioned by Tom in a LinkedIn “Global Foresight” conversation.
Tom,
Thanks for mentioning the Times Op-Ed, It’s just great some mention of Soddy and the “physical world problem” finally appeared in the Times. As I find so often, I agree with Soddy’s analysis of the problem, as […]
post to LinkedIn’s Global Foresight thread today,
Tom,
I guess the problem is that we’ve been steering the development of the earth as if expanding our vehicle with our windows painted over with out of date explanations, having a party and not watching the earth’s responses as we crashed into things. Our blind procedures, then, have not […]
Richard & all, - from an email today -
I think the statement from Rorty:
> “Truth cannot be out there - cannot exist independently of the human
> mind because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there. The world is
> out there, but descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of
> the […]
Sent to some research scientists interested in the “physical world” problem….
I’m thinking it might make it easier if I explain less, rather than more, to get a response to my main question. You could just say where you were stopped; at a, b, c, d or e
—
I observed an effect of how […]