Jeff wrote:
> According to the Activist the zone concept is useful in conserving energy
> and makes our activities more efficient.
> Zones are about energy conservation for humans.
> At the very beginning there was one statement about working with
> nature and after that we were off into this abstract tool called zones.
> If we focus on the tool too strongly we may miss its origional purpose.
> Can zone design be separated from the natural world?
> Does a site dictate the zones or should we try to modify
> the site and create a diverse set of zones if possible?
> How do we keep zone design on a sustainable path?
Interesting thought, as always, Jeff. I hear two issues here. One, can
tools be designed to work only toward one goal, for only one purpose? Is
it possible to design a tool that inserts nails into wood but can not be
use to destroy things? And two, should we be fitting into Nature or fitting
it to us?
If zones help conserve energy, then I would think they CAN be helpful for a
sustainable path. But since the whole assumption behind the approach
(zones and Permaculture) is that we can and should modify Nature to our
convenience and benefit, it is very easy to slip back into unsustainable
practices. I have always had a hard time accepting the idea that some
initial major energy input (bulldozing, buying materials, etc.) is okay if
it produces more in the long run than required to make it. So, it's okay
to be unsustainable as long as you can reap big benefits later? The
balancing factor (the ethics of taking care of others and returning
surplus) is there but perhaps not inherent in the tools. People using
Permaculture techniques without the ethics can easily go astray from the
intent of Permaculture. And Permaculture is not necessarily sustainable,
though I'm sure the intent was that it should be.
This leads me back to my original points. One, can tools be designed to
work only toward one goal, for only one purpose? And two, should we be
fitting into Nature or fitting it to us? One possible definition of a
"useful tool" may be that it can be used for many purposes. So, perhaps
the goal is not specific tool design, but stronger ethics. Bill Mollison
has said something to the effect that we have all the tools and
technologies we need to live sustainably on the earth, we just need to use
them well. This is probably why we included, even stressed first, the
ethics behind Permaculture. But Jeff has brought up an interesting point;
are the ethics being followed with all the tools and techniques of
Permaculture?
Eric:
