Kathern wrote:
>My experience leads me to agree more with Jeff's ordering Eric. Whilst I
>agree that in theory the environment should come first I think that if we
>are trying to save the planet, as against our own little bit of it, the
>satisfaction and enjoyment have to come first.
Hi Kathern, that definition of sustainable-living was not mine.
It was from the class on sustainable living and has resulted
in a separate discussion with the teacher. Looks like we have
four slightly different perspectives on the definition <grin>.
I think you, Eric, and Viviane (instructor) are very close and
i'm in a different world. Try this test.. read the definition
and see if you think of a "thing" or a process. Here is
the definition again:
>>> sustainable living. - satisfying life
>>> - appealing life
>>> - environmentally responsible
To the instructor this definition suggests a process and
to me it is ambiguous. We both agreed that sustainable
living needs to be a process and may appear different
for everyone who joins the path.
In my mind the issue of "satisfying vrs responsible"
go away as we move towards process thinking. For example,
i naturally pursue enjoyable activities and they are everywhere.
The word "responsible" helps select where i look for a
satisfying life. Often when i'm acting unsustainable
(enjoyment ahead of responsibility) this represents an
opportunity for the process to act on. The only issue
at this point is whether the process has stagnated.
For example, my largest roadblock is probably the car. If i
say the car is a "satisfying" and "appealing" component of
life that is more important than "responsible ecology" then
the process stops. If i drop into guilt and say i'm not
being responsible then this again stops the process. If
i stay in the process and look for enjoyable solutions then
the path remains open. I may never eliminate the car from
my life but i will always be seeking other options.
Another way to look at this is to try identifying someone
who is living sustainability. Do they meet all the criteria
in our definition (satisfied, responsible). Now ask if
they are truly sustainable or temporarily more sustainable
than others. My point is that sustainability is a moving
target and our definition should make this clear.
Another interesting question is to ask if "satisfying" is
a feeling derived from process or from static positions
and beliefs.
I wonder if i'm the only person who thinks like this?
jeff (off to repair the corn path. We had heavy rains)
