Yes that's the common perception, but you can quickly see it's 180 degrees out of phase with the real answer as soon as I tell you. The real answer is that we need to stabilize consumption. That might mean some people reducing, but individual reductions won't have any effect on stabilizing the system as a whole. Our problem is that of all growth systems, how to switch from exploding to maturing... It's a very cool systems dilemma.
Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 5:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [FRIAM] bigger plans, bigger little mistakes I believe that the only way to address such global problems and to assure the sustainability of the natural resources base on which we all depend is to reduce consumption. A couple of decades ago the concept of voluntary simplicity was promoted; soon it might change into involuntary simplicity. Global warming and its effects, the decline of fossil fuels and conflict might drive this. It would be interesting to develop a model for consumption to see how various consumptive levels (energy, water, goods and services) would effect human societies. And then an ABM to see how various societies might react. Paul Paryski _____ See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
