I both relish in reading about this, which is further into
implementation now than the writer knows, and grow equally frustrated
over the fact that it takes science to officially and at great expense,
provide us with facts we already know as wisdom.
Not that nothing new has been uncovered, but hasn't it always been a
well known thing that we thrive in stimulating, attractive, naturally
lit spaces? Must we continuously lose nature to rediscover its healing
properties?
What we forget is the intense perpetration of profit-driven, corporate
directed construction industry which controls most aspects of dwelling,
healing and work spaces.
Want to feel connected to the Earth? Get off your concrete block,
breathe in some unfiltered air, dare to remove the vinyl siding, try
rock or wood instead of plastic and metal. Raise the ceilings a bit,
distance your house from the neighbour's reach to allow grass and trees
to accommodate some wildlife, and build near water and trees--like we
used to. It's too simple, and sad that it takes a few like-minded
experts to give us the scientific approval for common sense.
Inspiring views and comfortable quarters have traditionally been the
luxury of wealthier citizens. The challenge has always been to let it
trickle down to the masses for the betterment of humanity and the rest
of the planet.
*Natalia Kuzmyn
*
On 11/11/2012 2:56 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
Steve sent this wonderful article along the same lines:
http://www.psmag.com/culture/corridors-of-the-mind-49051/
This is why Aesthetics is the foundational Domain of all of the Social
Domains. Most cultures have some organized version of this before
they build. It's nice to see that the generic Domain (science) is
now beginning to justify it just as they did "perspective" when the
Italian painters figured it out and told the engineers about it.
REH
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ray Harrell
*Sent:* Sunday, November 11, 2012 5:35 PM
*To:* 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] The Future of Music -- the colors of Futurism
I'm told the Roma have two terms for Futurists. One is Drabani which
means Master of Poisons. The other is Gitche Serve' which means
"One who Guesses" and is the person fleecing the Gadje (you and me) on
the street for a buck.
The person who plans the future must be a Master of Foundations. A
person capable of understanding the systems of the environment as well
as the imaginative architecture that will rest upon that Foundation.
I think of Whiteheads "complete abstractions" as the technique for
knowing how to manifest the Foundations and divide the two
environments for the benefit of both. That's what we Aniyvwiyah call
Ulanigvgv or competent power.
Good to hear from you Lawry,
REH
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *de
Bivort Lawrence
*Sent:* Sunday, November 11, 2012 3:37 PM
*To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
*Cc:* 'Isaac Yager'; 'Sarah Levine'; 'Summer Greenwald-Gonella';
'Amanda Grafton'; 'Christina Parsons'; 'Phil Kaplan'; 'Darcy Dunn';
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; 'Jennifer
Rolnick'; 'Ari Isenberg'; 'Ethan Goldberg'; 'Stephanie Dream Listener
Weems'
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] The Future of Music -- the colors of Futurism
Hello, Ray,
"Futurists" come in all colors. Some, yes, are dreamers, and fall
into the category, if you will, of science fiction writers --
imaginative visions designed to intrigue and spur thinking.
Your basic question, really, comes down to whether a "futurist" has a
reliable (or at least examinable) methodology. Probably the least
interesting, most pedestrian methodology is simple trend extension:
discern a trend dating from the past to the present, and extend it
into the future. This method was at the basis of the old-time
futurists. Of course, its weakness was that trends do not persist for
ever (think sigmoid curve) and so as a predictive method it had sever
limitations. Another method, favored by some well-known ex-CIA-type
analysts, was to read the public press for trends and consensi on what
the future would hold. The weaknesses here are self-evident.
So then we come to your query as to whether (some) futurists have
fundamental models of how things are and can be, based, I would
suggest, most solidly in a systemic approach to the structures and
dynamics of the real world. There are some wonderful models available
for this. Other kinds of models were those developed by Meadows, /et
al/, EPA/DOE's SEAS, and Leontiev's Input-Output modeling effort.
Behind all these approaches lies a seldom mentioned but, in my view,
dominating relaity: that the prediction (and especially those
predictions that people take seriously) lay the groundwork for people
deciding to do things differently -- and thus create results that seem
to then deny the validity of the prediction.
And this brings me to my favorite theme and the one that has most
dominated my thinking and professional work: the deliberate
intervention in the affairs of the world (whether at the individual
level, or companies, or communities, or that of, say, international
systems). The goal with this approach is not so much the prediction
of what will happen, but the co-creation of desirable futures,
predicted or not. My aphorism on the matter: it is easier to create
the future than to predict it.
To be successful with this co-creative approach and goal, one does
need a largish portfolio of tools -- linguistic, modeling, strategic,
tactical, political tools. It takes time and effort to build this
portfolio, time and effort to maintain it, and time and effort to
introduce others to it. It takes great dedication, patience, and
artistry to employ these tools in the pursuit of worthy, complex
goals. Learning is continuous.
Cheers,
Lawry
On Nov 11, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
Are "Futurists" simple dreamers or are they experts in the Foundations
of things that builds the strength for dreams and separates them from
chaos?
REH
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ray Harrell
*Sent:* Sunday, November 11, 2012 9:57 AM
*To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION; Amanda
Grafton; Ari Isenberg; Christina Parsons; Darcy Dunn; Ethan Goldberg;
Isaac Yager; Jennifer Rolnick; Phil Kaplan; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>; Sarah Levine; Stephanie Dream Listener
Weems; Summer Greenwald-Gonella
*Subject:* [Futurework] The Future of Music
This looks very interesting.
REH
http://futureofmusic.org/events/future-music-summit-2012
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
