Thank you for this interesting thread ! :) ( on the economy of monasticism )
Could some of us see ourselves in some ways as monastics of a digital / "post print" age ( albeit distributed / spread out ? ) and, if so, still in a stage of formation ? with a convergence of interdependent viable self sustaining production infrastructures still to develop ? Does the approach ( memes ? ) some of us use on this list differ from the communes cited and compared with the monastic communities in that book ? How do monastic or intentional community modes of production , governance and property relate or differ to p2p approaches ? Are such monastic orders "blue" ( authoritarian ), and are intentional communities they are compared to ( from the 60 ies, and after ? ) "green" memes ?<http://www.spiraldynamics-integral.nl/uploads/images/headers/Value_systems.jpg> ( egalitarian ? ) If this emerges as yellow, turquoise and beyond, what would it look like ? How have ( if they have ) old monasteries adapted to changes in memes ? What is the level of interconnected critical diversity required to enable viable self sustaining p2p production / governance / property systems ? What would the relation of a p2p viable system be to space / distance ? Is there anywhere on earth where a diversity of systems, such as documented on p2pfoundation , appropedia, etc already converge as to mutually self sustain ? What would its cost be, in terms of infrastructure development ? ( if/when acquiring production infrastructure on the capitalist monetized markets ) And what transition dependencies does it have in relation to current ( industrial era ? ) infrastructures ? Based on physical distance factors , what have been past conditions of a certain form of emergence, and how would it compare with today ? What would the maps look like, if some aspects of p2p meme development would be considered as colonizing monastics ? Monastics of a certain meme ? Where are such memes most represented and interconnected ? Is there a need for a critical mass combined with a critical diversity within a specific geographical area and along certain levels of interconnectedness within such potential systems ? What would its current main development centres be ? Berlin and San Francisco ? or simply... the internet... and any place with high internet connectivity and creative / information based economies ? And if so, what do we potentially see emerging from a combination of internet and spatial face to face dynamics ? Did our interactions on the internet lead to any of us converging and living together ? ( open source ecology project maybe ? ) On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Kevin F <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anna, > > Monastics also provided services to the communities of which they are > a part. In the past the monasteries were great repositories of > knowledge. They were not limited to scriptural works alone. In the pre > print era scribes also produced copies of philosophical, technical and > historical works. They provided opportunities for people to educate > themselves and in turn those same people became stewards of that > knowledge which was of general benefit to communities that grew up > around the monasteries. > Now as you say it is true that as celibate institutions they fail to > reproduce themselves. However it can also be said that the knowledge > of which the monasteries were caretakers contributed to the > sustainability and in turn the re-productivity of the lay communities > and that seeing monasteries as socially valuable in this way was one > reason people from those communities chose to join. > Of course this is not the only motivation to join. For some it was to > pursue the spiritual life, for others it was to escape poverty, while > others joined because of social or family pressure. > One of the big rules was that monks and nuns should not own property. > If monks or nuns were to have families things become more complicated > as humans tend to look out for the welfare of their own before that of > the community as a whole. One of the arguments for celibacy in the > church is that it acts as an anti corruption measure. When Priests, > Abbots and Nuns have families it is easy for mini dynasties to emerge > as quite quickly it is the son of the Abbot who inherits his fathers > prestigious and influential role. This situation is avoided when they > are required to be celibate. > The other advantage of a celibate community is that its members have > more time to focus on intellectual work. When this is applied to > technical problems, inventive and innovative solutions can be shared, > improving the health and sustainability of the broader lay community. > All of these dynamics change as societies become better off. Today we > no longer depend on monasteries to preserve and reproduce important > texts. Nor do we depend on them for education or health. None of this > was true 500 years ago. As the quality of life improves for people > across the globe the appeal of monastic life is waning. Everywhere > fewer and fewer young people are taking vocations. The tables have > turned in a way. While at one time communities depended on monasteries > today most monasteries depend heavily on charity. What they have to > offer society more generally has come into question and their futures > are indeed uncertain. > I do not wish to romanticise the historical role of monasteries, I > just want to point out that their social function has changed over > time. While I agree that today these institutions have become in some > sense parasitic my point is that it was not always so. > What I gained from reading this paper was more from the analysis of > incentives and motivations both of which can be applied to analysis of > intentional communities. Also worth considering is the power of shared > values that may be not be so strong in more secular arrangements. > > Regards > > Kevin > > > On 30 January 2013 19:22, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > The element left out of this analysis is the fact that monasteries are > > single sex establishments which do not have to cope with child rearing. > They > > are therefor parasitic in the sense that they live off the produce of the > > society at large which provides them with the personnel while leaving > them > > free to indulge in their 'spiritual capital'. > > > > There is no doubt in my mind that child rearing is the most difficult and > > undervalued profession, since it is performed in the main voluntarily by > > untrained people out of love, and therefore does not appear to require > any > > specific investment. Consequently it can be ignored as in the above > > discussion as though living in a secular socialist commune could be > compared > > to living in a monastery. > > > > I am not decrying the need for a spiritual element in helping to sustain > > indivuals and groups. Indeed I think it is essential to bring meaning in > the > > present situation of imminent 'collapse of civilisation', but it needs > to be > > able to be interwoven into our everyday lives, not hived off into > separate > > cloisters which may be beneficial for the inmates but do not really > > contribute to the sustenance of the rest of us. > > > > Anna > > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Kevin F <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I've been reading 'The Economics of Monasticism by Nathan Smith' over > >> the past week. He makes some interesting points in comparing the > >> sustainability of intentional communities with that of Christian > >> monasteries. Citing a study by Rost et al (2008) that > >> "An average longevity of 463 years makes monasteries more durable not > >> only than firms, but even than most states." and further suggesting > >> possibilities as to what makes them so successful. > >> > >> I will add it to the wiki when I get a chance over the coming days. > >> > >> The Economics of Monasticism - Nathan Smith > >> > >> "Since their emergence in ancient times, Christian monasteries have > >> proven to be among the most durable of all human institutions, and in > >> the medieval centuries made enormous contributions to the emergence of > >> Western civilization. They are organized internally on socialist > >> lines: monks own no property and owe total obedience to the abbot, > >> making the monastery a miniature ‘centrally planned economy.’ A > >> puzzling contrast exists between the longevity of monasteries and the > >> transience of secular socialist communes. This paper presents a > >> theoretical model which shows why voluntary socialist communes might > >> be viable despite ‘shirking’ problems, yet fail due to turnover, and > >> how worship, which induces people with high ‘spiritual capital’ to > >> self-select into the monastery and then grows that spiritual capital > >> through ‘learning-by-doing,’ can solve the turnover problem and make a > >> worship-based socialist commune—a monastery—stable. Monasticism, like > >> the market, is a form of ‘spontaneous order,’ but unlike the market, > >> it does not depend on third-party enforcement (e.g., by a state) to > >> function: this explains why monasticism (unlike capitalism) was able > >> to thrive in the anarchic Dark Ages. Monasteries, in principle and > >> largely in practice, are a form of society based on consent of the > >> governed, unlike liberal states which preach but do not practice > >> consensual governance, and it is interesting to juxtapose the real, > >> live ‘social contracts’ of the monasteries with the notional social > >> contracts of liberal political theory." > >> > >> http://www.thearda.com/workingpapers/monasticism.asp > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > ============================================================================= > >> GPG KEY > >> > >> > ============================================================================= > >> If this email is not signed or encrypted its because it is sent via > >> the browser. For private communications I encourage friends to use > >> GPG. If you are interested in learning more about GPG try the Enigmail > >> plugin with the Thuderbird email client. A quick search for > >> '[email protected]' on public keyservers should find my most up > >> to date key. > >> > >> For example try - > >> > >> > http://sks.spodhuis.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=kev.flanagan%40gmail.com > >> OR > >> > >> > http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=kev.flanagan%40gmail.com > >> > >> > ============================================================================= > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> P2P Foundation - Mailing list > >> http://www.p2pfoundation.net > >> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > P2P Foundation - Mailing list > > http://www.p2pfoundation.net > > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > > > > > > -- > > ============================================================================= > GPG KEY > > ============================================================================= > If this email is not signed or encrypted its because it is sent via > the browser. For private communications I encourage friends to use > GPG. If you are interested in learning more about GPG try the Enigmail > plugin with the Thuderbird email client. A quick search for > '[email protected]' on public keyservers should find my most up > to date key. > > For example try - > > http://sks.spodhuis.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=kev.flanagan%40gmail.com > OR > > http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=kev.flanagan%40gmail.com > > ============================================================================= > > _______________________________________________ > P2P Foundation - Mailing list > http://www.p2pfoundation.net > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation >
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
