Post by Merlyn Peter on Jan 7, 2014 22:47:23 GMT
Land Regeneration2.pdf (449.67 KB) Land regeneration - The ecological and spiritual imperative. This chart comes right at the end of Book 5 Vol 1 The Carob Pod: An Anthropological Guide to Permaculture and is better explicated in Vol 2 Petriarchy: The Law of the Land found in journal format and both available on my website market page. In fact, the understanding of the chart develops to a very large degree but I include here a simple explanation as to why I originally designed it.
This wholly revised design tool has been inspired by my networking skills and ability to combine multiple activities into one great scheme. As such, the organic base to my thinking allows me to identify root causes, and to see their effects played out. This is in full view of the integrity of the system maintaining a holistic outlook. As such the design tool needs to be read in a wholistic fashion, and not linearly. At the hub lies the original motive, an affirmation of humanity as a cultural and environmental being whose genetic vocation depends on this search for “the source.” Radiating outwards are the degrees of influence essential for the maintaining of this motive – its integrity. This is done in a manner that identifies the strongest influence as central to that integrity. As one progresses further outwards the level of activity attributable to those lesser influences reduces, but it is never discounted. (The dark spiralling curve represents human evolution from its embryonic to primary to higher consciousness.)
The object of this tool is to provide overall guidance during the construction and implementation of management plans and to understand them in context of human development and evolution. This allows the participants to focus their attention upon the necessities whilst keeping in mind the influences at the outer edges. Of course, the number of effective influences has grown indefinitely (an infilling so to speak); the more this happens the greater the reinforcement there is in the centre. Importantly, it allows for the continued abstract expansion of this model if one feels the necessity. This is obviously my context of understanding and I am reluctant to expand (even contract) it any further since such an action would only tempt superfluous modes of linear thinking. And anyhow, I add another dimension to its abstract thinking by overlaying a pattern for evolutionary consciousness. In this I am trying to indicate a jump in consciousness by humanity who at the embryonic and primary level share the same characteristics as all life forms on this planet.
I have consistently joggled with this model which has since moved on from its earlier prototypes. I am happy as it stands but nevertheless, if I studied it long enough the context of my thinking may be tempted to change it about again, reflective of my healthy appetite towards personal evolution. At times I am torn between a social context and an individual one inductive of my lifestyle behaviour. At a later stage of development one may be tempted to move the spheres of influences around to reflect the increased activity of a particular one within their own plans. I believe this would conduce to create a state of fragmentation and is indicative of this fragmentation within the management of the system. Rather, to maintain an organic outlook, the further the influence is away from the hub then the greater the networking is required between the different spheres. (That I place Godhead at its furthest part is itself food for thought but should indicate to the reader the necessity of holistic and cyclical thought.) This may appear to be a rigid system, but in reality it is a form of negative feedback that will prevent the management plan from overstepping its mark too rapidly. The idea behind this type of thinking is to allow a continual reinforcement of the hub. Subsequently, any intense activity happening on the outer edges will be checked and slowed down by the need to ensure radial balance across the entire organic plan. Effectively, this makes the system self-regulating and immune to exterior influences that may cause damage.
The important thing to gauge here is the dualism applied towards this system’s thinking which is complementary and not Cartesian. Once it is understood that the articulation of space is a phenomenon created from the human tendency and mindset to be removed from ephemeral time and in its place is substituted a growing awareness of chronological/historical time in relation to a “domesticated” landscape, it can be appreciated that each individual will have to experience a paradigm shift if personal evolution is to be augmented as a holistic vocation. Hence the inner three circles emphasize our most primitive biological and ecological motivations; they emphasise millions of years of bipedal evolution and takes us beyond our forested habitats. Within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs these can be seen to incorporate the first four levels of deficit, the physiological, safety, belonging and esteem needs. Self-actualisation is then the first real evolutionary jump of higher consciousness in which any loss of biological and ecological integrity and subsequent change of values is forever the inner battle that he fights with concerning his own health and lifestyle efficiency, and thus the quest for individualism is inaugurated. On a co-developmental level this is reflected in the formulation of a social consciousness through the generation of individuals in society; the working relationships of these self-actualised individuals originally constitute the arenas of commerce and technology, the accumulation of wealth and knowledge, and the application of law and order - the external management of energy and resources. I believe I am equating to the collective unconsciousness (pre-adaptation) in the former case and the collective consciousness in the latter case. It is important to realise this in both positive and negative lights since this has been the history of man’s relationship with the environment.
As I infer this consolidated social development also has a default path of application that inverts the holistic plan. It is obviously understandable though that the measure of these influences in modern societies tend to be their collective impact to change the world. If the core ecological motive for land regeneration is usurped by individuals onto a cultural level of exploitation it leaves the personal quest for spiritual gain at a distant loss being as it is the inner motivation for individual evolution. Likewise, looking at wealth or applied science as the main motive for social relations outside its organic status can actually cast a negative light upon the issue because of its projection in the default path, and subsequently takes the form of materialistic attitudes. Power politics and economic hegemony will also reorientate the values of the individual to the effect of removing from him or her their environmental determination and bioregional qualities. But let me reiterate; power is recognised and administered as a collective phenomenon. In this light wealth or embodied knowledge should not be quantifiable in materialist or scientific terms but granted and accepted as Providence. The alternative is indicative of despotic societies in which the population is restrained under repressive conditions. Power then, underscores the whole spectrum of cultural influences effected as it is in the application of law and authority, but cast in a more positive way is seen as a state of social well-being and equality. It becomes the grace of greater existence or being. Hence there is this perpetual desire to let go of cultural restraints that bond the individual to human convention that in a confused state may be likened to economic gain or power dominion. I reiterate, true power and status is self-effacing in that it evolves into spiritual modes of consciousness. If one can design the system that gives lesser influence to those that dominate modern human thinking we get closer to inverting the trophic pyramid of power relations and towards a higher awareness of the real meaning behind discriminative societies – they environmentally determine resource management. The broaching of human relations and boundaries will therefore be premised on ensuring that the basic salient needs of humanity are met first to include its physiological, safety, belonging and esteem needs. Carried into future generations and measurable through our natural capital I am simply referring to the individual quest of attaining spiritual enlightenment (Godhead) as a paradigm shift premised on one’s response to the collective unconsciousness.
Hence transcending the default tendency to pragmatism is a spiritual quest that continues to implicate the appraisal of the landscape and the obtenance of our basic needs seen in Providence; spirituality is better understood not as a further act of development but one that co-evolved alongside the default path of power politics since earliest times, from the period when man made an evolutionary jump in consciousness – the brain boom. It vindicates my conclusion that spiritual degradation is a reciprocal factor of technological determinism and elitism. It resulted from an increase in energy availability and the need for his biological organs to adapt not least from the draw of fire and increased heat it provided. It extended operations into the night and was our way of overcoming the fear of the unknown, the way our psycho-somatic make-up came to deal with humanity’s aberration from nature. The spiritual quest would thus be perceived in the conception of life as an ethereal quality of energy. It was through his loss of environmental stimulation (an unevolved state) likeable to being in a foreign (c.f. exotic) landscape where indicators for survival were compromised and new synergistic relations were required. As I say, any veering from spiritual emancipation i.e. the inclination to return to natural providence which ultimately meant death under climate change and shrinking habitats led man to walk a default path by which his gained impetus over time is enacted through technological mastery. Bear in mind also that it should be man’s ultimate spiritual cause to come to terms with the death he is in continue defiance with. The landscape would effectively become a model in which humanity asserts his re-identification with it through the accretion of linear time based upon his historical interjection. Millions of years passed in which he trod lightly in his ecological footprint, through the construction of protection zones and the need to effect a change of behaviour in order to hunt efficiently as a social group new food sources. Anthropologically I believe they continued to forage the usual types of recognisable vegetation but supplemented their protein requirements with scavenged meat. It was this change of diet to animal protein as a primal food source that permitted millions of years of evolutionary change to occur in our physical make-up; the increase of a protein-based diet brought with it different energy requirements and habits, not least the need to rearrange the social group towards collective security. Optimum group sizes entailed sentries and lookouts, but it also required forward thinking, and the natural leader of a pack would be required to transpose those instinctual characteristics onto a level in which he or she learnt to give commands that arrogated the control of time. I have earlier referred to this as the ‘borrowing of time’. We must always bear in mind that this is an unfamiliar landscape and natural spontaneous organisation has now been supplemented by, not least, imitation. If my hypothesis is right and humanity learnt to scavenge by following the habitual modes of wild dogs, it would reaffirm why the brain boom only happened during the era when fire and the hearth were invented in the last 100,000 years. The protection of the group was now indicated by the mastering control of nature which now moves beyond purely the adaption of it. Humanity is now adaptating it and changing the behaviour of its organisms, viz., the dogs biorhythms are altered to protect the campsite and fire is transportable into unknown territories. This reversal in the role of dog and man has only just relatively happened and explains why dog’s evolutionary development has been minimal, for the case that their own change of biological behaviour has only just relatively begun. Humanity, on the other hand, or what would be understood so in higher consciousness, has been continually exposed to a foreign landscape requiring new conceptual forms of thinking and language to engage it. The iconography of the landscape changes along with how the elements in the environment alter in their meaning through their different use.
For now then it is important to bear in mind that humanity is in a temporary flux with nature and lives on ‘borrowed time’, defying his species extinction effected from the changes imposed by climate and shrinking natural habitats. It should also be borne that new diseases either from change of habitual conditions giving rise to different disease organisms, or the susceptibility of old ones brought on my reconfigured immune systems, contextualise the suffering conditions of man, and we are thus led to assume that man’s preoccupation with life is of healing himself – this is his spiritual motivation and measure of success. It stands to reason that sustentation, like animal and plant husbandry, takes on an augmented role here and with it the development of nomenclature in order to relate to the rest of the group correct behavioural methods of cultivation not least its association with fire. As such the landscape was geographically and linguistically mapped out for both food systems and social structuring i.e. hunting and foraging grounds, and residential/protection zones. Likewise it is not difficult to relate to the need for healing sanctuaries situated near food sources, be they herbal or carnal, and elemental sources (water and fire etc.). This is our spiritual vocation then, if we are to fulfil ourselves genetically and achieve self-actualisation one needs to divest our surplus energy requirements back into a spiritual mode of existence. This design tension is a moderation of our primitive instinctual motives in one direction and default social relations in the other, a middle ground, before a true culture will ensue again - the Law of the Land. The question to ask here is: Why do the leaders in the world attach themselves to spiritual authorities? Quite simply the answer is one about who really has influence in this world.
As such then, looking at our above model my dualistic language here is to show that man evolves through contradiction and complementation. To recap, being thrust into an unfamiliar landscape and hence becoming an exotic species from that moment onwards, surviving as a group would be an act of speciation. It could only continue so long as man remains in these isolated conditions and breeds. The consolidation of what I call secondary cultural influences led to the creation of a value system towards the maintaining of a new social integrity. The environmental stimulation for this process was premised on the way the individual came to terms with his or her own emotional development as the means to dealing with the adaptation process (genetic predisposition). Hence, this bridging is what generates the astral or ‘emotional body’ and constitutes the platform for self-actualisation to build upon. I believe this is the spiritual process in the making, when the emotionally-centred body is once again balanced in accordance with the law of the land through the act of “naturalization” of the individual’s motives leading to genetic fulfilment. These moments Maslow refers to as ‘peak experiences.’ It is the mitigation of the fears and anxieties that follow humanity into alien landscapes; hence there is always a subsequent spiritual renaissance in cultures and leaders who enjoin the same cause.
Consider the chart further, it is defined thus:
Conservation/Speciation – Biodiversity/Evolution
Security/Survival of the fittest – Sustentation/Life expectancy
Territorialism/Migration – Commensality/Minded adaptation
Socialism/Kinship – Self-actualisation/Discrimination
Cybernetics (Technology)/Energetics (Commerce) – Embodied power/Resourcefulness
Materialism/Wealth/Epistemology (Applied science) – Creation/Providence/Praise (Piety)
Revolution/ Eminence/Jurisdiction– Origins/Godhead/Being
At the heart of this is our ethical disposition to regenerating land constituted of the billions upon billions of organisms that have died in the process through mineralisation. More so is it a returning to our primal motive in our integration with the landscape. The ethical basis in permaculture and the modern environmental movement in general, outlined at the Rio Convention of 1990, highlights three main practices: Earth Care, including the protection and conservation of all species, People Care including the preservation of traditional practice and formulation of global ethics, and Fair Shares, the elimination of poverty through the sustainable practice of food production and its equal distribution. Now, it should be born in mind that the Holistic Design chart is a model for the implementation of a management scheme that gives no greater importance of one aspect over another, rather it shows a balanced way forward for the allocation of resources whilst maintaining the integrity of the planet’s needs in general towards an understood and accepted homeostasis. That said, the model should be likened to how much energy is spent in attaining those inner goals; more physical energy is required by those influences near the centre of the chart, and its resource allocation is a way of stipulating those energy requirements. It is in fact a plan for a change of livelihood and paradigm shift away from cultural determinism; secondary social causes mirror the individual’s quest for unconscious motivation. It should be understood that environmental stimulation works on the level of the personal first and from here we can sympathise with our ancestors in their proximity to the land. I should also point out that I am also referring to areas of water and air, fundamental as they are to travel. It is apparent though that humans have lived on water ever since they invented floating structures, and we are just a breath away from living in suspension in air or deep space. The cultural tendency has been to evolve to ever lighter forms of buoyancy however much energy that will take in the world to create, and this is reflected in mythical, idealistic, and practical mindsets that have been nurtured over time.
Now, the line is drawn so I should clarify somewhat the difference between the lifestyles developing through both cultural and environmental stimuli and why I bias the latter incentive to development. In the above model I refer to the degrees of influence or motivation that our future sustainable societies should move towards in its transition back to a low-energy lifestyle with its correlative spiritual gain. Our greatest needs are in the centre and these can be understood as fulfilling ecological roles. What I mean by this is that first and foremeost humans are animals and every action should be seen as a synergistic one towards the rest of nature. Impossible as it may sound in achieving the state of unconscious motivation required towards this duty other than through specialised conscious practice that our religious institutions nurture (I make the case elsewhere that the modern environmental movement denies this characteristic role) and by which man has passivated himself in nature, on doing so he can then be reassured of his union with it. If by default we continue to accept cultural whims as indicators for human progression under erring leaders, what is the measure of man’s success? Moreover, what is the measure of homeostatic integrity? How can man measure his actions against nature without gauging the changes and potential damage he is ultimately enforcing upon himself? Is it not better to see culture as reflected within the environment and the methods by which it stimulates human activity on the personal and social level (listed above) as the true indicators for change? I believe this sentiment has been understood by all civilisations in the past and is what gave rise to the meditative and ritualistic developments of its governing structures in the first place. It was a form of placating the gods and allowed for the cultural development of “waiting for divine mediation”. From an ethical point of view we would need to harbour natural responsibility towards others and ask ourselves whether our motives are unbalanced. This obviously happens to a very large degree because humanity in general is striving to survive as a collective who know that working as a group is more efficient and dynamic when the same goals/gods are shared. I have been consistently referring to this natural responsibility, alluding to it from many levels, not least the sense of intuition induced in making decisions. But more on this later, consider for now that we are ecological beings fulfilling ecological niches, but that the more we move away from environmental stimulation the less likely we are to know the planet’s supra-organismic requirements. Hence we are less likely to make sacrifices for the ethical sake of preserving and protecting other species if we don’t know our material and social limitations; cultural determinism has been a major factor in the extermination of natural habitats and ignorance of the living requirements of other organisms because its leaders rule with an iron fist. Ironically ecosystems always strive to contain at the purely instinctive level an awareness of death and regeneration, and if humans are truly to evolve an environment catered for every living thing he must play God if only to understand his own limitations and dependency upon nature. The learning experience is one of discovering the simplicity of actions and motives and the cultivation of spiritual awareness. For instance, in Buddhist and Zen systems of thought it is considered to be an “emptying” process, a removal of cultural baggage.
This wholly revised design tool has been inspired by my networking skills and ability to combine multiple activities into one great scheme. As such, the organic base to my thinking allows me to identify root causes, and to see their effects played out. This is in full view of the integrity of the system maintaining a holistic outlook. As such the design tool needs to be read in a wholistic fashion, and not linearly. At the hub lies the original motive, an affirmation of humanity as a cultural and environmental being whose genetic vocation depends on this search for “the source.” Radiating outwards are the degrees of influence essential for the maintaining of this motive – its integrity. This is done in a manner that identifies the strongest influence as central to that integrity. As one progresses further outwards the level of activity attributable to those lesser influences reduces, but it is never discounted. (The dark spiralling curve represents human evolution from its embryonic to primary to higher consciousness.)
The object of this tool is to provide overall guidance during the construction and implementation of management plans and to understand them in context of human development and evolution. This allows the participants to focus their attention upon the necessities whilst keeping in mind the influences at the outer edges. Of course, the number of effective influences has grown indefinitely (an infilling so to speak); the more this happens the greater the reinforcement there is in the centre. Importantly, it allows for the continued abstract expansion of this model if one feels the necessity. This is obviously my context of understanding and I am reluctant to expand (even contract) it any further since such an action would only tempt superfluous modes of linear thinking. And anyhow, I add another dimension to its abstract thinking by overlaying a pattern for evolutionary consciousness. In this I am trying to indicate a jump in consciousness by humanity who at the embryonic and primary level share the same characteristics as all life forms on this planet.
I have consistently joggled with this model which has since moved on from its earlier prototypes. I am happy as it stands but nevertheless, if I studied it long enough the context of my thinking may be tempted to change it about again, reflective of my healthy appetite towards personal evolution. At times I am torn between a social context and an individual one inductive of my lifestyle behaviour. At a later stage of development one may be tempted to move the spheres of influences around to reflect the increased activity of a particular one within their own plans. I believe this would conduce to create a state of fragmentation and is indicative of this fragmentation within the management of the system. Rather, to maintain an organic outlook, the further the influence is away from the hub then the greater the networking is required between the different spheres. (That I place Godhead at its furthest part is itself food for thought but should indicate to the reader the necessity of holistic and cyclical thought.) This may appear to be a rigid system, but in reality it is a form of negative feedback that will prevent the management plan from overstepping its mark too rapidly. The idea behind this type of thinking is to allow a continual reinforcement of the hub. Subsequently, any intense activity happening on the outer edges will be checked and slowed down by the need to ensure radial balance across the entire organic plan. Effectively, this makes the system self-regulating and immune to exterior influences that may cause damage.
The important thing to gauge here is the dualism applied towards this system’s thinking which is complementary and not Cartesian. Once it is understood that the articulation of space is a phenomenon created from the human tendency and mindset to be removed from ephemeral time and in its place is substituted a growing awareness of chronological/historical time in relation to a “domesticated” landscape, it can be appreciated that each individual will have to experience a paradigm shift if personal evolution is to be augmented as a holistic vocation. Hence the inner three circles emphasize our most primitive biological and ecological motivations; they emphasise millions of years of bipedal evolution and takes us beyond our forested habitats. Within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs these can be seen to incorporate the first four levels of deficit, the physiological, safety, belonging and esteem needs. Self-actualisation is then the first real evolutionary jump of higher consciousness in which any loss of biological and ecological integrity and subsequent change of values is forever the inner battle that he fights with concerning his own health and lifestyle efficiency, and thus the quest for individualism is inaugurated. On a co-developmental level this is reflected in the formulation of a social consciousness through the generation of individuals in society; the working relationships of these self-actualised individuals originally constitute the arenas of commerce and technology, the accumulation of wealth and knowledge, and the application of law and order - the external management of energy and resources. I believe I am equating to the collective unconsciousness (pre-adaptation) in the former case and the collective consciousness in the latter case. It is important to realise this in both positive and negative lights since this has been the history of man’s relationship with the environment.
As I infer this consolidated social development also has a default path of application that inverts the holistic plan. It is obviously understandable though that the measure of these influences in modern societies tend to be their collective impact to change the world. If the core ecological motive for land regeneration is usurped by individuals onto a cultural level of exploitation it leaves the personal quest for spiritual gain at a distant loss being as it is the inner motivation for individual evolution. Likewise, looking at wealth or applied science as the main motive for social relations outside its organic status can actually cast a negative light upon the issue because of its projection in the default path, and subsequently takes the form of materialistic attitudes. Power politics and economic hegemony will also reorientate the values of the individual to the effect of removing from him or her their environmental determination and bioregional qualities. But let me reiterate; power is recognised and administered as a collective phenomenon. In this light wealth or embodied knowledge should not be quantifiable in materialist or scientific terms but granted and accepted as Providence. The alternative is indicative of despotic societies in which the population is restrained under repressive conditions. Power then, underscores the whole spectrum of cultural influences effected as it is in the application of law and authority, but cast in a more positive way is seen as a state of social well-being and equality. It becomes the grace of greater existence or being. Hence there is this perpetual desire to let go of cultural restraints that bond the individual to human convention that in a confused state may be likened to economic gain or power dominion. I reiterate, true power and status is self-effacing in that it evolves into spiritual modes of consciousness. If one can design the system that gives lesser influence to those that dominate modern human thinking we get closer to inverting the trophic pyramid of power relations and towards a higher awareness of the real meaning behind discriminative societies – they environmentally determine resource management. The broaching of human relations and boundaries will therefore be premised on ensuring that the basic salient needs of humanity are met first to include its physiological, safety, belonging and esteem needs. Carried into future generations and measurable through our natural capital I am simply referring to the individual quest of attaining spiritual enlightenment (Godhead) as a paradigm shift premised on one’s response to the collective unconsciousness.
Hence transcending the default tendency to pragmatism is a spiritual quest that continues to implicate the appraisal of the landscape and the obtenance of our basic needs seen in Providence; spirituality is better understood not as a further act of development but one that co-evolved alongside the default path of power politics since earliest times, from the period when man made an evolutionary jump in consciousness – the brain boom. It vindicates my conclusion that spiritual degradation is a reciprocal factor of technological determinism and elitism. It resulted from an increase in energy availability and the need for his biological organs to adapt not least from the draw of fire and increased heat it provided. It extended operations into the night and was our way of overcoming the fear of the unknown, the way our psycho-somatic make-up came to deal with humanity’s aberration from nature. The spiritual quest would thus be perceived in the conception of life as an ethereal quality of energy. It was through his loss of environmental stimulation (an unevolved state) likeable to being in a foreign (c.f. exotic) landscape where indicators for survival were compromised and new synergistic relations were required. As I say, any veering from spiritual emancipation i.e. the inclination to return to natural providence which ultimately meant death under climate change and shrinking habitats led man to walk a default path by which his gained impetus over time is enacted through technological mastery. Bear in mind also that it should be man’s ultimate spiritual cause to come to terms with the death he is in continue defiance with. The landscape would effectively become a model in which humanity asserts his re-identification with it through the accretion of linear time based upon his historical interjection. Millions of years passed in which he trod lightly in his ecological footprint, through the construction of protection zones and the need to effect a change of behaviour in order to hunt efficiently as a social group new food sources. Anthropologically I believe they continued to forage the usual types of recognisable vegetation but supplemented their protein requirements with scavenged meat. It was this change of diet to animal protein as a primal food source that permitted millions of years of evolutionary change to occur in our physical make-up; the increase of a protein-based diet brought with it different energy requirements and habits, not least the need to rearrange the social group towards collective security. Optimum group sizes entailed sentries and lookouts, but it also required forward thinking, and the natural leader of a pack would be required to transpose those instinctual characteristics onto a level in which he or she learnt to give commands that arrogated the control of time. I have earlier referred to this as the ‘borrowing of time’. We must always bear in mind that this is an unfamiliar landscape and natural spontaneous organisation has now been supplemented by, not least, imitation. If my hypothesis is right and humanity learnt to scavenge by following the habitual modes of wild dogs, it would reaffirm why the brain boom only happened during the era when fire and the hearth were invented in the last 100,000 years. The protection of the group was now indicated by the mastering control of nature which now moves beyond purely the adaption of it. Humanity is now adaptating it and changing the behaviour of its organisms, viz., the dogs biorhythms are altered to protect the campsite and fire is transportable into unknown territories. This reversal in the role of dog and man has only just relatively happened and explains why dog’s evolutionary development has been minimal, for the case that their own change of biological behaviour has only just relatively begun. Humanity, on the other hand, or what would be understood so in higher consciousness, has been continually exposed to a foreign landscape requiring new conceptual forms of thinking and language to engage it. The iconography of the landscape changes along with how the elements in the environment alter in their meaning through their different use.
For now then it is important to bear in mind that humanity is in a temporary flux with nature and lives on ‘borrowed time’, defying his species extinction effected from the changes imposed by climate and shrinking natural habitats. It should also be borne that new diseases either from change of habitual conditions giving rise to different disease organisms, or the susceptibility of old ones brought on my reconfigured immune systems, contextualise the suffering conditions of man, and we are thus led to assume that man’s preoccupation with life is of healing himself – this is his spiritual motivation and measure of success. It stands to reason that sustentation, like animal and plant husbandry, takes on an augmented role here and with it the development of nomenclature in order to relate to the rest of the group correct behavioural methods of cultivation not least its association with fire. As such the landscape was geographically and linguistically mapped out for both food systems and social structuring i.e. hunting and foraging grounds, and residential/protection zones. Likewise it is not difficult to relate to the need for healing sanctuaries situated near food sources, be they herbal or carnal, and elemental sources (water and fire etc.). This is our spiritual vocation then, if we are to fulfil ourselves genetically and achieve self-actualisation one needs to divest our surplus energy requirements back into a spiritual mode of existence. This design tension is a moderation of our primitive instinctual motives in one direction and default social relations in the other, a middle ground, before a true culture will ensue again - the Law of the Land. The question to ask here is: Why do the leaders in the world attach themselves to spiritual authorities? Quite simply the answer is one about who really has influence in this world.
As such then, looking at our above model my dualistic language here is to show that man evolves through contradiction and complementation. To recap, being thrust into an unfamiliar landscape and hence becoming an exotic species from that moment onwards, surviving as a group would be an act of speciation. It could only continue so long as man remains in these isolated conditions and breeds. The consolidation of what I call secondary cultural influences led to the creation of a value system towards the maintaining of a new social integrity. The environmental stimulation for this process was premised on the way the individual came to terms with his or her own emotional development as the means to dealing with the adaptation process (genetic predisposition). Hence, this bridging is what generates the astral or ‘emotional body’ and constitutes the platform for self-actualisation to build upon. I believe this is the spiritual process in the making, when the emotionally-centred body is once again balanced in accordance with the law of the land through the act of “naturalization” of the individual’s motives leading to genetic fulfilment. These moments Maslow refers to as ‘peak experiences.’ It is the mitigation of the fears and anxieties that follow humanity into alien landscapes; hence there is always a subsequent spiritual renaissance in cultures and leaders who enjoin the same cause.
Consider the chart further, it is defined thus:
Conservation/Speciation – Biodiversity/Evolution
Security/Survival of the fittest – Sustentation/Life expectancy
Territorialism/Migration – Commensality/Minded adaptation
Socialism/Kinship – Self-actualisation/Discrimination
Cybernetics (Technology)/Energetics (Commerce) – Embodied power/Resourcefulness
Materialism/Wealth/Epistemology (Applied science) – Creation/Providence/Praise (Piety)
Revolution/ Eminence/Jurisdiction– Origins/Godhead/Being
At the heart of this is our ethical disposition to regenerating land constituted of the billions upon billions of organisms that have died in the process through mineralisation. More so is it a returning to our primal motive in our integration with the landscape. The ethical basis in permaculture and the modern environmental movement in general, outlined at the Rio Convention of 1990, highlights three main practices: Earth Care, including the protection and conservation of all species, People Care including the preservation of traditional practice and formulation of global ethics, and Fair Shares, the elimination of poverty through the sustainable practice of food production and its equal distribution. Now, it should be born in mind that the Holistic Design chart is a model for the implementation of a management scheme that gives no greater importance of one aspect over another, rather it shows a balanced way forward for the allocation of resources whilst maintaining the integrity of the planet’s needs in general towards an understood and accepted homeostasis. That said, the model should be likened to how much energy is spent in attaining those inner goals; more physical energy is required by those influences near the centre of the chart, and its resource allocation is a way of stipulating those energy requirements. It is in fact a plan for a change of livelihood and paradigm shift away from cultural determinism; secondary social causes mirror the individual’s quest for unconscious motivation. It should be understood that environmental stimulation works on the level of the personal first and from here we can sympathise with our ancestors in their proximity to the land. I should also point out that I am also referring to areas of water and air, fundamental as they are to travel. It is apparent though that humans have lived on water ever since they invented floating structures, and we are just a breath away from living in suspension in air or deep space. The cultural tendency has been to evolve to ever lighter forms of buoyancy however much energy that will take in the world to create, and this is reflected in mythical, idealistic, and practical mindsets that have been nurtured over time.
Now, the line is drawn so I should clarify somewhat the difference between the lifestyles developing through both cultural and environmental stimuli and why I bias the latter incentive to development. In the above model I refer to the degrees of influence or motivation that our future sustainable societies should move towards in its transition back to a low-energy lifestyle with its correlative spiritual gain. Our greatest needs are in the centre and these can be understood as fulfilling ecological roles. What I mean by this is that first and foremeost humans are animals and every action should be seen as a synergistic one towards the rest of nature. Impossible as it may sound in achieving the state of unconscious motivation required towards this duty other than through specialised conscious practice that our religious institutions nurture (I make the case elsewhere that the modern environmental movement denies this characteristic role) and by which man has passivated himself in nature, on doing so he can then be reassured of his union with it. If by default we continue to accept cultural whims as indicators for human progression under erring leaders, what is the measure of man’s success? Moreover, what is the measure of homeostatic integrity? How can man measure his actions against nature without gauging the changes and potential damage he is ultimately enforcing upon himself? Is it not better to see culture as reflected within the environment and the methods by which it stimulates human activity on the personal and social level (listed above) as the true indicators for change? I believe this sentiment has been understood by all civilisations in the past and is what gave rise to the meditative and ritualistic developments of its governing structures in the first place. It was a form of placating the gods and allowed for the cultural development of “waiting for divine mediation”. From an ethical point of view we would need to harbour natural responsibility towards others and ask ourselves whether our motives are unbalanced. This obviously happens to a very large degree because humanity in general is striving to survive as a collective who know that working as a group is more efficient and dynamic when the same goals/gods are shared. I have been consistently referring to this natural responsibility, alluding to it from many levels, not least the sense of intuition induced in making decisions. But more on this later, consider for now that we are ecological beings fulfilling ecological niches, but that the more we move away from environmental stimulation the less likely we are to know the planet’s supra-organismic requirements. Hence we are less likely to make sacrifices for the ethical sake of preserving and protecting other species if we don’t know our material and social limitations; cultural determinism has been a major factor in the extermination of natural habitats and ignorance of the living requirements of other organisms because its leaders rule with an iron fist. Ironically ecosystems always strive to contain at the purely instinctive level an awareness of death and regeneration, and if humans are truly to evolve an environment catered for every living thing he must play God if only to understand his own limitations and dependency upon nature. The learning experience is one of discovering the simplicity of actions and motives and the cultivation of spiritual awareness. For instance, in Buddhist and Zen systems of thought it is considered to be an “emptying” process, a removal of cultural baggage.