Thanks to Dave Boje for once again providing us with an insightful
commentary on a controversial issue. While Schumaker's work clearly
ponders the dark side of advancing technology, it is nonetheless a side
worth considering, particularly as we become more and more dependent on the
products of advancing technology and innovation.
Best,
Larry
>Return-Path:
owner-mg-ed-dv@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:24:42 -0600
>Reply-To:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>Sender:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>From:
dboje@NMSU.EDU
>Subject: [MG-ED-DV] Small Is Beautiful - The Ecocentric Side of the
Debate
>To:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>
>Dear Bill,
> I must respectfully disagree. I think that Schumaker's book offers
>tremendous insight into the relationship between production and consumption
>trends and ecology. Schumaker approaches it from an ontology of Ahimsa,
>respect for all forms of life. The technocratic solutions I am aware of do
>not seem to be keeping pace with the loss of biodiversity, overconsumption,
>etc. The technofunctionalist sustain a "romantic" narrative that technology
>will compensate for over-population, polllution, bio-diversity loss, etc.
>Schumaker takes the progress myth of the techfunctionalist's to task. I
>track the developments since Schumaker's work in an "In The News Section" I
>maintain at
http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/inthenews.html I also recommend
>Vasquez, Tim "Whoever dies with the most toys wins!"
>http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/economy.htm who looks at a less romantic
>plotline for the relation of predatory capitalism and ecology.
> In the end, I take a co-evoluton perspective, a look at how
>production/consumption is co-evolving with our world ecology. I have more on
>this at
http://web.nmsu.edu/~dboje/TDfestivalspectacle.html I have been
>studying Ahimsa work such as in Schumaker as a way to reform the co-evolving
>trends.
> I hope you find this useful
>
>david
>
>
>
>In response to
mcdaniel@MCGREWMCDANIEL.COM> and "Clemens, Bruce W"
><
clemenbw@JMU.EDU>
>>Subject: Re: Advice on using "Small is Beautiful"
>
>>O
>>> My experience is with having been taught a course using Schumaker's book.
>>> It is
>>> shortsighted
>>> wrong on a tremendous number of accounts
>>> doesn't understand or account for human nature
>>> fails to maintain the objective science it is supposed to be based on
>>>
>>> Small is beautiful is based on the assumption that human endeavours are
>>> essentially futile and doomed. It does not allow for the possibility that
>>> our race and our cultures might produce their way out of environmental
>>> disaster. It preaches a philosophy of defeat and retreat.
>>>
>>> He didn't anticipate the places where small actually does work;
microloans,
>>> microclimates, and microelectronics. I suggest you teach a course on
>>> sustainability using someone else's work.
>>>
>>> Bill McDaniel
>>> McGrew + McDaniel Group, Inc.
>>> Strategic Management Consulting
>>> for New Technologies
>
>>
>