Showing posts with label Knowledge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Knowledge. Show all posts

10. Buckminster Fuller's Elegant Law



Buckminster Fuller's Elegant Law
Bob Komives
::

Growth studies are integral to physiology. Construction is integral to architecture. Economic development should be integral to economics. Yet, economic developers and economists share little common ground. At least one economist, Paul Romer, works to change that by convincing other economists that knowledge and technology are part of economic growth. This seems obvious to a person on the street but revolutionary to most macroeconomists.

Depending on where I run into it, economic development still seems to be more in the kit bag of real estate developers, promoters, and financiers, as well as thought provoking generalists. Confusion among economists makes me no more comfortable with the developers and promoters who play on a simpler stage:

" I create jobs.
You want jobs.
Jobs make community rich.
Give me break.
I will make money.
Then, I will make you
a nice, rich community."

||

Pending some coherent understanding of economic development such a monologue plays well to many audiences.

I find more comfort with the generalist synthesizers who try to comprehend the complex world and take us along for the trial. They look beyond their narrow window on the universe to an ever-expansive view. This is not frivolous pursuit leading to nowhere. Some, such as da Vinci and Einstein left obvious legacies. Others do no less than help us think, create, and pursue our own synthesis. They are skilled people who are generalists and designers.

Generalists:
see pattern
where others see spots,
see hypothesis
where others struggle to see the experiment.
Designers:
see opportunities
where others see problems.

||

One generalist designer got me onto this economic tangent. R. Buckminster Fuller formulated the fundamental law of macroeconomics. Wealth is a function of the knowledge and the energy in the universe.

wealth = function of (knowledge & energy)

The amount of energy in the universe is constant. The amount of that energy that we can call wealth, however, is not constant. It varies as the biosphere grows and changes. According to Fuller's Law, then, knowledge is the only component of wealth that can cause wealth to grow or shrink. This makes sense if we adopt a broad concept of knowledge.

We know something about
food, clothing, shelter,
art, and human rights.
They know some things about us.
Each and all is wealth.
Food is energy
made palatable.
Clothing and shelter are energy
reformed into protection and image.
Art controls and molds energy
to please our senses.
Human rights let us control our own energy
(including our own bodies).
Lacking such energy,
and the knowledge to use it,
we are poor.

||

Buckminster Fuller's formulation for wealth lead him to make a simple prescription for economic development: Increase knowledge! Since the quantity of energy in the universe is fixed, we create wealth only by increasing knowledge. More important, when we increase our knowledge we cannot fail to increase our wealth.

My own formulation is incidentally different, but it leads to the same conclusions:

wealth = knowledge

On this alone I would like to rest my case. What else I have to say is not so clean and simple. I too need more designer synthesis. However, I believe I can argue well that economic development is inseparable from economics. I can lay down some of the bases for a conscious economic development strategy that equates with a sane use of the biosphere and discards the popular conception of a balanced national budget. The knowledge we need is within us, around us, and ahead of us.


:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 10. Buckminster Fuller's Elegant Law ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

11. Classes of Knowledge, Uses of Wealth



Classes of Knowledge, Uses of Wealth
Bob Komives
::

Knowledge is just an abstract concept
until we tie it to the energy that it harnesses.

The wealth potential of the biosphere
is to have useful knowledge
of all the energy in the universe.

We have reached but the tiniest fraction of that potential,
but take note:

for billions of years the total was zero.

Knowledge makes wealth. Wealth is energy --that energy that is of value because we know how to use it to our benefit. Even when ignorant in our brains of value, something in our body, our society, or our environment knows how to harness the energy of wealth to our benefit. One can benefit from electricity knowing little of its physics and mechanics. Nor is it necessary to know how our immune systems work to benefit from their protection.

As our knowledge increases, our species' wealth increases. As long as our knowledge increases faster than our population, wealth per person increases. Buckminster Fuller saw that if we understand the principles of knowledge formation we understand the principles of economic development. With such understanding we might avoid extinction and continue to partake in evolution's gift of growing prosperity.

Fuller saw energy as physical, yet saw knowledge as metaphysical. Since knowledge is the only variable in his conception of wealth, if it is metaphysical it does not lend itself to measurement. (At least I do not know any metaphysical measurements to apply.) Convinced that Fuller's Law held much more promise than the collection of theories that were passing for macroeconomics, I looked for a way to reformulate the law so that we might test it alongside other physical laws that we reveal through science. There should be notation that can express Fuller's Law in physical terms. Knowledge could then be discussed as a quantity even if measurement were still impractical.

After an enjoyable, but long, struggle with this measurement problem I saw that it simplifies if we think of one instant in time and ignore any complications from the relativity of time across the vastness of the universe. At one instant as seen from one point in the universe, knowledge is not metaphysical. It acts upon discrete units of energy. At that instant all of the energy of the universe can be divided into three classes.

Class-w energy is the knowledge (wealth) of a particular species, ecosystem, community, or other subordinate part of the biosphere. Human wealth is class-whuman.

Class-W energy is biospheric knowledge. It includes all class-w energy.

Class-U energy is all the energy in the universe, including class-W.

Since knowledge and energy are inseparable at this instant, we can measure knowledge by measuring the energy to which it has attached. Our human wealth equation becomes a summation of this attached energy:


∑wealth = ∑knowledge = ∑class-whuman energy

When life appeared the amount of the energy in the universe devoted to life went from zero to a tiny amount. As life multiplies that amount stays tiny relative to the universe but steadily increases. Life's invasion of the inanimate universe has begun. Earth has become a biosphere. Life captures inanimate energy and organizes it into its systems. Some newly captured universal energy gets bound into living creatures. A larger amount --still inanimate-- serves as storehouse of energy for life support. Life exploits this storehouse as food and as supportive environment in which to survive and prosper. This captured, organized energy is life's wealth. It includes the growing amount of energy that actually knows how to live and the expanding reservoir of inanimate energy that life knows how to exploit. So it is for our species. Our class-whuman energy is the energy that knows how to be we, plus other biospheric energy that we know how to use to our benefit.

That part of Class-W biospheric energy that we cannot count in our class-whuman wealth is quite important. It measures our ignorance.


:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 11. Classes of Knowledge, Uses of Wealth ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

16. Biology, Brain, Artifact: Our Wealth Stores


Biology, Brain, Artifact: Our Wealth Stores

Bob Komives
::


Where do we store our wealth of knowledge?
Evolution gave us a nervous system,
a brain, wherein we learn our environment
and attempt to respond to change.
Our brain holds memory
wherein we store our learning for later use.
We learned to create artifacts,
utilitarian and coded,
that, once made,
hold our knowledge.
Nests and tools,
paintings and hearths,
books and buildings
may survive our death
to be inherited by following generations
that may use and build upon this heritage.
Our life-time learning,
our artifacts,
and our biological heritage
combine to organize our culture.
||
We can classify human knowledge by where we store it. Carl Sagan wrote of genetic and extragenetic locations.

Genetic knowledge is written in the nucleotides in the chromosomal DNA molecules. As life evolved its forms became ever more complex. Genetic code had to contain more information. Humankind has more genetic information than most other mammals, which have more than amphibians, which have more than protozoa. Depending on mutations and natural selection, this genetic form of knowledge grows slowly and is limited by its container, the chromosome.

Extragenetic knowledge resides outside of our chromosomes. Much is written during our lifetime in the memory of our brain. Because we can learn and be taught, our species can adapt quickly to problems and opportunities presented by our environment. But brain knowledge dies with each individual unless she has somehow passed it on to someone else. It is still sharply limited by the capacity of a brain to learn and apply information during one lifetime.

Some extragenetic knowledge, however, is also extrasomatic; it is stored in artifacts outside our bodies. Utilitarian objects and coded messages augment our ability to capture and use energy. Humankind does not have exclusive access to such knowledge, but we are the experts. Libraries are obvious examples, but tools, houses, and other useful objects contain knowledge. These inanimate objects may have a usefulness that is independent of the life span of the people who create them. The objects tend to accumulate, offering each successive generation an opportunity to be more knowledgeable (wealthier) than the previous one. Nor is it necessary for the user to know as much as the creator.


To use our hammer of steel and wood
we must know to grow and manage arm and hand.
We must learn how and why to wield our hammer.
Yet, we need not know how
to make or shape steel,
to select wood
nor make a handle.
Someone put this into our hammer,
so we can use without knowing.
Someone Put This Into Our Hammer

I classify knowledge by location as: biological knowledge, brain knowledge, and artifactual knowledge.

Biological Knowledge. It includes the genetic codes, most of the living tissue of each living creature, and any energy immediately at the disposal of this knowledge. For an earthworm it includes himself, the soil that surrounds him, that is about to be consumed, and that that is being consumed. For the biosphere, it includes the biomass plus most of the inanimate materials and gases just above and below the Earth's surface, and beneficial energy arriving at Earth from the sun and elsewhere.

Brain Knowledge. It includes information and skills learned by individuals from their environment during their lifetime as well as any energy immediately at the disposal of this knowledge. For the human who has learned to swim and dive for clams, it includes the water supporting her and the clam she is about to grasp. For the biosphere, it includes any increase in biomass or captured energy that is due to brain knowledge -for example, the fish stocked and propagating in a natural lake that had no fish until knowledgeable humans intervened.

Artifactual Knowledge. It includes knowledge outside our bodies, and any energy immediately at the disposal of this knowledge. For a cold human it includes his stove that incorporates brain knowledge of metallurgy and the science of burning. It includes the firewood in and immediately nearby his stove, as well as the food he is about to cook, and his cookbook. For the biosphere, it includes a man-made fish pond, the solar panels on a space vehicle, and the energy that each captures.

Knowledge organizes and reorganizes the world. Biological knowledge sustains basic processes and carries the fundamental codes of life. Brain knowledge augments the amount of energy that an individual, a group, an ecosystem, a species, or biosphere can put to beneficial use. Artifactual knowledge can harness and release vast quantities of energy that the body and mind cannot manage directly.

Brain knowledge increases rapidly for each new individual. An ignorant baby becomes a knowledgeable adult. We organize ourselves so that we can pass much wealth from individual to individual and from generation to generation through example, oral tradition, ceremony, song, dance, and vocabulary. Much brain knowledge also comes from direct personal experience. This wealth accumulates much faster than does genetic change, but it is inefficient. It usually passes to only a small group before the teacher dies. It may be forgotten or misunderstood. Much brain wealth dies with each individual.

Artifactual knowledge increased slowly in the early millennia of mankind. One generation left simple hand tools in wood, stone or bronze for the next generation. Supplemented by a transfer of brain knowledge through teaching and demonstration, these artifacts often retained their usefulness over generations. Each new generation could not only make new tools but use those accumulated by earlier generations. When nomadic groups converted to stationary communities they could keep more of the tools made by past generations. We still use simple hand tools. They often help us build complex machinery and electronic equipment that in turn we can use to manufacture better, less-costly simple hand tools. Our artifactual culture builds upon itself.

Written language is itself an artifact (in code) that helps us store instructions for using and building other artifacts. Instructions might otherwise be forgotten or severely limited in distribution. Using this coded artifact, our brain knowledge can quickly and temporarily grow to suit the need at hand. We only need to know how to read the language.

I illustrate the interworking of the forms of knowledge with a simplified view of the ancient Egyptians and their culture that flourished along the Nile River. They relied without thinking about it upon their biological knowledge to keep their bodies functioning long enough to reproduce themselves and to accumulate and transfer brain knowledge. With their brain knowledge they could understand the seasons, the floods, the principles of agriculture and mechanics. Combining biological and brain knowledge, specialized engineers could build dikes and irrigation systems. These artifacts enabled many who knew nothing of engineering to increase their food and fiber production. In the process, Egyptians developed new strains of plants by selecting seeds from those plants that took best advantage of this man-altered growing system. These plants, though having their own genetic wealth, were living artifacts storing extrasomatic knowledge for the ancient Egyptians and we who follow. A complex system of biological, brain, and artifactual knowledge built an increasingly productive culture that gathered ever more energy unto itself.

In a purist sense, the three forms of knowledge are downwardly dependent. Biological knowledge came first; it can exist without the more advanced forms of knowledge. Brain knowledge evolved with increasingly sophisticated nervous systems. It obviously depends upon the genetic code of the body that hosts it. Artifactual knowledge exists outside the body. However, without brain knowledge and biological knowledge there would be no one to take advantage of it. It would cease to be wealth.

This hierarchy of dependence is valid, but difficult to apply. Much biological wealth depends on brain knowledge or artifactual knowledge. Pigeons can exist without humankind, but their population would be much lower without the artifacts of man, city buildings. Holstein cattle owe their unique characteristics to careful breeding by humans. They are living artifacts for humankind, but biological wealth for themselves. Astronomy is mostly brain knowledge, but much of it depends upon artifacts such as telescopes. In our complex patterned biosphere the forms of knowledge interact and interdepend.


:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 61. Biology, Brain, Artifact: Our Wealth Stores ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

17. Culture: Patterned to Cooperate and Compete


Culture: Patterned to Cooperate and Compete

Bob Komives
::
Energy begat matter.
Matter begat life.
Life begat knowledge.
Knowledge begat culture.
Then culture begat.

Begat
Life is a nearly inevitable pattern that emerges from changing interactions among inanimate forms of energy. Adaptive evolution is a nearly inevitable pattern that emerges from life interacting with itself and a changing inanimate environment under an imperfect system of reproduction. Culture is a nearly inevitable layer of patterns that emerges from adaptive evolution interacting with itself. Complex patterns of life emerge and get tested by adversity and diversity. The more durable patterns survive and retain knowledge as to how groups of species and groups of individuals can organize to exploit the inanimate and animate forms of energy in the environment. This group knowledge is still stored inside individual chromosomal genes, but it may be used in patterns across the genes of several individuals and even multiple species. It may be used in patterns alive in places that range from virus to atmosphere.

Richard Dawkins calls the patterned and mutually beneficial relationship among individuals of one or more species, the "Extended Phenotype" I think of it as the larger body. Congress is a lawmaking body. The actions of its members are hard enough to explain when we know the role of Congress. Certainly, we would have no idea what single acts of individual congressmen mean if we did not see the larger body.

Dawkins argues that the selfish genes that drive evolution do not just affect the creatures in which they reside. Behavior will tend to maximize survival of genes that foster the behavior, whether the genes are in the animal behaving or in some other creature that affects its behavior. Whenever cooperation or competition increases the survivability of genes (in separate species, separate individuals in the same species, or separate organs within the individual) such behavior is reinforced.

Evolution creates not only diverse species that fit diverse habitats, but also creates diverse extended phenotypes, relationships and cultures that fit diverse circumstances. Humankind competes with the cold virus, yet Dawkins asks whether it is we or the virus who has manipulated the evolution of our sneeze in response to a cold. The sneeze provides us some relief, but clearly the virus is given a free ride toward other victims. We and the cold virus have a special relationship.

Thus, the distinction between cooperation and competition becomes fuzzy. While individuals act out serious competition to improve their well-being, they may play compatible roles in a cooperative effort, a cultural effort, to survive. Economics should be one of the sciences that try to understand culture --to understand how we use patterns of cooperation and competition to improve well-being for individuals and increase likelihood of survival for our species.



:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 17. Culture: Patterned to Cooperate and Compete ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

18. Exploitation's Deceitful Attraction


Exploitation's Deceitful Attraction

Bob Komives
::

We know from experience that, despite all the good it does for us, at times Adam Smith's "invisible hand" needs to be slapped. We rise again and again in fits of moral outrage to knock down those who sacrifice common good to disparity—promote our loss for their gain. Do we do so often enough? We discuss that question frequently. Here is another question that we should discuss: do such struggles and knock downs pit morality against economics? To this second question I answer, no. Morality need not fight economics unless you equate economics with pursuit of personal gain. You should not. I do see these struggles as contests between good and bad; but between (good) morality and bad economics, between common good and bad science. Great disparity is a great clot in the arteries of development.

Great disparity between us,
great impediment among us.
Moral justice asserts
that our wealthy must distribute wealth
onward to our poor.
Economic development just begs
that wealthy just act
knowing their dependence upon the poor
—and upon more.
More wealth distributed
brings back more wealth recirculated;
today distributed,
tomorrow shared.
In abstract we speak
of wealthy and poor.
In concrete we speak
of butcher, baker, banker,
slave, master,
pitcher, raker, candlestick maker.
We distribute,
recirculate,
compete,
cooperate,
evolve,
to survive
to prosper
together.

||
Consider the economics of exploitation. Take an extreme example; consider the economics of
slavery. As species, as group, our wealth grows biologically with each birth; it decreases with each death—usually. Simply having more people may decrease our group wealth. Our increased population may overwhelm brain knowledge and artifactual knowledge that we use to harness resources. While this negative outcome may not be as likely as doomsayers often say, more people do not by their presence alone make the individuals in their group more wealthy. Yet, mistaken actions by fellow humans seem to stem from a belief that greater population brings wealth—if it is more of the right kind of population, the kind that makes us rich. When powerful individuals and groups enslave other people they increase the population that works at their service. A slaveholder feels wealthier holding more slaves.

We can exploit others in ways more subtle than slavery, but in all ways exploiters believe (if they are honest with themselves) that they become wealthier if they subjugate more people. Usually they do not try to increase overall population, just their controlled population. Unfortunately, history shows that from their narrow and short-sighted viewpoints they are usually right. Since we see our world having static resources, we find it selfishly attractive to exploit the minds and bodies of our brothers and sisters. These harnessed minds and bodies know how to gather wealth for us.

 
From the broad viewpoint of humankind exploitation is not attractive. It reduces opportunities for the exploited. That reduction inhibits the growth of brain knowledge and artifactual knowledge for our species, reducing species wealth and average per-person wealth. To the exploited it is painfully obvious that they suffer the burden of their exploiters. 


Unfortunately, exploiters are painfully ignorant that they suffer under the burden of their exploitation. This becomes tragically obvious when a lethal microbe flourishes in the impoverished ecology of the exploited and surges forth to kill exploited and exploiter alike. Yet the lesson is not learned. Here, economics has, first, much to learn and, second, much to teach.

Exploiter dreads that exploited would self-organize.
Old culture that slave might keep,
and new culture that slave might create,
destroyed, discouraged, undone.
Exploiter simplifies—
in
simple
organization
finds
control.
Biosphere complicates—
for in our complexity, it finds resilience;
for in its resilience, we find wealth.

||



:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 18. Exploitation's Deceitful Attraction ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

20. Family is Our Minimum.


Family is Our Minimum.

Bob Komives
::

There are no true rugged individuals.
Either they died
for lack of nurturers after birth,
or they were never born
for lack of lovers before conception.

Ruggedless

The science of ecology tells us how we share biospheric wealth with other species, often to our mutual benefit. We must share. No element of life is self-sufficient. We must tax other individuals and species; they must tax us. Humankind has no self-sufficient individuals. From Lewis Thomas in Lives Of A Cell, I learned that the mitochondria in our cells are but one of several kinds of creatures with their own genetic structures that live symbiotically with us, within us. We tax them for their knowledge in order that we might survive; human genes alone do not know enough to keep us alive.

Even if I were to refuse to recognize mitochondria as anything other than "me," I could not ignore the two people who had to undergo bisexual reproduction for me to arrive in this world. Then I cannot ignore that once I got here, during infancy and well beyond, I continued to depend upon adult nurturers for my survival and well-being.

To support bisexual reproduction and to solve the challenge of infant dependency we organize ourselves into families. Family is the minimum biological unit of organization for species survival. Many of us do more than survive. We depend upon our families and their particular patterns of role playing to do more than reproduce and nurture hunks of genes and protoplasm. Adults carry brain knowledge and have artifacts that they wish to distribute to their children and others. Family is the convenient minimum to carry out this complex wealth distribution. Through family we receive and pass along culture and experience. Thus, our adopted children--who carry none of our genes but carry knowledge that we acquired during life--may inherit and pass along more of what we are than do our biological children.

Family is the minimum--the macroeconomic minimum-- the smallest organ that our species knows can capture, distribute, and recirculate knowledge we need to survive and prosper. Since reproduction requires two people and produces a dependent, over time there must be at least three individuals in a family. The minimum number of roles to play, however, is four: father, mother, dependent, and nurturer. There are no maxima.

Beyond the biological minimum necessary for survival, our species has unique flexibility in choosing the family form through which one generation can pass biological, brain and artifactual knowledge on to the next. Adjectives such as matrilineal, patrilineal, extended, monogamous, and polygamous each describe a family pattern that has proved useful. Nouns such as nucleus, band, clan, tribe, chiefdom, city, federation, and even nation, describe scales at which family-type roles can operate.

Microeconomics is important because it helps us understand the dynamics of individuals (or even families acting as individual entities) who buy and sell goods and services in a marketplace. Some of these individuals may be close to rugged, but, here at least, we do not give a damn. What does it profit a man to control a market but suffer a dearth of things to trade? We cannot look to microeconomics to understand the dynamics that produced the market goods and services in the first place -nor the greater wealth that never goes to market. To gain that understanding we should be able to turn to macroeconomics and its minimum economic unit, the family, in all its forms. There we can hope to find out how our species reproduces, expands and nurtures its wealth.


:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV ::20. Family is Our Minimum ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

37. Organize For Economic Development.


Organize For Economic Development
Bob Komives
::

Economist, please try to define
why our wealth (1) can grow and (2) decline.

Please Try To Define

Life had to learn how to work for itself. It had to learn to sustain and expand itself in its home, the biosphere. It now knows how to organize itself to capture and expend energy with purpose, and to produce results that function. As life expands, it learns more ways to organize. Life's library of workable knowledge sustains it during tranquillity and changes it during crisis. The library grows larger and more diverse, even as it loses some works --species and ecosystems that have disappeared.

Knowledge is the wealth of the biosphere, the product of good work and good fortune. It organizes biospheric development, human development, human culture. Biological knowledge encoded in genetic libraries sustains the complex processes that mold inanimate energy into animate energy and animate energy into complex patterns. Brain knowledge adds real-time, real-life learning to the library. Artifacts, artifactual knowledge, organize and maintain energy in ways that genes and minds cannot.

In ancient Egypt, farmers who knew little of engineering drew upon the greater engineering knowledge stored in irrigation structures, systems, and administration to increase food and fiber production from their work. As they learned which plants did best, they stored their improving knowledge in each generation of seeds --selecting seed from superior plants. The improved varieties were their living artifacts, storing knowledge for children who used that knowledge without relearning it. They simply planted seeds of the improved varieties. Brain knowledge also passed from one generation to the next through written and spoken words and diagrams. And, of course, this knowledgeable culture could not have survived if men and women had not known to reproduce themselves and nurture their offspring into adulthood. Complex biological, brain, and artifactual knowledge were both essence and cause of a productive culture --not perfect knowledge, not perfect culture, but alive and long-lived.

Economics should explain how our species organizes itself for work that produces and sustains well-being. It should explain why "prosperity" is not "well-being" unless it works to promote likelihood of survival in our species and our biosphere. In short, the economist should describe the rules of organization for economic development.

Wealth is our preoccupation--
it is not our invention.

Economic development is an organized invasion--
life invades the universe.

Do not try to create economic development.
Be, instead, a knowledgeable partner.
Practice stewardship and equity.
Learn more.
Share knowledge.
Know to organize to foster the biosphere.

Know that wealth can disappear--
species, ecosystems, and cultures become extinct.
Guard against
the natural disaster,
nuclear war,
and revolution
that can destroy knowledge--
leaving machines that no one can use,
books no one can read,
science no one can remember.

Guard against the disappearance of life,
for the biosphere knows how to become wealthier.

Prevent the destruction of our species,
for we can learn to partake of that increasing wealth.

Stop exploiting one another,
for then we can partake of more wealth more quickly.

Bring our understanding of the world into harmony
with the knowledge embedded in the universe.

Thus,
we shall act as consistent development partners--
in our human sphere
in our biosphere.

A More Knowledgeable Partner



:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 37. Organize For Economic Development. ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

86. Derive Economics from Life Science.



Plum Local IV ::: Part VI
To Do

== chapters 86 - 92 ==
=== look to right column for direct links to chapters ===








86. Derive Economics from Life Science.
Bob Komives
::
...
The rules of wealth are written in the biosphere, by the biosphere. We are privileged to discover those rules slowly and to use them consciously. We can look beyond the apparent scarcity of the moment to the ubiquitous abundance that has nurtured evolution of our biosphere. Until the next cosmic disaster sets life back or extinguishes it, evolution builds ever more plentiful life from a once inanimate universe. Economics must better connect itself to life science to understand abundance.

Oil is dirty water
to anyone who has no knowledge of how to use it.
Water is death
to many who do not know how to swim or fish.
Fish may be angels or devils
to people who know no use for them.
Knowing that many fish are edible and tasty
has little value to a hungry quadriplegic
whose arms no longer know how to grasp a fish.
Knowing how to grasp a fish
has little value if it destroys all the fish—
eliminating the knowledge they carry within them.
Knowledge Of Dirty Water
Our wealth is complex. It includes art, safety and clean air, as well as more tangible goods and services. A resource is a resource because life has knowledge to leverage it. Knowledge is wealth and has no inherent limitations except the limits of the universe. We must measure knowledge, track it, and understand how life organizes it if we are to understand abundance. The biosphere is rich in knowledge bound into energy forms that know how to organize themselves to convert more and more of the inanimate universe into life. Humankind's wealth is its share of that knowledge. Today, other life sciences know more about this wealth than does economics.

Economics usually deals only with humankind —as do some other sciences such as sociology. That limitation is legitimate since all sciences are really arbitrary sub-sciences of one whole, science. If intellectual boundaries are understood to be convenient rather than absolute, we let one science flow naturally into another. Economic analysis should work at species level, national level, regional level, group or family level, or at the level of any life system we choose. Why? Because wealth develops at all levels. Choosing any one level for analysis, we must look inward to sub-systems, but also outward to the systems of which the chosen level is a working part.

A community fosters its economic development when it  captures wealth, distributes it, and recirculates it through  community organs —neighborhoods, schools, families, businesses, associations. In the process of economic development new subgroups may form, and old ones may reorganize. As in nature, the successful process is at once complex and elegant.

This same community should look outward to try to understand the larger governments, cultures, ecosystems, and ultimately the biosphere and universe of which it is an organ. Economics, the life science, will tell us how, while capturing wealth from these higher-level organisms, we should foster their wealth —recognizing that they too develop and change. Economics, the life science, will explain to us why, if we organize ourselves to foul or stagnate our planet, we organize for failure.
:: Bob Komives, Fort Collins © 2006 :: Plum Local IV :: 86.  Derive Economics from Life Science  ::
With attribution these words may be freely shared, but permission
is required if quoted in an item for sale or rent

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::