hearthstone
04-19-2010, 10:55 AM
Co-Existence Model of Ecologically and Socially Sustainable Earth.
(updated draft of "'Evolving' the Ideal Earth Design: Ensuring Transparency".)
by Mr. Jan Hearthstone
online: https://www.modelearth.org/unimodesse.html
There exist many notions of what a sustainable world should look like with no clear consensus on the subject.
It would be possible to accommodate any sustainable life-styles of varying degrees of complexity on Earth--all those could exist in the world without interfering with each other, and without interfering unduly with other life forms that share the Earth with humanity--providing that all those life-styles would be demonstrably sustainable.
It would be possible to model this situation perhaps not even needing any extensive computer modeling--"gedanken experiments"<sup>(notes)</sup> might even be enough, at least at the start; computer modeling might, perhaps, be used later for proving that the more complex sustainable life-styles would, indeed, be sustainable.
To ensure that any style of a sustainable living of any degree of complexity would really be, beyond any doubt, sustainable, the design of any of those should start from the level of the simplest way of sustainable life possible--a hunter-gatherer society.
From there the model would be "evolved"--from the hunter-gatherer way of life to more complex sustainable life-styles, step by step, always plainly, transparently displaying that the design remains sustainable ecologically and socially.
Important:
It has to be noted that this "evolution" in model would not follow the actual evolution of human society in which violence has been the initiator and mover of "progress" ever since there were no new territories to be discovered by humans and expand into.
On the contrary--the evolution of sustainable life-styles in model, from the simplest to more complex, would be driven by consideration for the wellbeing of all in the system--human and non-human alike; In this way sustainability of the system at any stage of the "evolution" would be assured. In this way it would be impossible to introduce into the design any non-sustainable elements.
Evolved thus, any way of sustainable living--from the simplest possible to the most conceivably complex ones--would demonstrably be transparently sustainable--i.e. truly sustainable, not only "sustainable" in name.
A design evolved in this way would allow anyone to live at any level of complexity of a sustainable life-style, since many people have different ideas involving the complexity of a sustainable life-style. No too complicated computer programs would be necessary to model a sustainable Earth in this way! All different sustainable life-styles would fit in as long as the "sustainability" in each case would be clearly provable on the basis of all known and pertinent data.
The overall global population size should be determined by what population of hunter-gatherer the Earth could support, even though any sustainable style of living would be possible. The global population--the total of all humans on Earth--should aways remain at the level of of density of hunter-gatherer society (the simplest and, at the same time, a sustainable way of living on Earth), so that if the more complex forms of sustainable living (that might even be more "efficient" at using land area for food production, perhaps) should fail, or become not attractive anymore, there would never be any overpopulation problem should everybody have to start living at (ultimately) the hunter-gatherer level again. The idea of any "expansion", or "growth" (of population, of economy) would be foreign in a sustainable world. In a sustainable world there would be no need for growing population; a growing population would be antithetical to common sense--no one would introduce such ideas into the design!
The design that would be based on the above stated principles would have the best chance to support life even in by the humans made (in the past), or most naturally caused extreme environmental conditions.
Humans, and countless other species, could ride out all the difficult times ahead of us much more smoothly, if it is recognized that the latest disturbance caused by humans is also fixable by humans themselves--we have all the knowledge and resources to make it happen. This is, though, only going to happen if we humans. collectively, are truly as intelligent as we believe ourselves to be.
Notes:
"gedanken experiment"
–noun (Physics)
thought experiment.
https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gedanken+experiment
The need for designing a sustainable world co-operatively is explained at The Need for Designing the Future Collaboratively (file:///HEARTHSTONE/gief/intro.html) (https://www.modelearth.org/intro.html).
Thank you, Hearthstone.
(updated draft of "'Evolving' the Ideal Earth Design: Ensuring Transparency".)
by Mr. Jan Hearthstone
online: https://www.modelearth.org/unimodesse.html
There exist many notions of what a sustainable world should look like with no clear consensus on the subject.
It would be possible to accommodate any sustainable life-styles of varying degrees of complexity on Earth--all those could exist in the world without interfering with each other, and without interfering unduly with other life forms that share the Earth with humanity--providing that all those life-styles would be demonstrably sustainable.
It would be possible to model this situation perhaps not even needing any extensive computer modeling--"gedanken experiments"<sup>(notes)</sup> might even be enough, at least at the start; computer modeling might, perhaps, be used later for proving that the more complex sustainable life-styles would, indeed, be sustainable.
To ensure that any style of a sustainable living of any degree of complexity would really be, beyond any doubt, sustainable, the design of any of those should start from the level of the simplest way of sustainable life possible--a hunter-gatherer society.
From there the model would be "evolved"--from the hunter-gatherer way of life to more complex sustainable life-styles, step by step, always plainly, transparently displaying that the design remains sustainable ecologically and socially.
Important:
It has to be noted that this "evolution" in model would not follow the actual evolution of human society in which violence has been the initiator and mover of "progress" ever since there were no new territories to be discovered by humans and expand into.
On the contrary--the evolution of sustainable life-styles in model, from the simplest to more complex, would be driven by consideration for the wellbeing of all in the system--human and non-human alike; In this way sustainability of the system at any stage of the "evolution" would be assured. In this way it would be impossible to introduce into the design any non-sustainable elements.
Evolved thus, any way of sustainable living--from the simplest possible to the most conceivably complex ones--would demonstrably be transparently sustainable--i.e. truly sustainable, not only "sustainable" in name.
A design evolved in this way would allow anyone to live at any level of complexity of a sustainable life-style, since many people have different ideas involving the complexity of a sustainable life-style. No too complicated computer programs would be necessary to model a sustainable Earth in this way! All different sustainable life-styles would fit in as long as the "sustainability" in each case would be clearly provable on the basis of all known and pertinent data.
The overall global population size should be determined by what population of hunter-gatherer the Earth could support, even though any sustainable style of living would be possible. The global population--the total of all humans on Earth--should aways remain at the level of of density of hunter-gatherer society (the simplest and, at the same time, a sustainable way of living on Earth), so that if the more complex forms of sustainable living (that might even be more "efficient" at using land area for food production, perhaps) should fail, or become not attractive anymore, there would never be any overpopulation problem should everybody have to start living at (ultimately) the hunter-gatherer level again. The idea of any "expansion", or "growth" (of population, of economy) would be foreign in a sustainable world. In a sustainable world there would be no need for growing population; a growing population would be antithetical to common sense--no one would introduce such ideas into the design!
The design that would be based on the above stated principles would have the best chance to support life even in by the humans made (in the past), or most naturally caused extreme environmental conditions.
Humans, and countless other species, could ride out all the difficult times ahead of us much more smoothly, if it is recognized that the latest disturbance caused by humans is also fixable by humans themselves--we have all the knowledge and resources to make it happen. This is, though, only going to happen if we humans. collectively, are truly as intelligent as we believe ourselves to be.
Notes:
"gedanken experiment"
–noun (Physics)
thought experiment.
https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gedanken+experiment
The need for designing a sustainable world co-operatively is explained at The Need for Designing the Future Collaboratively (file:///HEARTHSTONE/gief/intro.html) (https://www.modelearth.org/intro.html).
Thank you, Hearthstone.