Re: [ox-en] There is no such thing like "peer money"
- From: "Samuel Rose" <samuel.rose gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 11:15:51 -0400
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Stefan, we are totally cool, I like you, and I have learned much from your
germ theory ideas.
I just want to get down to where we have a disconnect. You replies below
help me understand that.
more replies...
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Stefan Meretz <stefan.meretz hbv.org>
wrote:
On 2008-07-13 00:16, Samuel Rose wrote:
Btw. a side remark (also for Sam): money and business are by no
means natural things. They cannot create an "ecolology". This is a
myth, but as Marx had shown, a kind of "real operating myth". We
should not render homage to the fetish.
I think I actually called it a "human ecology" which includes human
creations such as mediums of communication, cities, human technology,
etc
You called it "money-driven human ecology", I focus on "money-driven"
and you on "human ecology". That's ok. I am sorry, I don't want to
bother you.
So, that is one disconnect, because I see the totality of what we as humans
have now as a direct extension of the continuum of evolution from the
tiniest bacterium from billions of years ago, right up to us. I don't see us
humans, nor all of our creations as somehow "separate". Sure, our way of
doing things sucks, but we only came onto the scene pretty recently compared
to much of the rest of what is out there living right now.
I see all of our creations as "extensions of man" which I gleaned from
Marshall McLuhan, and I accept that we as a species will eventually use our
"extensions" in most of the possible ways that they can be used, from the
most deplorable, to the most laudable. I only say this because we (as a
species) have always done this. Although, the volume of people who use our
extensions in deplorable ways is decreasing over time, and that is what I am
hoping for and working towards, to increase that decrease by making it
easier to use those extensions in laudable ways.
McLuhan called those extensions "mediums", and that is what all of our
technologies are: mediums. And this includes money. Humans are an extension
of all living things that have emerged on this planet, and human mediums are
extensions of humans. It is one continuum (that is how I see it anyway, but
maybe you can help me see how this logic is wrong. That is where my bias
comes from, in any case).
So, that is why I think there is some such thing like "peer money", to quote
the subject of this email thread.
Because, for each medium, each "extension of man", there is a whole
continuum of ways that it can be used, from the most benevolent, to the most
despicable. McLuhan basically said that when we use a medium in despicable
ways, that we have "over-extended" it se:
http://www.anthonyhempell.com/papers/tetrad/concept.html
I contend that the real reason why we experience problems with money, why it
is such a bane on society, is not because of the nature of money itself.
Rather, it is a lack of literacy among humans about the limits of the medium
of the technology that is money. So, we have created a system where we as a
society have learned to collectively accept the frequent pushing of the
money medium to it's limits, and we have accepted it's the creation of new
problems that come with pushing it to it's limits. But, I already know that
it is possible to co-govern money, or any other human created medium, any
other extension of man in a way that will *not* push it to it's limits.
So, money is not the evil. Lack of literacy of the medium of money, and the
limits of it's beneficial utility is the problem, as I see it.
This is also the answer that I see to the question "money will continue to
exist and be used on a widespread basis, so what do we do about it?"
We help people become literate about the limits of the medium, and learn to
use the medium in ways that will garner them the benevolent utility, and
avoid the over-extending of the medium. People with this literacy learn that
they don't have to accept the problems that come with over-extending the
money medium as a necassary evil. They learn new ways that they can us this
extension of man.
BTW, this also applies to all other human-created technolgies/mediums...
So, that is how I see money. I'll stop using the whole "ecology" analogy
because I can see it is confusing things.
Money has been around for at least ten thousand years or more among
humans. Money has naturally emerged among almost every culture that
ever existed. Money does not exist in non-human systems, but money
did emerge in human systems.
But antique money has a completely different function than the modern
one. And money has not "naturally emerged", but socially.
In my view, human systems *are* ecologies. All systems are ecologies,
healthy or not, pathological or sustainable, good or bad. I see them
all through the lens of complexity theory/complex systems theory. I
use the term "ecology" to describe an emergent system of diverse
actors who's actions and re-actions affect one another in different
ways, that creates a web of complex interactions.
That' ok with me. However, I do not, because it incorrectly mixes
natural and societal processes.
I talk about money, because whether you deplore it or not, I believe
it's not going away any time soon. So, how do we deal with it?
Good question.
I think we actually agree on the above, and I am not sure why you
think you are "schooling" me on what money is, and what it does etc
I definitely know that I am not "paying homage" to a "fetish" whether
you believe that I am or not.
To me it seemed so. If not, good.
What I am doing is confronting the reality that a huge amount of
people out of the 6.5 plus billion people on the face of this earth
WILL continue to use money for probably hundreds of years to come, if
not more. And, their use of that money WILL have a tremendous effect
on you, and on me, and this *IS* a HUMAN ECOLOGY whether you think it
is or not. It is a human system, and you ARE a part of it.
I would prefer to descibe this in non-natural terms. Of course, humans
are natural beings, but the specific level to understand here is the
society, even for money.
Do you see what I am saying? You can reply back to me with as many
dismissive, arrogant, one-upping remarks that you'd like to. It's
fine with me if you think that I am full of it. I really don't care.
But, my point, my language and meaning are described above, in my
words.
I don't have much interest in discussing ideas that refuse to
acknowledge reality, or in being told that I my thinking is somehow
invalid when it's obvious you have know idea what I am talking about
in the first place when I use terms like "human ecology".
I really don't even understand why you seem to be getting angry at
this exchange of ideas, but I don't really know you, so I can only
guess.
Maybe you can help me understand. It's ok if you think I am full of
shit. Just help me understand why you seem to think what I am saying
is wrong, I do not get it.
I think this is indeed a disadvantage of the email medium. Maybe I am a
too serious person. I don't want to make you angry, and I hope you can
accept my apologies.
Ciao,
Stefan
--
Start here: www.meretz.de
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de
--
Sam Rose
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
AIM: Str9960
Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.com/services
Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
OpenBusinessModels: http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
http://p2pfoundation.net
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
http://www.cooperationcommons.com
http://barcampbank.org
http://communitywiki.org
http://openfarmtech.org
Information Filtering:
http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
http://del.icio.us/srose
http://twitter.com/SamRose
[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de