Initial responses to the ESD Elephant Bernard Lietaer date 31 July 2006 03:21 subject Re: The blind man and the ESD elephant
Dear Marilyn, One dimension that seems to be missing in your paper is to also deal with the efficiency (or rather inefficiency) of retained learning of the normal education process, indepently of the topic. I am attaching here a paper on the topic of how a "learning complementary currency" can change how we learn as much as what we learn... If you want to use and give a reference for this idea, here are the details: Bernard Lietaer: "
Proposal for a Brazilian Education Complementary Currency" Published in the International Journal for Community Currency Research 2006 (http://www.le.ac.uk/ulmc/ijccr) Warm wishes, Bernard Marilyn Mehlmann date 18 August 2006 15:59
Thank you Bernard! Of course I agree with you. If we separate the two strands of your argument, then the money angle pre-supposes that ESD involves extra costs for the educational system - which is certainly true in many countries but not in the context we are writing for at this moment, so I hope to add a reference in another context. Regarding the pedagogy absolutely, and it's one of the basics of the pedagogy of empowerment that as many as possible teach as much as possible. I hadn't thought of going into the pedagogy here but it's great to have a reference. Best Marilyn* Valentin Yemelin hi, Marilyn. Read your pamphlet with amusement. Very nicely done and quite to the point. I have two comments. One is a commonplace "what the heck "sustainable" means?" I personally have a problem with it, particularly in Russian, where it is translated more like "grounded, non-overturnable". I\d rather prefer harmonized (harmonious) or at least balanced. But that may be too philosophical discussion leading nowhere. But it is also an elusive element contributing to a confusing goal The other is about what comes first. You point out very rightly, that you can't solve the problem from the same perspective. It is impossible to change economics without changing social structure and, primarily, personal values. Thus economics is not primary and I agree that it is 100% negotiable, IF there is a motivation to negotiate. So it brings us to and individual psychological arch, or foundation, whatever, embracing the 3 classical pillars. And the social, that comes first (in transformation), is its derivative.