I thought this was a propos to discussions about working toward
environmental solutions. Accepting a problem, and recognising that we may
need to change the way we ought to act toward the environment, does not mean
that there will not be opposition to anything "new". Interesting
corollaries - opposing the new, leads to business as usual. Like lemmings
that oppose any direction change, even though they accept the cliffs are
ahead. Or a rabbit that stays still in the spotlight. Hmm.
Just a thought.
Chris Perley
-----Original Message-----
There are three main arguments for doing nothing.
Dangerous Precedent:
Every public action which is not customary, either is wrong, or, if it is
right, is a dangerous Precedent. It follows that nothing should ever be
done for the first time.
Fair Trial Argument:
A Fair Trial ought only to be given to systems which already exist, not to
proposed alternatives.
Unripe Time:
People should not do at the present moment what they think is right at that
moment, because the moment at which they think is right has not yet arrived.
>From Microcosmographia Academica
Farncis Corford (1908)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0890053189/qid=967412754/sr=1-2/103-5
723662-7232661
http://www.snybuf.edu/~sackmabd/sackmary/cornford.htm
========
http://www.mre.gov.br/ndsg/textos/alcool-i.htm
http://www.mre.gov.br/ndsg/textos/planfa-i.htm
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|