by cameron | Apr 14, 2007 | environment, Melbourne, Uncategorized
I had the fortune last night to be invited to Peter Ellyard’s 70th birthday party at SOS, a sustainable and ethical restaurant at Melbourne Central with an amazing view over the old Melbourne Museum. I’m guessing there were about 100 people there from different sides of Peter’s life – his family, colleagues and friends. It’s was a terrific night and the tributes to Peter were all heart-warming (even mine). I had a series of engaging and vibrant discussions with a group of intelligent, articulate people from various walks of life I consider new friends, including Lauren (a Rhodes scholar), Felix (a self-described “70-year-old French Jew” who spent 30 years living in a kibbutz in Israel), Felix’s wife Shoshanna who is a philosopher/artist/educator who successfully fought off several of us who wanted to debunk the documentary she recently watched on memories transmitted through heart transplants, Ralph, a surgeon, his wife Patsy, an editor, and many others. My good mate Anthony, the guy who introduced me to Peter, was there, as was Diane, the masseuse at the Como Building in South Yarra who apparently originally introduced Peter to AJ and, coincidentally, has massaged all three of us at one point in time (separately, I might add) over the years.
ANYWAY… many of the tributes during the evening talked about Peter’s overwhelming generosity to everyone in his life. I’ve certainly been touched by this in the couple of months I’ve known him. He seems to operate on the principle that the more you give of yourself, the more will come back to you.
It reminded me instantly of a section in Buckminster Fuller’s book “Critical Path” which I was reading earlier in the day. Fuller described this principle, which I’ve learned to think of over the years as “The Principle of Reciprocity” as “precession”. He defined “precession” as “the effect of bodies in motion on other bodies in motion”. Precession was his answer to his own question “How do you obtain the money to live with and to acquire the materials and tools with which to work?”. This was the beginning of his mission when he was effectively bankrupt. His examination of the world around him lead him to believe that bodies in motion exert right-angle effects on other bodies around them. For example, the gravitational effect one planet has on another is at right-angles to the direction of motion of the planet (okay, so my simplistic understanding of the general theory of relativity would suggest that it’s actually the other way around… the warping of space-time that the mass of body A has causes body B to travel in a certain directional orbit around it… but let’s leave that aside for the time being, okay?). Drop a stone in a still pond and the concentric rings spread out at ninety degrees to the motion of the stone.
Fuller theorized that while most humans had, historically speaking, spent most of their energy trying to selfishly earn a living for themselves, some of them had, inadvertently, helped “nature” progress by making huge leaps in the standard of human civilization. These advances were “side effects” of the primary objective of being selfish.
He wrote:
“Therefore, what humans called the side effects of their conscious drives in fact produced that main ecological effects of generalized technological regeneration. I therefore assumed that what humanity rated as “side effects” are nature’s main effects. I adopted the prescessional “side effects” as my prime objective.”
What if, instead of working with the objective of your own comfort, you worked purely for the betterment of the human race? Would, perhaps, your own comfort be taken care of by “nature” in some sort of principle of reciprocity?
Fuller wrote:
“”Since nature was clearly intent on making humans successful in support of the integrity of eternally regenerative Universe, it seemed clear that is I undertook ever more humanly favorable physical-environment-producing artifact developments that in fact did improve the chances of all humanity’s successful development, it was quite possible that nature would support my efforts, efforts, provided I were choosing the successively most efficient technical means of so doing. Nature was clearly supporting all her intercomplementary ecological regenerative tasks – ergo, I must so commit myself and must depend upon nature providing the physical means of realization of my invented environment-advantaging artifacts. I noted that nature did not require hydrogen to “earn a living” before allowing hydrogen to behave in the unique manner in which it does. Nature does not require that any of its intercomplementing members “earn a living”.”
Now I don’t want to sound all “The Secret” on you, but there does seem to me to be a principle that, put simply, “if you do good things, good things happen to you”. Karma without the reincarnation. From the moment I started TPN, I had this feeling that this was an important mission. I’ve always felt like I had a purpose. And, that if I did it properly, worked hard, was focused, disciplined, and did it with integrity, that “good things would happen”.
I don’t expect miracles. I don’t expect things will always fall into my lap. But I do believe (not very scientific of me, i know) that if I pursue the right vision, diligently, honestly, and work my ass off, that perhaps I am merely fulfilling the purpose the Universe has for me. Now, again, I’m not suggesting that the Universe is “intelligent” or that there is some sort of mystical “higher power” that “has a plan” for me.
But… humans are made from atoms. Atoms obey the laws of physics and chemistry. Could you say that an atom of oxygen, connected to two atoms of hydrogen, has the purpose of being water? At the moment in time when you observe it as a water molecule, isn’t that it’s purpose? And up a level, on a macro scale, what is the purpose of that molecule of water? To make a cell function? To provide life-giving nutrients to an animal or plant? And that plant, what is its purpose? To feed me?
In the great chain of “purpose”, with every component of the Universe fulfilling its individual task, am I not merely a bunch of atoms, each of them obeying the laws of physics and chemistry? Am I, then, not also obeying the laws of physics and chemistry? Perhaps I, like the oxygen atom, have a role to play, determined, not by some mystical being, but by the laws of physics and chemistry.
Peter Ellyard is fulfilling his role, as mentor and futurist and leader. As he has done that diligently over his lifetime, he has obviously been rewarded in a variety of ways.
If I fulfill my purpose, which I see today as being a cog in the human evolution machine, dragging us an inch closer to the realization of our potential as a species, perhaps the Universe will continue to rise up and support my efforts, naturally and effortlessly?
by cameron | Apr 13, 2007 | Podcast, TPN
Something a little different tonight… I was chatting with Benjamin Wilkoff tonight about doing a show for TPN about the intersection of education and Web2.0. We chatted about the challenge that the education system (and educators) seems to be having with adopting Web2.0 technologies rapidly into the classroom and curriculum as learning tools. I also spent some time explaining to Ben the vision and business model of TPN. As it turned out, Skylook was running in the background recording the show and I thought it might be something you’d be interesting in hearing.
Apologies for the sound quality – I was using my Logitech USB headset, not the normal mics.
If you enjoyed this podcast, make sure you don’t miss future episodes by subscribing to our feed and leave us a voice comment!
The G’Day World Theme Song is “Save Me†by The Napoleon Blown Aparts.
by cameron | Apr 10, 2007 | Podcast
Did you ever meet someone so positive, so UP!!!, that just talking to them makes you want to lie down and rest? Jason Womack is one of those guys. Jason is a keynote speaker, professional educator and executive coach. After working for The David Allen Company (Getting Things Done) for seven years as a senior trainer, not to mention running the occasional triathlon, he’s recently started his own company The Jason Womack Company which he describes as “a personal development education company”. I asked him why? “Because I wanted to be a beginner again.”
We chatted today about how he stays so up, what he plans to contribute to the betterment of the human race, how he manages his daily schedule, his tips and tricks for getting things done, and what kind of questions he asks himself.
Read Jason’s blog here. Okay… I need a lie down.
If you enjoyed this podcast, make sure you don’t miss future episodes by subscribing to our feed and leave us a voice comment!
The G’Day World Theme Song is “Save Me†by The Napoleon Blown Aparts.
by cameron | Apr 7, 2007 | Christianity, Melbourne, science, science vs religion
I hadn’t planned to post anything about Easter this year but my neighbour David sent me a link to this article in The Age today written by Melbourne “literary critic” Peter Craven and it’s annoyed me. Craven has written a pretty bleary counter-revisionist attempt to convince us that the Christian mythology behind Easter actually has some validity and should be honoured. For someone who is self-described as “blisteringly arrogant” , this is a shabby piece of pious nonsense. Reading this article, you’d think that Craven must be nearing death and suddenly feeling like he has to do some major sucking up to his imaginary God to account for a lifetime of past sins.
As I wrote back to David:
I don’t see anything mysterious or wonderful about continuing a 2000 year old myth. I find it primitive and scary that so many people in the 21st century still feel the need to worship supranatural beings. I do agree with Craven though that kids should be taught about human mythology in school, but I’d love to see ALL human mythology taught. Kids should be taught the Christian heritage behind easter, but should also be taught the original reason for a celebration at the spring equinox, to celebrate the fertility gods that ancient humans believed brought new life, new crops. I think that if more people had an unbiased and comprehensive education in human mythologies they would recognize that Christianity is a mish-mash of many older mythologies,
some judaic, some “pagan”. Unfortunately the catholic church did too good a job wiping out the memory of those older mythologies during the dark ages so 1500 years later they aren’t understood by most people. All most people in the West have known is the christ myth which has value, no doubt, but should be seen in context to the entire body of human mythology.
Let’s teach the kids, from a very young age, the stories of Ishtar and Isis and Tlazolteotl (the eater of filth!) and, my favourite, Aphrodite.
Let’s not be sexist either. We should teach them about the blokes – Ba’al and Adonis and Marduk and Mithras (who was born of a virgin on December 25 with shepherds in attendance… 100 years before Christ) and Osiris.
Try finding a book for primary school kids which tells those stories at your local bookstore.
Now, let’s get back to the travesty of this Peter Craven article in The Age.
He writes:
“And with all the hideous barbarities of Western civilisation that made Nazis of us all, you can’t go very far in the civilisation stakes without recognising the power and the glory of the Easter story and what has been made of it.”
NAZIS?!! WTF?
“It may be that we live in a post-Christian age, it may be that the Enlightenment worked wonders to deepen the mercy that is enjoined on Christians, but our civilisation will lose its heart and mind — you might say it would lose its soul — if it turns its back on the miracle and mystery of the Easter story.”
Actually Peter I think abandoning the worship of imaginary deities and learning to accept rational thinking is the only way we can consider our society “civilized”. Any people that worship imaginary deities must be considered, at least in part, woefully primitive. The “civilized” parts of our society have nothing to do with imaginary deities. They can be considered the benefits of rational minds. Let’s not forget that Christianity forced the dark ages on the human race. They deliberately destroyed the great works of human antiquity. The science and philosophical works of ancient Greece and Rome were nearly all destroyed by small-minded Christian leaders. The “heart and mind” of the human race was obliterated and forced into a period of darkness which it finally struggled out from underneath only hundreds of years later.
“It is a story resonant with the gravest tragedy in the world, but it ends (that’s what those Easter eggs are all about) in light and triumph and love.”
No, Peter, the eggs and the rabbits are both ancient fertility symbols which were being used to celebrate the Spring Equinox in ancient times. Like most things in Christianity, this was borrowed/stolen from older human mythologies, probably to make it slightly easier to force the new religion down the throats of the pagans.
“Whether we like it or not, the story of Christ’s death on the Friday we call Good runs through all our dreams. It’s there in the greatest architecture we know, it’s animate in the great paintings of the Renaissance and a constant point of reference in our greatest poetry and drama, even in Samuel Beckett, who says he saw the world extinguished though he never saw it lit.”
Peter’s education is obviously sorely lacking. Greatest architecture? What about… The Cheops Pyramid? The Colosseum? The Aztec Cholula pyramid? The Eiffel Tower? The Sydney Opera House?
Poetry… 1001 Arabian Nights? The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam?
Drama… The Illiad? The Odyssey? Wuthering Heights??
Anyway… I could go on but I’m bored.
I agree with Craven that “the Easter Story is graphic, stark, mesmerising”. Like much of the Judeo/Christian bible, it’s a terrifying look at human (and deist) depravity.
Let it sit where it should with the rest of ancient human literature. A reminder of where we came from. A lesson on how thousands of years of oppression and bloodshed were justified.
And let’s move on to a brighter future.
by cameron | Apr 5, 2007 | Podcast
Well I’ve had some pretty big guests on this show over the years – Noam Chomsky, Ray Kurzweil, politicians, businessmen – but today is the biggest guest so far.
She’s the PodMother. The Matriarch of TPN. She goes by the pseudonym of Gran Jan but I know her as “mum”.
Ladies and Gentlemen – my mother. Jan Reilly.
She joins me to talk about… well… me.
We also talk about her views on religion, growing up with physical abuse, and living with alcoholism. And used condoms. Oh yeah. I’m going to need another five years of therapy after THAT comment. Listen to the last 60 seconds to know what I’m referring to.
If you enjoyed this podcast, make sure you don’t miss future episodes by subscribing to our feed and leave us a voice comment!
The G’Day World Theme Song is “Save Me†by The Napoleon Blown Aparts.
by cameron | Apr 4, 2007 | Australian media, Podcast
Tim Burrowes is the Group Editor at Reed Business who publish B&T Magazine, Australia’s largest advertising rag, and the new sister publication “Digital Media” which comes out here April 5. This is the one with the “40 Biggest Players of Australia’s Digital Age” article that Brad Howarth wrote.
Tim and I chat about the launch of the new magazine, Australia’s digital media landscape, the changes in the advertising industry, the future of TV, why he hates Telstra… and James Bond.
If you enjoyed this podcast, make sure you don’t miss future episodes by subscribing to our feed and leave us a voice comment!
The G’Day World Theme Song is “Save Me†by The Napoleon Blown Aparts.
by cameron | Apr 4, 2007 | Uncategorized
Out of all of the great information in Dave’s recent “State of Technorati” report, I found the last paragraph to be the most impactful:
As always, our credo remains to “Be of Service” – my hope is that we’re delivering on that promise better today than ever, and that this time next year it will be still more true than ever before.
“Be Of Service”. How well does that fit into the Bucky Fuller theme we’ve been discussing of benefiting the human race? This lies at the very core of what I see as the difference between what Peter Ellyard calls “Future Makers” and “Future Takers”. The makers are creating value and being of service. The takers are making money for themselves regardless of the impact on the human race. As an entrepreneur, I really want to combine being a future maker with profit. I don’t think this should be any harder than making money by being a taker – it’s all a matter of where you focus.
Here’s my challenge to each of you today – is what you are doing on a daily basis creating value for the benefit of the human race? Or are you just pillaging someone else’s value creation?
