From conviction to approaching reality ...

[Did67]

As in many subjects apart from the 10 researchers in the world who work daily on these questions all the other OPINIONS including mine are not of great interest.

Rather than opinion or opinion we should speak of belief

Excellent remark. I would talk about beliefs. Rather than belief. Word that I use rather in opposition to a mechanism described ...

We are indeed unable to understand the very subtle mechanisms ... So when we "adhere" to such and such a theory, it is usually a question of conviction.

Noting, however, that in a person beliefs overlap (or not). And so it's a whole scheme that we have in mind. Diagram which is also an "analysis grid". We reject this, because it doesn't fit into the grid.

Note also, that very often, by hyperspecializing themselves, to understand these complicated things, the 10 researchers in question, with some exceptions, lose sight of the whole, the "system". And so perhaps understand, but sometimes reason a little in a vacuum! Or even build their world, which then becomes a bubble. This may be correct. But a bubble hovering in the ocean of reality ... So sometimes I'm glad I'm not among those 10 ... Even though at other times I'd like to understand!

[lazzaret]

We can blame these few researchers for being "in their world" but not for not seeing an agrosystem as a whole when one of these researchers explains that the most important is probably outside the strict limits of the system.

what could be disturbing is not intervening, or in other words, that the circle of intervention comes down to planting 4 weeds ...

the slightest intervention (ideally non-intervention) 'is still one of the routes sought by phenoculture, regardless of whether one believes or does not believe in the interweaving of these subtle mechanisms for better efficiency.

[Did67]

Sorry, the expression "to understand these complicated things, the 10 researchers in question, with some exceptions, lose sight of the whole, the" system " was awkward. I was not talking about the two articles there. I do not know them.

I was actually talking about the "10 world specialists" on such and such a subject, the only ones capable of understanding it. In general, by becoming these global hyper-specialists, they unfortunately lose the sense of reality, what I call the perception of the system in which it is located ... That was a general remark. And just a vague opinion ...

[Did67]

the slightest intervention (ideally non-intervention) 'is still one of the routes sought by phenoculture, regardless of whether one believes or does not believe in the interweaving of these subtle mechanisms for better efficiency.

I wouldn't sum it up at all like that. It is perhaps this fundamentally different vision that explains some of our differences.

The "vegetable garden of the sloth" or the "phenoculture" 'is first of all to avoid harmful interventions or those whose balance positive effects / negative effects is unfavorable. For example, working the land.

It is relying on natural mechanisms, rather than opposing it.

But it is a serious intervention in the ecosystem. You were perhaps not connected when I developed the fact that my "Potager du Laesseux" is a clearly man-made space. Otherwise, at home, it would be a natural climax forest, made with hornbeam, beeches, ash trees, acacias, etc ... Nothing - or very little - to grease.

So the massive supply of hay is a serious intervention. The term "phenoculture" takes over well -culture, as in agriculture. It signs the human hand.

Moreover, to my visitors, I define myself as a "breeder of living soil organisms, which, for their part, garden for me".

My goal is not non-intervention at all. My goal, I would like to remind you once again in summary: "to have a lot of vegetables, more than organic, without work". Non-intervention, in the sense of no-till, no-treatment, no-fertilizer, it's just the best way I've found to have organisms that work effectively for me. It seems obvious to me that destroying them regularly, or permanently destroying their works, is not an effective way of making them work for me.

Sorry, I'm not a "baba-cool"!

[lazzaret]

would I still have it all wrong?
it doesn't surprise me anymore ...

more seriously, i think we quibble. Between sowing and harvesting, the bulk of your gardening activity is thinking. This is what I deal with non-intervention.

obviously that the hand of the man is put on his vegetable garden or his fields but between putting hay, observing, trying to understand and acting accordingly et treat because we see a particular pest appear or because the weather is "bad", turn over the land before sowing and after harvest because it is necessary to aerate, to plow to keep clean, to smoke the soil chemically because it is reassuring, there is There is a "schizophrenia of interventionism" that I see much more measured in phenoculture.

as for the look, for my part I like floral shirts but it's because I loved the magnum series

[Did67]

For me, it is important to distinguish an objective from a means ... Otherwise, the reasoning gets confused. And the "anything" is not very far ...

Again, even if I answer you, I am of course talking about general cases here. How many idealizing discourses on natural gardens, in "natural balance", on biodiversity, etc ... Idealizing therefore which does not enlighten ...

And that is why trying to be clear with those who read me, I say, I claim that my garden is a seriously anthropized space. No need to tell stories or tell stories. It is a fact. But for that, you have to want to try to be an honest man and not a storyteller that makes you dream.

The way to get there without work is to cover the floor.

And for organisms to work well for me, I have to feed them well: so it's the use of hay, which is a means ... Not a dogma.

Etc. ..

[Did67]

as for the look, for my part I like floral shirts but it's because I loved the magnum series

I had flowered shirts - currently, I'm more in the sober gray and black ...

But I was not talking about the look, but the state of mind: peace and love, and everything will be fine ...

[lazzaret]

in a forest, the litter is made of leaves ... when at home it is hay. I don't see any dogma in saying that.

you're talking about general cases, but it's at my address ... ok I have convictions that make me see poetry in the garden as much as anthropogenic action, but I didn't realize that I was dogmatic in telling stories .

in short, I will return to my cave / garden and leave you in peace with my convictions. I say because they will still blame me, I have no bitterness. I was wrong.

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

Boudiou must not be susceptible

Are not the divergent opinions a windfall and a mine of information ???

After you take it leaves you and you continue to make the "baba cool" like me (or not) but you educate yourself on every corner of the boards ... and in the end you progress ..

Well it's my opinion

[sicetaitsimple]

Boudiou must not be susceptible

You're right: we have the right to have different opinions and visions, and wisdom, which I think comes a bit with age, would like that in this case we do not feed the endless debate, or that we move it on a dedicated wire. But hey, from time to time, inevitably we get hot!

In this case, it is this photo of the tomatoes "of the neighbor" on a parallel wire which set fire to the powders a little. It's still weird to post pictures of vegetables on this blog without specifying that they are not from your production, right?