Log In
Follow me
-
Recent posts
- Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
- An Anatolian tale: Wild Drummer of the Apple Village
- The man who never asked inconvenient questions
- Important economy lesson that I learned from aquariums
- The Song of Ecological Ignorance
- My Book: Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics
- My motivation letter for a job about infectious disease dynamics
- What does “sustainable wellbeing economy for all” require?
- Natural Aquariums for Ecological Literacy and Ecosystem Modeling
- My PhD thesis: Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
- 5 Essential Questions for all Departments of Economics
- Economics or Anthropology?
- Most Popular Myths of Mainstream Economics
- Meine Standartfragen an Personalvermittler
- Why I don’t want to work for the finance industry
Most popular
Follow @ twitter
Facebook
Categories
- Miscellaneous (6)
- Natural aquariums (10)
- Science and philosophy (5)
- Sustainable life (22)
Recent comments
- tuncali on Ecosystem Mutilation and Patching Business
- tuncali on My Book: Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics
- tuncali on My PhD thesis: Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
- tuncali on Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
- tuncali on What does “sustainable wellbeing economy for all” require?
- tuncali on Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
- tuncali on Natural Aquariums for Ecological Literacy and Ecosystem Modeling
- tuncali on What does “sustainable wellbeing economy for all” require?
- tuncali on The man who never asked inconvenient questions
- tuncali on Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
- tuncali on Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
- tuncali on Preface of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”
Tag Cloud
- academy
- akademie
- anthropology
- aquarium
- book
- cichlids
- clean-tech
- degrowth
- ecoliteracy
- ecological economics
- ecological ignorance
- ecological literacy
- ecology
- economic myths
- economics
- economy
- ecosystem
- ecosystem mimicry
- ecosystem mutilation
- education
- environment
- ethik
- evil of mediocrity
- evolution
- fairy tale
- finance
- ideology
- industrial education
- job
- low-maintenance
- low-tech
- natural aquarium
- paradigm
- PhD
- philosophy
- rethinking economics
- story
- sustainability
- tale
- technology
- umwelt
- video
- well-being
- wellbeing economy
- wild drummer
Interesting article. What do you mean by “full world paradigm”?
Varanx, the total human population of the world was under 500 millions for millions of years. 1 billion was reached in about 1825. At the beginning of the 20. century (1900) it was appr. 1.7, about 2.5 in 1950 and today about 6.5 billions (Green History of the World, Clive Ponting). As I was at the primary school (30 years ago) we learned that the population of Turkey was 40 millions. And today over 70! It was about 13 in 1920. The last century is an unprecedented catastrophe for the life on earth. The level of carbon dioxide increased from 270 ppm in 1750 to 380 ppm in 2005. The global production of organic chemicals skyrocketed from 1 million to 1 billion tonnes annually in 2000. Whereas the ecological burden of human activity increased with such a pace, the carrying capacity of our planet’s poor ecology diminished with a similar pace (8. chapter “rape of the world”, Clive Ponting). For example, the total area of rain forests was reduced to half in the last century; from 2.8 to 1.5 billion hectares. I think these particular numbers should already give an idea that how full our world is today, compared to the situation 50 or 100 years ago.
“In this empty-world vision, the environment is not scarce and the opportunity cost to expansion of the economy is insignificant. But continued growth of the physical economy into a finite and non-growing ecosystem will eventually lead to the full-world economy in which the opportunity cost of growth is significant. We are already in such a full-world economy, according to ecological economists” (Ecological Economics, H. Dahl).
Uneconomical growth in full world means, opportunity costs of the growth of (manmade) economy may well exceed its benefits to society. Neoclassical economists never thought abut uneconomical growth. For them, all natural resources are either not scarce, or replaceable by human technology which is o course false. Just think of the multidimensional and sustainable productivity of rain forests and coral reefs, or oil. We have still no alternative for the pollinating activity of bees.
Dear Tunc, you are not too fond of wind energy, am I right? Because you neglected it a little. May I recommend the website of AWEA, American Wind Energy Association: http://www.awea.org. I find the Wind Web Tutorial on this site very useful. Visit: http://www.awea.org/faq/
Nice discus. With young, really a sight to watch. I didn’t know some fish care so much for their offspring.
marx, thank you for your recommendation (AWEA). I added it to my link list.
Another resource for clean energy which highly recommend:
Profiting from Clean Energy: A Complete Guide to Trading Green in Solar, Wind, Ethanol, Fuel Cell, Carbon Credit Industries, and More (Wiley Trading)
This is an excellent overview book which explains the current market and technology situation without getting too technical. Probably the best overview book I’ve read so far. After reading this book you’ll also have an idea about emerging technologies and companies to invest with their stock exchange codes. I particularly liked the rich reference list of this book.
Pingback: What are the top free CMS for managing an online store? | Cms Management System
This particular entry is significant to me as a (former) taxonomist and evolutionary biologist. I do believe that evolution is a form of creation. I never understood why the two concepts must be considered mutually exclusive. But in my experience, it was difficult to get into an open discussion with either side. The extremes, as in so many cases, own the discussion. I was an alpha (species level) taxonomist. Looking at that detail in a creationist light caused me almost to wonder if the “Creator” was bored. Add a spine here, or a plate there…or why bother at all really. Why does an animal living 2000m in the sea have a different spine pattern than one at 1000m?
But as a self sustaining, self perpetuating process, evolution could be seen as the ultimate mechanism of creation. I found studying evolution, oddly, to be a rather religious experience!
(Found the site through an Amazon.com list…thanks!)
Thank you for your comment, though I don’t quite understand what you mean by “the extremes, as in so many cases, own the discussion”. So, do you think the scientists like Ernst Mayr, Dawkins or Denett who are trying to make evolution understandable to the majority are extremists? How can you be a sincere scientist, explaining evolution by natural laws and at the same time cautiously leaving room for supernatural powers? I think, the real extremists are not on both sides; they are on the political religious side because they are insistently blind to mountains of scientific evidence. I don’t even believe in the sincerity of politically motivated creationists. We don’t have any evidence yet for supernatural powers. So, I don’t think anyone would be an extremist, if he says that he won’t believe in a supernatural power unless there is sound evidence. Maybe you mean extremist not in the scientific or logical, but in the social and political sense.
Hi Tunc, I am also living in Switzerland. Where did you find those angelfish? It is very difficult to find wild form young angelfish.
I found them from an amateur breeder in Zurich. See the classifieds in http://www.aquarium.ch, the central aquarium forum in Switzerland.
Excellent idea this setting up low maintenance aquariums. Easier to keep and looks more natural. I am also fed up with dealing cleaning repairing technical equipment. Much inspired by your biotope I am thinking about setting up a similar aquarium with Apistogramma. I don’t know only which Apistogramma. Any idea is very much appreciated. Has anyone tried such an aquarium with an Apistogramma species?
Generally, I would recommend small and slow growing Apistogramma species like borellii and trifasciata. They are more adapted to sparse food conditions.
I would like to try a low tech tank myself. Many thanks for all the info. I think I will go with some white cloud mountin minnows as my fish as well as the dwarf sucking catfish and lots of inverts.
Nice aquariums. I like the idea of placing emergent and crowing plants above the aquarium. How do you place them? Just dip the roots in the water or you plant them in a pot and then put the pot in the water? If there is a pot, what soil do you have in it?
You can plant emergent plants like large Echinodorus sp. and umbrella (Cyperus alternifolius) directly to the bottom substrate of the aquarium provided that the water level is not deeper than 40cm. Otherwise, I generally use hydroculture pots filled with clay pebbles that I attach to a side glass of the aquarium. For epiphytes like golden pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum) you don’t even need a pot. You can just attach the stem to a side glass and let the roots float in water. The roots will soon find their way down to the bottom.
Just love you tanks. Cannot wait to get my one set up. I have been reading up on the Walsted method.
Hi Tunc, Great website and natural or low tech aquarium using only plants. I am also into such setups and have two 4 feet aquariums, 1 potted water lily setup and 1 plastic pond with plants to “clean” the water and keep it clean for my fishes (mostly barbs, platy, etc ) – altho’ I do also installed pumps for aeration purposes. These are all outdoors but shaded under my patio – only natural lights as I live in the tropics. Am happy to know that you are also into sustainable economic development and the vast opportunities in renewable energy now and in the future. Will be visiting your site more often.
Nice tank!…eco-style and all! But i guess that you have a lot off natural sunshine in Turkey? I live in Denmark and its cold and no much sunlight in the winter. So a some lightning is the needed…..
That´s with the foam-thing?….
Yes, of course there’s more sunshine in Turkey compared to Denmark, but the natural aquarium mentioned in my article is in Switzerland. The short winter days may really be a problem for plants in Denmark, so I guess you might need supplementary artificial lighting, or you might try highly adaptable subtropical plants. With foam sheets I tried to create different water depths in the aquarium, that is, deeper and shallower zones. I had hoped to create different ecological niches for plants and animals. Today, I don’t think it really works in such small aquariums. For a larger pond I think it would certainly be useful.
Pingback: Amazon biotope Lnumber/Aphisto tank, not really planted (Pic heavy) - Page 2
Hi, I’m fascinated with your natural aquarium because I have not been able to find documentation of anything close anywhere on the internet. I have an existing small (29-gallon) tank that I want to convert to a similar concept. Its bacterial ecosystem is intact but although once heavily-planted, it has no plants at this time. I want a natural, low-tech, self-sustaining aquarium (the exception being light, it won’t be by a window) and I’m told by everyone it can’t be done. I say that’s ludicrous, and thanks for proving me right.
Two questions: you didn’t mention water changes, did/do you do any for this tank? And do you think this concept is possible with only submerged plants, or are the partially submerged, faster-growing plants necessary for filtration?
Thanks…Dominic
My water changes are really rare; maybe 3-4 times a year, at most %10. Dwarf shrimps may need rain effect for breeding. For that purpose, I let the water level drop up to 10cm (4 inches) through evaporation, then fill in rain (RO) water. A self-sufficient aquarium without sunlight and marginal plants? I think, it depends on the type of animals you want to keep. In any case, it must be a low-density aquarium, otherwise the purification capacity of submerged plants will not suffice. As you know, even in a typical high-density home aquarium with filters heaters etc., if you fully omit water changes the level of pollution (nitrate, phosphate etc) will not increase indefinitely; it will stabilize after a while at some high pollution levels. The question is, whether this level is healthy for your animals. In my experience, it’s possible to maintain much lower pollution levels with marginal plants without water changes. But some fish or an invertebrate may still need water changes for stimulation into breeding. The lack of sunlight is another difficulty. Some algae and other microorganism that feed on these algae can only multiply under natural sunlight. Without sunlight there might be some minor gaps in your food chain and in the required biodiversity for an efficient recycling. Nevertheless, I think it should be possible provided that you loosen the concept of total self-sufficiency a little. There must always be some inputs and outputs even in low degrees. I have for example a 50 liter low-tech aquarium with artificial lighting (daylight lamp) with waternymph (Najas guadalupensis) and duckweed (Lemna minor). In this aquarium I have snails (ramshorn and trumpet), 1cm (0.5 inch) layer of sand, algeater catfish Ancistrus dolichopterus, dwarf shrimps (Neocaridina sp.), and Mexican amphipods Hyalella azteca. Inputs: Dried leaves, zucchini, cucumber and carrot skins (small amounts). Outputs: Occasional water changes (f.e. 3 liters every two weeks) with some plants, snails and Hyalella azteca taken out for other aquariums as food. In this form, this is a sustainable aquarium working since three years. Such a simple ecosystem in a larger scale would I guess sustain several small fish like the scarlet badis (Dario dario) without any problem.
Thats technically not a biotope. Im seeing fish from 2 different continents. A biotope has fish, invertabrates and plant life from one specific area. Cool aquarium though. First selfsustaining aquariumive seen, very good idea. But the waste has to go some where?
FF95, the idea is that the fish waste should break down to plant food. Instead of the bacterial filtration being primary (NH4->NO2->NO3) the plants use a more efficient system to process the waste. The invertebrates make the mulm easier for the plants to process, and in turn the plants feed and oxygenate the animal life. Right Tuncali?
Yes, both of you are right. I am using the term biotope rather loosely just like other hobbyists, but in a different sense. The official definition of biotope: “An area that is uniform in environmental conditions and in its distribution of animal and plant life”. But I understand what you mean. The most established use of the term biotope among hobbyists is choosing fish species from a certain habitat, e.g. a lake or pond, otherwise leaving everything like food and recycling artificial. For me, the most important aspects of a biotope are biodiversity, recycling and sustainability with its own food chain. Invertebrates like shrimps, arthropods, snails and sand worms decompose waste material into plant fertilizer much faster and efficiently than the bacteria. And as D. Walstad explains, bacteria convert ammonia into nitrates which is less readily taken by plants as food than ammonia. That is, too much bacterial life is unhealthy for fish and plants. Waste goes ultimately into the biomass of growing marginal plants. Some snails can also be taken out if they get overpopulated. The biggest challenge is probably keeping the sand healthy in the long term without the accumulation of waste. For that purpose, I use trumpet snails and marginal plants like the umbrella with strong roots. My input to this ecosystem is occasional dried leaves, potato and carrot skins for herbivores. I would appreciate very much if you write about your own experiments on low-tech aquariums, either as comments here or in forum. In that way, we could share our experience about different ecosystem models.
Your aquarium look nice. When will you post pictures of your smaller aquariums? Good job- These are inspiration for my future aquariums
Thank you for the comment and reminder. I added the image gallery of my table aquariums to the page: Low-tech dwarf cichlid aquariums on my working table (60×40×40 cm each)
Pingback: My AMAZING Saltwater Aquarium Fish Tank Beautiful Aquarium Fish & Coral Reef | Saltwater Aquarium Fish
Hello, Tuncali! I love your self-sustaining tank experiment! And thanks for sharing all that information. I’m a newbie to the hobby, and it’s too bad I only learned about natural aquaria after I already set-up my 20-gallon planted tank the high-tech way. Anyway, I do plan to upgrade to a larger tank a few months from now–and that one will be as natural as I can make it. When I do set it up, I’ll share my notes with you. Meanwhile, I hope you can keep posting updates on your biotope. The more I can learn before setting up my big tank, the better.
Cheers!
Hello Tuncali,
this is a lovely natural set-up! It’s really nice to read about your experiences, no need for us all to make the same mistakes! Sorry to hear about your D. Dario’s. I have some myself and they are wonderfull fish. I’m hoping, fingers crossed, I have some females now too, would be really nice if they bred for me. My question for you is about your ground cover, What does it consist of, just sand? Or did you add some layer of fertilizer? I know Diane Walstad does so, but honestly: I’m scared! Afraid of terrible algae bloom. Would be really nice if you could tell me your experiences.
Thanks and greetings from the Netherlands!
Karen
Hello Karen. I used a thin layer of red laterite soil as the bottommost layer (totally about 2 kg) and simple quartz sand over this laterite. As far as I can remember D. Walstad advices using clay, or simply soil as substrate provided that it doesn’t contain any organic substances or humus that might decay quite rapidly and cause algal blooms due to high levels of phosphates or nitrates. Clay without humus is a perfect substrate if you want to grow larger Echinodorus species. I wish you good luck with your darios. Really splendid fish for natural aquariums.
I love your tank. I have something similar but in a smaller scale. I caculate your tank size, it is really 76 us gal? Also where can I go about to buy one of these tanks?. Thanks in advance.
Yes, approximately. 1 US gallon is about 3.785 liters. Considering that I never fill the aquarium full to the top (160x60x40cm, 40 cm the height) it contains about 300 liters, and about 80 US gallons of water. I had ordered my aquarium to a well-known glass aquarium manifacturer in Switzerland. There are such manifacturers who can make custom-size aquariums; quality and security are quite important. The glass should be thick enough to bear the water pressure. If your aquarium will receive sun light I would recommend you to go for a large size and deeper aquarium for a stable pH. Water depth is like a pH buffer. Or you will need to shade your aquarium to prevent large pH fluctuations.
Have you considered adding a culture of live aquatic worms, such as tubifex, or blackworms, to your substrate? They are useful for breaking down waste, and aerating the sand, and it seems they may have a denitrifying effect. Difficult-to-feed animals, such as peacock gudgeons, and african dwarf frogs, become nearly effortless to feed this way, even in a community setting with faster, more competitive eaters, such as rainbowfish. The worms themselves eat leaf litter, and detritus.
I have been maintaining my own blackworm culture for a while, but I am switching over to tubifex worms, because they are apparently more suited to indoor aquarium conditions, and I believe they will breed faster. I have never had good luck with corydoras, but since I began keeping live worms in the sand, my habrosus dwarf cories have been absolutely thriving.
Interesting that you ask it, because I put tubifex worms into my aquarium two months ago after reading “Culturing Live Foods” from M. R. Hellweg (see amazon.com). I haven’t yet checked the worms to see whether they are thriving or not. I also think that they should be efficient recycling agents living in the sand. I wonder, if they can sustain their population in an aquarium with worm predators like dward croaking gouramies.
very good splendito
Lovely! One of our new members (@ NaturalAquariums.com) posted a link to this page. There are several of us there who do these types of low tech to no tech tanks. Come visit & share your experiences w/ us there if you get a free minute!
Really enjoying this article and the website in general.
Hi there, I’m blown away by your low maintenance tanks! Apart from heating (and possibly lighting – as it is colder here in Wales) I would like to attempt much the same thing on a smaller scale, in fact on the nano scale, using a 12inchx12inchx12inch open topped aquarium.
Do you think this is possible? I have a few quick questions, if I were to add Cyperus alternifolius, what substrate would you reccomend (as a pot would take up too much room), and which plants in general, would you reccomend for such a small aquarium (to achieve a similar effect to you).
Thanks for your time.
Gareth.
Hi there,
for the first few times I could only say “wow”!!!
I can’t explain how inspiring it is. I haven’t read Diana W., only read her name in connection with low-tech.
I have something similar to yours in my mind but you made my thoughts real. Congratulations.
Do you make water changes? If not, what kind of water do you use to keep the water-level?
Do you know something about mangrove ofr this purpose?
Thanks,
Cs
Greetings Tuncali !
Sinif arkadasin H. Nazli ben .Congratulations on your wedding! Send us a picture of your family soon Your web site is great ! keep on the good work
H. Nazli
What are those millions of itty bitty green specks floating in the last photo? Is it duckweed? You have a very nice setup. The first photo with the papyrus is amazing!
Yes, duckweed, Lemna minor.
I had a trio of wild caught Peruvian Angels (adults when I got them), now several years later w/ only one left. I decided to add another cichlid (a Salvini) to the tank where the last one resided, but it didn’t work out too well. At first the angel was dominant, then as the juvenile sal grew, it grew too aggressive & I had to relocate the angel. He had been so used to getting lots of live foods in the low tech tank he was in (black worms, lots of fry), and when I moved him into another low tech tank- one that didn’t have much in the way of live foods growing in it, he sort of went on a hunger strike. I finally have him eating well again & accepting some flake & frozen & freeze dried foods. The Diamond tetras in this tank compete for the baby endler fry I add to it often. The angel is just not as fast as them, but he does get some. And, I’ve found that he likes some sort of worm-like critter that grows in my compost bucket. It is segmented & has a very hard “shell” casing. Only he seems interested in these.
Hi Tuncalik,
I must say that this is very nice web and well written articles. I use the same method you described with pothas, also read Walstad’s book. With loads of flowers you have healthy fish and clean water. However I am wondering whether water can be purified also by leaves, not only roots. I have submersed leaf of Monstera in my aquarium. Do you have any experience with that? Do you also use artificial light sources (I must rely on them).
I am looking forward for more articles about your aquariums and some new photos.
Regards, Pavel
No, I don’t have experience with submerse leaves of plants like monstera. By just guessing, I don’t think the submerged leaves of marginal plants or climbing ephiphytes can survive in the long term under water. And surely, some leaves must remain out of water to get enough light and carbondioxide to pump up photosynthesis. There will be no water purification without sufficient photosynthesis. Except for my natural aquarium (the first picture above) I use artificial lights for all of my aquariums. Most plants like papyrus and golden pothos seem to like natural sunlight and grow well only if there is some sunlight. But surprisingly, climbing fig (Ficus pumila) at our home seems to like artificial fluorescent light more than sunlight.
nice blog.im doing my natural aquarium and having some fun.really nice and silent beauty…
hope to learn a lot from you guys
Thats a nice tank!
I recently bought my tank, I was planning on having a planted tank. I couldn’t find many plants but I sure have the plant you have in the middle of your tank which has some flowers.
Also are those lucky bamboo? or some other type?
I used a little soil and gravel for plants. Sadly in Sri lanka I can’t find any aqua soil.
Pingback: http://billi543.vox.com/
Pingback: Hydroponic Plant Filtration
Pingback: Low Maintenance Ecosystem Tank
Those are beautiful. Are there restrictions on what fish you have in the united states? I don’t think I can make it to Switzerland any time soon.
Pingback: Lowest maintenance tank for vacation home, possible? - Page 2
Pingback: Filter Media-less Aquarium - General Aquarium Plants Discussions - Aquatic Plant Central
Hi congratulations on achieving your setup. Do you think this could work in a large scale aquarium for instance 5000 litres.
I know it would take along time to establish, but in your opinion do you think it could work .
Many Regards
Jason
Sorry for the late answer. Yes, I think this concept can work for larger aquariums, the larger the better. The aquarium should not be too deep, so that some marginal plants with roots at the bottom sand can grow above the surface. And natural sunlight! I think, natural garden ponds are best examples.
Pingback: so this el natural thing????? plz help - El Natural - Aquatic Plant Central
The aquarium looks really great. It’s exotic and I love looking it. The fish had a nice shelter on the aquarium. It’s a nice way of building an aquarium. All I can say is “WOW”. Congratulation, Your method is one of the best.
Eric Dawson
P.S. Mind if I leave a shameless plug? I’m the webmaster for skincaredailyreview.com- resurgence reviews
merhaba gerçekten çok iyi bir çalışma.. bende türkiyede biyotop akvaryumu kurmaya çalışan bir akvaristim .. ancak burada gerçekten bu işi yapmak zor, nedeni akvaryumcu esnafın bu konuyu tam olarak anlayamaması .. su bitkisi konusunda hala bir çeşitlilik bulunmuyor aynı şey omurgasız canlılar ile cüce ciklet tedariği içinde geçerli…sadece paylaşmak istedim çalışmalarınızın devamını sabırsızlıkla bekliyorum..iyi çalışmalar…
Dazzling post about fish fair! In my aquarium have more blue rams fish. The looks of this fish is awesome. Thanks for sharing different kind of fish name 🙂
WOW indeed. This is really incredible. I can’t imagine how much time and work your aquariums take. Such dedication. I am terrible at keeping these types of things alive and thriving, so I really appreciate those who can.
Great images you have videos and images you have here. Keep up the good work. This is one of the best ways to let people know that we need to take care of our environment.
wow, that is so awesome. I want to start a home aquarium too. A neighbor of mine has such a fantastic setup- people actually pay to enter his home and see his setup. He has rare breeds of fish swimming around, it’s amazing. I will try sneaking some photos, although he doesn’t really allow it. Thanks, your setup is pretty great as well.
Abbs
My website: Mouthguards
I’m an animal lover and I hope I do something like this in my life soon! Another thing I want to do is go to an African Safari.
Abbs, it isn’t that easy starting a home aquarium just like that, specially such a complex one. It requires a whole lot of dedication. But wow, you know someone with a better aquarium than the ones in these pictures? I would honestly like to see it. Please do come back with some pics. Would appreciate it.
Bob
My website: HCG Diet
Hi Tuncalik! your aquariums are such an ispiration for me. I’m planning to convert my acquarium full of filters and pumps in a low tech tank. I have some echinodorus paeleifolius emerged,some pothos and some syngonium,and a lot of vallisneria. The tank is 150cm x 55x 45cm.
I house 5 T.meeki and a shoal of poecilia salvatoris and some corydoras elegans.
I wanna know if there is a kind of order for planting the tank..for example:first plants the pothos,second the echinodorus etc.
What about this?
Pingback: Self-Sustained (almost) Tank... Possible? - Page 2
Pingback: Self-Sustained (almost) Tank... Possible? - Page 2
I have always been using WordPress but would like to try something else and heard Drupal is good. Hope I can poke around it soon.
Pingback: Low Maintenance Ecosystem Tank - Page 2
Hello. I currently have some F1 (born from wilds) Peruvian red backs. They’re still younger so the red back has not fully developed yet, but you can already see the red speckles where they will be in the future. I’m sure once they mature or reach sexual maturity, their backs will be bright red/orange.
The Peruvians are naturally wild and skittish. I put them in with my Pterophyllum Leopoldi (also called Pterophyllum dumerilii) and while the Leopoldis are true wild Angels, they’re older and used to humans so they help settle the Peruvians into the tanks.
If you’re interested in more information and pictures. You can look here: http://angelfish.net/VBulletin/showthread.php?t=23003
An update about my professional career: I am currently working for Finaquant Analytics, as founder and owner.
Website for Finaquant Analytics: http://www.finaquant.com
My LinkedIn profile: http://ch.linkedin.com/pub/tunc-ali-kutukcuoglu/45/664/105
i came across this site and was blown away by your aquarium!!!
wauw!!!!
it looks fantastic!!!!
in the bottom aquarium is there anything else besides lemna minor?
tazzy
Yes, there are green dwarf cryptos (Cryptocoryne wendtii) and java fern. These are really hardy and sustainable plant species that can grow even under low light conditions.
number 2 is the most successful planted work i ever seen
An update about my professional career: I decided not the use the CFA title anymore. Reason: Irresponsible attitude of the CFA institute and its community for social and environmental concerns in global investment practices with a deliberate “don’t know-don’t question-don’t care policy”. I will explain my reasons in more detail in a future blog.
Hi I am new here I have a120 gallon tank with discus I would like to try and do a planted tank like yours can I use a dwarf umbrella papyrus (Cyperus alternifolius i have 15 discus in the tank.any help would be great.
Hi,
I am a CFA charterholder and I quite agree with you.
CFA Institute is too much a follower in the field of environment conservation, it should be more at the forefront..
I think the example of Indonesia is a good example of what is going wrong in terms of short sightedness and unsustainability.
Jeopardizing the future is bad policy, including from an investment point of view.
Short term priority on growth and employment, future disaster, the bill will be paid by the next generation…
Mues säge hesch es cools aquarium set up…
E.F. Schumacher (1911-1977) criticized the concept of “progress” of the industrial paradigm in his wonderful book Small is Beautiful:
“Ever-bigger machines, entailing ever-bigger violence against the environment do not represent progress; they are denial of wisdom.”
Because, wisdom requires the ability to see the complete picture (i.e. holistic view) for an optimal trading off among many important welfare factors (i.e. multi-dimensional optimization that requires holistic view to include all important factors and constraints).
Schumacher realized that many human technologies served primarily to the extraction and monopolization of economic power; not to the improvement of general welfare for today’s and future’s generations.
E.F. Schumacher (1911-1977) in his book Small is Beautiful (page 14) points to the fact that how it is eagerly overlooked that nature is the primary producer which can’t be simply replaced by human-made technologies:
“The illusion of unlimited power, nourished by astonishing scientific and technological achievements, has produced the concurrent illusion of having solved the problem of production. The latter illusion is based on the failure to distinguish between income and capital where this distinction matters most. Every economist and businessman is familiar with the distinction, and applies it conscientiously and with considerable subtlety to all economic affairs – except where it really matters – namely, the irreplaceable capital which man had not made, but simply found, and without which he can do nothing.”
“One reason for overlooking this vital fact is that we are estranged from reality and inclined to treat as valueless everything that we have not made ourselves. Even the great Dr Marx fell into this devastating error when he formulated the so-called labour theory of value”
Industrial paradigm is good for:
1) Earning money at all costs
2) Concentrating military and economic power
3) Extraction and exploitation
4) Monopolization
Industrial paradigm is bad for:
1) Well-being for all
2) Sustainable life
3) Economic justice and equity
Note that “interface” is a term used for the machines and software that can be divided into several components that are connected via simple (clearly defined, limited number) interfaces (modular design).
Talking about interfaces as the connection between humans and nature is one of the most typical manifestations of the mechanistic and reductionist industrial paradigm, which reduces a web of complex inter-connections to a limited number of simple interfaces.
The dichotomy (contrariness, oppositeness) of “industrial paradigm versus ecological paradigm” may be best analysed and communicated within the context of agriculture: Industrial versus ecological agriculture
Physicist, environmental thinker and activist Dr. Vandana Shiva often mentions “industrial paradigm” in the context of agriculture in her books and speeches:
TEDxMasala – Solutions to the food and ecological crisis facing us today
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER5ZZk5atlE
In Shiva’s book “Who Really Feeds the World”, chapter 4 (biodiversity feeds the world, not toxic monocultures), page 42:
“The loss of biodiversity in our food and in our land is because industrial agriculture systems promote monocultures.”
“The rapid erosion of biodiversity has taken place under a food system that sees farms as factories for commodities (industrial paradigm) rather than webs of production and life.”
“Monocoltures of the Mind, rooted in a reductionist, mechanistic paradigm, create a blindness to diversity of the world. Based on mechanistic thought, these monocultures are blind to the evolutionary potential and intelligence of the cells, organisms, ecosystems and communities.” (organic intelligence)
It is understandable that corporations prefer industrial to ecological agriculture, simply because there is not much money in ecological agriculture. What can they sell for a farming practice which is inherently self-sufficient and sustainable?
It is also understandable that the corporations can’t openly say “we prefer industrial farming because there is so much money in it.” They need other arguments to convince, fool and numb the majority of people. This is where the preconditioning by industrial paradigm, or generally ecological illiteracy comes in.
Thanks to the ideological blinders of the industrial paradigm (plus short-term monetary interests and corruption of course) the majority of the people can be convinced that industrial agriculture with lots of GMOs, chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers), irrigation and controlling technology means “improved efficiency, technological progress, modernization in agriculture, Green Revolution, Smart Farming” and so on.
Why industrial agriculture prefers monocultures is closely related with its mechanistic and reductionist world view:
Underestimating the value and (organic) intelligence of biodiversity, replacing organic intelligence by artificial human intelligence, modular design with simple interfaces, replacing non-monopolizable technologies of nature and locality (like non-GMO local seeds) by monopolizable technologies (like certified GM seeds), input/output factors’ paradigm of a factory which ignores the cycles of nature, and balance among different species, divide and manage policy in modular design…
Apropos modular design and divide-and-manage policy: High degree of specialization in education and science is another significant feature of the industrial paradigm (industrial education) which comes at the cost of losing the ability to see the complete picture (i.e. wisdom).
Generally, corporations don’t need that kind of wisdom; that is, holistic thinking. Corporations need tamed and obedient specialists who know their particular fields in meticulous detail, and don’t ask disturbing questions about the big picture, like “what am I working for”.
Ecosystem Mutilation (and Crude Patching) Business is about destroying self-sufficient and sustainable ecosystems to create new needs, necessities and dependencies (like bottled clean water sold for money) as new profit and monopolization opportunities.
Note that this destruction need not be planned or intentional. Also, the destroyer and the profiteer need not be the same persons or organizations. My blog article simply explains the dynamics of the global economic system:
ecosystem destruction –> new needs , necessities and dependencies –> temporary (unsustainable) patches with mechanistic and reductionist human technologies –> further destruction –> further needs & necessities, and so on.
Ecosystem mutilation and patching business is closely related with parasitic earnings that transfer wealth from local communities and future generations (i.e. stealing from local & future) into the hands of a few investors; just another mechanism for the transfer & concentration of wealth.
Being aware of the ecosystem mutilation & patching business requires ecological literacy (i.e. knowledge about biology, evolution, ecology, anthropology and ecosystems including humans).
Ecosystem mutilation business is about creating artificial scarcity of some goods and services. This can be done in two ways:
1) Destroying ecosystems physically to create new needs and necessities. For example, creating demand for bottled clean water by polluting local water resources.
2) Ideological manipulation (social engineering). For example, spreading an ideology of economic development and better lifestyle which is only possible with lots of shopping centres, asphalt roads and cars.
“The botany I was taught (at college) was reductionist, mechanistic, and strictly objective. Plants were reduced to objects; they were not subjects.”
Robin W. Kimmerer in her book “Braiding Sweetgrass”
***
What really supports our lives? What is the primary producer?
Plants or corporations?
“Our natural tendency to pay attention to things that support our lives has been hijacked by advertisers.”
Robin Wall Kimmerer
***
Unsurprising outcome of industrial lifestyle and education:
Children who can recognize more than 100 company logos can hardly recognize 10 plant species.
Robin W. Kimmerer, (35:42 in video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAH_pqVMZ0Q&feature=youtu.be&t=2142
There is an interesting article (info box) in Edible Forest Gardens Vol-1 by Jacke & Toensmeier, one of my favorite books about ecological agriculture and permaculture, on page 20: Box 1.1: Shifting the Burden to the Intervenor
This article is closely related with ecosystem mutilation & patching business. A short paragraph from this article which explains, how an addiction to chemical pesticides is created in agriculture:
“A good example of shifting the burden is the use of pesticides in agriculture. A farmer perceives a pest problem and intervenes in the system by spraying chemicals. This kills not only the “target” pest but also other insects and microbes in the soil and vegetation. The ability of the system, to maintain balance and control on its own then decreases. So another pest problem crops up, the farmer sprays again, and the cycle continues. For a time things seem better. In reality they get worse and worse. More pesticides, and stronger ones, become necessary over time. If the farmer stops spraying, the pests will increase out of control, and he or she will lose the crop, so addiction has set in. It takes time, effort, and understanding to rebuild a self-maintaining system. However, it takes much more effort to keep intervening over the long run.”
You can download the pdf book (Edible Forest Gardens ) in internet. I highly recommend to download (or buy) the book to read the above mentioned article.
Here is a real-life example, which might make you question the innovation concept of the industrial paradigm:
Companies like Monsanto-Bayer or Syngenta take a seed (maize, cotton or soya), which is a product of many million years of biological evolution and many hundred years of cultural evolution,
do some genetic editing at 1-2 spots of a giant genome, and get a patent for this GM seed as if it were their own innovation.
How can the innovation of nature and tradition ignored, or undervalued to such an extend?
I’ve just finished reading the 7. chapter the book “The Value of Everything” by Mariana Mazzucato: Extracting Value through the Innovation Economy
My comments & questions to Mrs Mazzucato (tweet chain):
https://twitter.com/tuncalik/status/1161369164944220163
One of the most common symptoms of industrial paradigm:
Talking about “healthcare” as if it were purely a human-made industrial service (drugs, operations, therapy etc.) offered by either state or private sector, completely disconnected from the environment, lifestyle, food, immune system and preventive public health policies.
We know today that many deadly diseases including cancer are caused by environmental destruction and pollution like GMOs and pesticides, and also by lifestyle (f.e. not enough physical exercise), and also by unbalanced junk food.
One of the most common symptoms of industrial paradigm:
Talking about “healthcare” as if it were purely a human-made industrial service (drugs, operations, therapy etc.) offered by either state or private sector, completely disconnected from the environment, lifestyle, food, immune system and preventive public health policies.
We know today that many deadly diseases including cancer are caused by environmental destruction and pollution like GMOs and pesticides, and also by lifestyle (for example, not enough clean air or physical exercise), and also by unbalanced (monocultural) junk food.
I think, it is no coincidence that artificial human intelligence (specialist scientific knowledge + artificial computer intelligence) is mostly required in fields like biotech or genetic engineering, that are often deployed in the ecosystem mutilation & patching business.
Because, patching business is about trying to replace (or compensate for the loss of) organic intelligence by artificial intelligence.
Organic intelligence: The build-in, intrinsic intelligence of ecosystems or organisms that shape and control the development of ecosystems or organisms, together with the entirety of their complex inter-relationships and bio-chemical cycles.
Social traditions -as products of cultural evolution- also resemble organic intelligence. Or maybe, we can also talk about social intelligence as a product of cultural evolution.
As a kind of ecosystem mutilation & patching business, artificial intelligence can also try to replace social intelligence, which was mutilated before (intentionally or not). For example, by shifting traditional polycultural (self-sufficient and sustainable) farming practices toward monocultural farming in the name of technological progress or modernisation.
My short presentation: What is industrial paradigm? What is ecological paradigm?
How can such an incomplete and biased worldview (industrial paradigm) be developed and established as the mainstream ideology of development?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItuZZL6sf70
The California Academy of Sciences is a renowned scientific and educational institution dedicated to exploring, explaining, and sustaining life on Earth. Based in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park, it is home to a world-class aquarium, planetarium, and natural history museum—all under one living roof.
Nestle’s “bottled water” business is one of the best examples for ecosystem mutilation & patching business.
Why is it such a good example? Because it is quite obvious, and relatively easy to understand. That is, not very easy to hide behind a smokescreen of economic complexity.
Can you sell bottled water to a village which has its own clean local water sources like a river or well? No. All these local water resources must be either destroyed -for example, with various construction or development(!) projects- or privatized to create the necessity for bottled drinking water.
Once the access of all the local water resources are closed to the village in one way or another, there will be a new need (artificial scarcity), and therefore new demand for bottled water (mutilation).
Nestle can now say, “we are improving the living standards of the village, because we are supplying the villagers a vital need” (patching).
A quite convincing argument, if you tend to forget the history and evolution of events that have created the scarcity, necessity and demand.
The same PhD Progress report (August 2019) can be viewed and downloaded here:
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/PhDProgressReport_Tunc_3_20190826_online.pdf
Economists or politicians who say “big water dams for irrigation are a necessity” must ask this question: What creates this necessity?
Industrial agriculture based on unsustainable monocultures uses 5-10 times more water than ecological agriculture.
Vandana Shiva keynote speech — Earth at Risk Conference 2014 (7:50 in video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZY_XuziJfE&feature=youtu.be&t=470
One of the best examples of mechanistic and reductionist worldview from the European history:
Scientific forestry: The illusion of high-efficiency with monocultures
Source: The Growth Illusion by Richard Douthwaite, page 32
“In a fascinating book, “Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed”, James Scott explains why forestry plantations were developed — and why they proved a major mistake.
‘The early modern European state, even before the development of scientific forestry, viewed its forests primarily through the fiscal lens of revenue needs,’ he writes. ‘Exaggerating only slightly, one might say that the crown’s interest in forests was resolved through its fiscal lens into a single number: the revenue yield of the timber that might be extracted annually.’
…
Towards the end of the eighteenth century, this only-the-timber-yield-matters thinking led to attempts in Prussia and Saxony to turn chaotic, mixed old-growth forests into predictable, same-age stands, each consisting of a single type of tree (Norway spruce).
…
The Norway spruce, known for its hardiness, rapid growth and useful wood, was introduced and planted in blocks in forest areas. It proved so lucrative when first planted that it rapidly displaced almost everything else. From the landowner’s perspective ‘this radical simplification of the forest to a single commodity was a resounding success.’ It was, however, a disaster for the peasants ‘who were now deprived of all the grazing, food, raw materials, and medicines that the earlier forest ecology had afforded.’
…
But the landowners’ initial success was not sustainable. ‘An exceptionally complex process involving soil building, nutrient uptake, and symbiotic relations among fungi,insects, mammals and flora … was apparently disrupted … [by] the radical simplicity of the scientific forest,’ Scott says. As a result, the second spruce crop grew 20 to 30 per cent more slowly than the first.
Moreover, the single-age, single-species stands proved highly vulnerable to damage by pests and to being toppled in storms. The term Waldsterben (forest death) entered the German language for the first time.”
My 4. PhD progress report (Feb 2020) can be viewed and downloaded here:
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/PhDProgressReport_Tunc_4_20200227.pdf
Current status of my PhD (as of 16. July 2020):
Though I received some positive feedback from various academicians, not very well on the side of official procedure at the University of Corsica; as feedback to my 3rd and 4th progress reports, my co-director (Dominique Prunetti) implied that they didn’t meet academic criteria (?) without explaining, what academic criteria he was talking about. And he wrote nothing else about the content of my 3rd and 4th progress reports.
I am still waiting for a feedback from my director Paul-Marie Romani. He is actually the more philosophical type with real interest in my PhD subject; history of economic thought, qualitative, historical and philosophical analysis etc. (especially epistemology)
I already knew, my co-director Prunetti thinks and behaves like a mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economist. I suspect, he is offended by my sharp criticism. Actually he shouldn’t be, because it is in the nature of my PhD which questions “why mainstream economics ignores (or underplays the importance of) ecology”.
Besides, I am open to any kind of information that show, there are indeed some economy schools that take issues like ecological literacy and sustainability (ecological sustainability; not business sustainability) seriously. After all, I am looking for true facts of real life in order to minimize material and logical mistakes in my PhD thesis.
Another problem could be, Mr Prunetti tend to think, real and respectable science is only about quantitative analysis (well-known Newton or physics envy in the history of economic thought). My impression is, he lacks the experience and philosophical/historical background required for qualitative analysis. I wonder, what kind of PhD work he has supervised so far.
By chance, I have a quite strong background in fields like physics, mathematics and statistics; especially in physics. So I have a sound judgement, where and how to use mathematics, and how not to misuse it (see premature mathematisation in neoclassical economics).
On 28. May 2020 I wrote an email to my director Romani (with cc to Prunetti) asking for a document by Prunetti, explaining openly and clearly what academic criteria he is talking about; what content doesn’t meet what academic (or scientific) criteria? But he still didn’t send me any explanation yet.
I think, academic (or scientific) criteria requires first of all intellectual honesty, openness and transparency. Otherwise, how can I know what he is talking about, and how I can correct any mistakes if I have any?
Meanwhile, I collect valuable feedback from other interested people (including academicians from other universities) as I (unlike Prunetti) believe in open discussion and open science.
I plan to obtain as many comments and critiques from different interested people and academics (from different occupations and disciplines) before writing the first draft of my PhD.
I will publish all these feedback here on this webpage (with the explicit written consent of the authors) as downloadable pdf files, in order to:
1) collect all comments, suggestions and critiques (from different points of views) before writing my first draft; to minimize material or logical errors, to minimize missing parts, to improve content
2) make the process of thesis development (and everyone’s share in it) more visible
3) have better arguments against any obstacles/prejudices claiming that my work is not academic/scientific/respectable enough
If you find my PhD subject (why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?) interesting, you can read my progress reports 3 and 4, and send me your comments, critiques and suggestions by email to phd@tuncalik.com
You don’t need to have any academic title; sincere interest is enough. You can be a person from any discipline and occupation. I recommend reading the 3. report first, which is the shorter and more readable one. You don’t need to read whole reports; you can also send your feedback for the part(s) you have read. You can send your feedback in two sections (i.e. subtitles), public and private. I will publish here only public sections.
References to real-life cases or real-life statistics that either support or refute my arguments are especially valuable for my PhD.
***
I’ve recently read two books that I found very enlightening for my PhD:
1) The Death of Nature, Carolyn Merchant (the history of cultural revolution in Europe from organic to mechanistic world; the ideological foundations of mechanistic reductionism which is so prevalent in mainstream economics)
2) The Culture of Narcissism, Christopher Lasch, afterword (begins on page 281), the psychological and cultural foundations of ungrounded technological optimism (technological fundamentalism) which is also very prevalent in mainstream economics
Feedback by Prof Peter Söderbaum for my 3. and 4. PhD progress reports (pdf):
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/FeedbackByPeterSöderbaum_reviewed_17July2020.pdf
Peter Soderbaum is Professor of Ecological Economics at Mälardalen University, Sweden and author of a number of books including Ecological Economics (2000). His numerous articles have been published in journals such as Ecological Economics, Journal of Bioeconomics, Post-autistic Economics Review, Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management and International Journal of Green Economics. (ref: google books)
Prof Söderbaum is one of the co-authors of the book Economics and the Ecosystem (2019) edited by E. Fullbrook and J. Morgan. His article in this book:
Toward sustainable development: from neoclassical monopoly to democracy
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue87/Soderbaum87.pdf
In few words, economic anthropologist Jason Hickel explains so many things:
“Theories of international development that rely significantly on wilful ignorance of colonial history and related postcolonial economic arrangements are for the most part intrinsically racist.
Why? Because they end up trying to explain global inequality with reference to Western “superiority” (of governance, technology, culture, whatever) rather than a 500-year system of organized net appropriation from the rest of the world.”
His related tweet:
https://twitter.com/jasonhickel/status/1286707553783689217
When a society talks about progress, we need to ask “OK, your society is progressing, but progressing into what shape and direction?”
Progression of a society (i.e. cultural evolution) is an evolutionary process, like the evolution of living organisms and ecosystems. And there is not a single direction or goal in evolution; every species or society evolves into a different direction.
Note that, “development” in the biological sense, for example development of an embryo to become a baby, is quite different than evolution. Development (a term often misused by mainstream economics) is a much more deterministic and single-minded process than evolution, with a definite goal: Producing a baby
Coming back to cultural evolution: A society may well believe, its historical evolution is real progress into higher goals or whatever, and this is the single possible, respectable and valid direction of progress, but this is an illusion. Every society has different values and ideals, and accordingly, a different conception of progress.
For example, for a mechanistic-reductionist and Western-minded society, progress in agriculture may mean “as much mechanical automation and human control as possible (i.e. maximum technology minimum ecology), whereas for another society progress may mean “as much ecological/natural automation as possible (i.e. minimum possible human intervention, maximum ecology minimum technology).
One ideal points to (ecologically unsustainable, unhealthy, corporate and investor friendly) industrial agriculture, other ideal points to (healthy, ecologically sustainable) ecological agriculture.
Why I left the Swiss CFA Society?
CFA: Chartered Financial Analyst
Main message of this blog article could be summarized in five words: Pseudo science with pseudo morality (investor rights etc.)
One could write handbook titled “how to earn money at all costs” and this handbook could tell only the truth (i.e. real methods, tactics, strategies), but truth alone without the real moral dimension wouldn’t make it science. Science must serve to whole humanity including next generations; not to a minority at the cost of others.
Similarly, a handbook titled “how to kill a person without getting arrested” could tell you 100% truth, but this alone doesn’t make it a scientific handbook.
Besides, justification of socially and environmentally harmful investments with economic myths like “development, growth, progress, job creation, modernisation” is not science; it is junk science based on neoclassical and neoliberal ideology.
When people asked me “what’s the title of your PhD?”, I used to say simply “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?”
About a week ago, an academician of economics recommended me to change the title of my PhD, like “how mainstream economics deals with ecology?” My title was apparently too offensive for many economists.
I told him that I would think about it. Then I really reflected on it, and decided to offer both versions. Take whichever version you like.
1) Official, polite, scientific(!), long version:
What’s the place of ecology (i.e. ecological literacy) in mainstream undergraduate economics education?
2) Unofficial, impolite, sincere, realistic, short version:
Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
***
There is a nice definition of “ecological literacy” in this article:
http://www.freshvista.com/2018/what_is_ecoliteracy/
“To be ecoliterate means understanding the principles of organization of ecological communities [i.e. living ecosystems including humans], collaboration, and using these principles for sustainable human communities.”
There is a book on ecological literacy which can be purchased in pdf ebook format. Highly recommended:
Ecological Literacy: Educating Our Children for a Sustainable World
https://www.ecoliteracy.org/book/ecological-literacy-educating-our-children-sustainable-world
You may download following pdf files:
1) Official description of my PhD in French (University of Corsica)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/esfvc4u2ah65afj/MyPhDproject_EcoleDoctorale_UniCorse.pdf/file
English translation of PhD description:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/leieuufrpyin5ya/PhDThesisDesription_TranslationInEN.pdf/file
2) Third and last (officially confirmed) version of my PhD offer in English
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0b8py3bv1uchnm4/PhD_Offer_Tunc_draft3.pdf/file
3) First (original) version of my PhD offer in English
http://www.mediafire.com/file/gd7w56mxm9i4o54/PhD_Plan_Tunc_draft1.pdf/file
4) First PhD presentation poster in English (June 2019)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/yf8oyoz6otuop7c/MyPoster_20199522_WithLogo.pdf/file
When people asked me “what’s the title of your PhD?”, I used to say simply “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?”
About a week ago, an academician of economics recommended me to change the title of my PhD, like “how mainstream economics deals with ecology?” My title was apparently too offensive for many economists.
I told him that I would think about it. Then I really reflected on it, and decided to offer both versions. Take whichever version you like.
1) Official, polite, scientific(!), long version:
What’s the place of ecology (i.e. ecological literacy) in mainstream undergraduate economics education?
2) Unofficial, impolite, sincere, realistic, short version:
Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
I think, agroecology (ecology of agriculture) should also be an educational unit (faculty, department etc.) under the big umbrella of evolutionary anthropology, because you can’t separate agriculture from lifestyle, environment, evolutionary history, tradition, food, cooking, local economy and culture.
In other words, every agroecologist should have a solid background in evolutionary (biological and cultural) anthropology, especially in the anthropology of the region s/he is working in.
I know, “mainstream economics” is a much disputed term. You may find a definition of mainstream economics here:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mainstream-economics.asp
“Mainstream economics refers to the orthodox or neoclassical tradition of economics, in which markets are moved by an invisible hand and all actors are rational.”
I use the term “mainstream economics” in the sense of orthodox, most common and dominant line of economic thought (in most cases neoclassical), especially in the context of undergraduate (bachelor) economics education.
Even mainstream economics education claims to offer lectures (like environmental resource economics), projects and activities that are supposed to foster ecological literacy, especially in graduate and master studies. The question is, what percentage of students take these lectures, and if they really foster ecological literacy (despite intensive indoctrination by neoclassical economics).
In my opinion (as I claim in my PhD progress reports 3 and 4), human-centered and mechanistic-reductionist worldview, that is, industrial paradigm –in contrast to organic/ecological worldview– is one of the most significant features of mainstream economics.
My claim: This worldview (industrial paradigm), which is in most cases fostered by modern industrial and economics education, is one of the greatest obstacles to ecological literacy.
More information: What is industrial paradigm? Industrial vs Ecological Paradigm
http://tuncalik.com/2019/08/what-is-industrial-paradigm/
Based on my personal experience with some Swiss universities, I guess, most economics departments will simply ignore such critical questions, even if they come from people with fame and reputation.
This kind of wilful ignorance and neglect is typical for mainstream economists and economics departments. It is in the nature of institutional behavior based on power relations, orthodox ideology and vested interests: If you decided to ignore ecology, you will also ignore critics about this ignorance. You will behave as if these critiques were not respectable enough to take them seriously. You can ignore the critics so easily because you know that you can get away with this wilful ignorance and neglect.
In his brilliant book “The Unsettling of America”, Wendell Berry complains eloquently about a similar case in the context of orthodox agriculture, which is perfectly valid for orthodox economics.
W. Berry tells, when he criticized the universities that promoted orthodox (industrial) agriculture with this book, he naively expected, they would either produce a stronger counterargument, or accept his critics and change their governing assumptions. But neither happened.
W. Berry writes: “The universities were not interested in the pursuit of truth by argument. They are interested in preserving the conclusions of an old argument… The organization of the university –and of modern intellectual life– rests upon this [old] argument. … Perhaps this line of thought began in metaphor, not now the likeness has become identity. … Furthermore, they do not wish to think a new or divergent thought; the old thoughts have suited their careers and their pocketbooks well enough.”
Feedback by Dr Julien-François Gerber for my 3rd and 4th PhD progress
reports (our email correspondence)
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/FeedbackByJulienFrancoisGerber_reviewed.pdf
The same document can be downloaded here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/qqxm6e53cerfl47/FeedbackByJulienFrancoisGerber_reviewed.pdf/file
“Julien-François Gerber is an Assistant Professor at the International Institute of Social Studies in The Hague. Before that, he was a faculty in Bhutan, in India, and a visiting fellow at Harvard University. He holds a PhD from the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. He works on the relationships between economic systems, ecological (un)sustainability, and the conditions for flourishing, alienation and resistance. He has published on the expansion of capitalism in the rural sphere, the property-credit nexus, popular environmentalism, (de)commodification, and post-growth/degrowth.” Reference: https://www.isrf.org/fellows-projects/julien-francois-gerber/
Natural or semi-natural, low-tech and low-maintenance (ecological) freshwater aquariums I’ve set up so far:
1) Biotope in my study, a low-tech natural aquarium (blog article)
http://tuncalik.com/2009/09/biotope-in-my-study/
Low-tech natural aquarium in its first months (youtube video with my own background piano music)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psh9Ufx_kHw
2) Semi-Natural Freshwater Aquarium in our Dining Room (2012)
https://www.facebook.com/aquasustain/photos/a.336363696470082/871435366296243/?__cft__%5B0%5D=AZXwbkV2EbiTSt8B-ZxrG_6be9ea13YehVLJUONDd-3lBOID9hSvrm0wmPlC6PjqrCZsGahgRVRak2zTZ_fxW036BkIES9FTGrqRzv6Lqhx0RVdOImxzGmS4DLPVA62CzbKYO7OrtjpgmHayRE1ck3H75SR8OvhYIrtRQPHRCmIgrg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
3) Semi-Natural Freshwater Aquarium in our Kitchen (2017)
https://www.facebook.com/aquasustain/posts/1297276013712174?__cft__%5B0%5D=AZVBUM5lGIjMtpwUUOwlTB49E8GUFRKEO__EkE_jTEA3aMWQNnMFwiiC1v1Gj-OJnKUBFmPl-R58JJVtiW6Wd7wbbVuAJIf3CHVGC-9cyLOlCJNHRUkQIOgWRTGvTNX7LwLZ2KMBTM8-T5oTih59KgLiBt1Vf41GRIOUYkNf3ZJMjA&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
My mental evolution:
I needed almost 15 years to make the transition from conventional aquariums (high-tech, industrial, based on artificial intelligence of a factory) to natural aquariums (low-tech, ecological, based on organic intelligence of an ecosystem). I needed 15 years to overcome the mechanistic-reductionist and technology-fundamentalist mentality of my conventional industrial education.
I think, there are many similarities between an ecological aquarium and an ecological farm (my related chain of tweets):
https://twitter.com/tuncalik/status/1300065641546813441
Feedback by Prof Richard Norgaard for my 3rd and 4th PhD progress
reports (our email correspondence)
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/FeedbackByRichardNorgaard_reviewed.pdf
The same document can be downloaded here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/zhryzra0jcwgpmc/FeedbackByRichardNorgaard_reviewed.pdf/file
Richard Norgaard is Professor Emeritus of Energy and Resources at the University of California, Berkeley, where he taught for forty-three years. Norgaard is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a recipient of the Boulding Award for Ecological Economics, and one of the founders of the field of ecological economics. Reference: https://greattransition.org/contributor/richard-norgaard
Richard Norgaard Professor Emeritus
https://erg.berkeley.edu/people/norgaard-richard/
Personal website
http://www.norgaard.link/
Before the 15. century, “organic world” paradigm was prevalent even in Europe. In “The Death of Nature” Carolyn Merchant tells the history of transition from the “organic world” to “machine world” worldview during the industrial revolution (from 15. to 19. century), as a history of cultural evolution.
“The Scientific Revolution and The Death of Nature” by Carolyn Merchant
https://nature.berkeley.edu/departments/espm/env-hist/articles/84.pdf
A supplementary note for the first myth “money justifies everything”:
Big money moguls like Gates and their wealth managers, who are shareholders of many multinational corporations, have today sufficient power to dictate what should be legal or illegal in a country.
For example, criminalizing organic seeds to open up the market for GM seeds of agrochemical companies (see “Who Really Feeds the World” by Vandana Shiva).
The latest draft-version of my PhD thesis “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?” can be downloaded here as pdf booklet. Note that this is not the final version. All critics, suggestions and comments are welcome.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
My symposium talk about history of economic thought on 26. November 2020: Misconceptions of Neoclassical Economics and Their Possible Causes (YouTube video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEh-FsM5ncI
The latest draft-version of my PhD thesis about economy & ecology (why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?) can be downloaded here as pdf booklet. Note that this is not the final version. All critics, suggestions and comments are welcome.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
The same pdf document can be viewed and downloaded here:
Natural Aquariums for Ecological Literacy and Ecosystem Modeling
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Project-Idea-Natural-Aquariums-for-Ecological-Literacy-and-Ecosystem-Modeling_20210319.pdf
Another bullet point that should actually be added to the top of the list:
12) Local and global democratic organisations for social, environmental and economic justice that can overcome the power of big money.
Brief information about the content of my PhD thesis:
Part A (introduction) is about basics: What is economics, and what are the differences between political economy and economics? How did broad-view political economy of the 19. century become narrow-view neoclassical economy in the 20. century? What is ecological literacy, and what are the basic principles of ecology? Do economics departments really ignore ecology?
Part B (fundamentals) is about an in-depth analysis of the ideological foundations
and core assumptions & beliefs of mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economics that still dominate the university education as well as mainstream media and politics today.
In this part (B), I investigate ideological foundations like Industrial Paradigm (i.e. human-centered, mechanistic & reductionist worldview), Western ideology of continuous and limitless Progress, short-term Business Interests and reducing the whole economy to Business Realm. I also investigate core beliefs (misconceptions, ideological barriers) like monetary reductionism, GDP growth obsession (growthism), technological optimism and inverse fitting (i.e. trying to fit realities of life into abstract mathematical theories), that stem from the aforementioned ideological foundations.
In part D (conclusions) I demonstrate, how most of these core beliefs (misconceptions) conflict with the principles of ecology that are listed in section A.6 (introduction).
How would a belief system react to such serious conflicts with a natural science like ecology? Normally, it has two options: (1) Either it makes the necessary corrections and updates in its theory, or (2) it ignores ecology to maintain the status quo. Mainstream economics seems to go for the second option with an incredible resistance to change.
In part D (conclusions) I try to explain, why the gatekeepers of mainstream economics behave like this, and I bring forth some suggestions for a better economics education.
A brief content analysis of some popular economics university textbooks is included in this PhD thesis. You may see the section D.5 for a summary.
Part C is a summary of some critical reports about the undergraduate economics education in some European countries, including UK, Germany and France. I found especially “The Econocracy” quite useful to understand the current status of economics education.
Current status of my PhD: Excommunicated!
https://twitter.com/tuncalik/status/1425045780969177089
Email to my PhD contributors: Excommunicated from the Church of Economism!
https://www.mediafire.com/file/a688cvc4m5hqc4g/EmailToPhDContributors_PhDstatusExcommunicated_20210804.pdf/file
Email to University of Corsica: Grand errors in the report of jury
https://www.mediafire.com/file/0yergp8zdlaul6j/EmailToUnivCorse_GrandesErreursDansLaRapportDuJury_20210809.pdf/file
Official PhD description (in French)
https://www.mediafire.com/file/esfvc4u2ah65afj/MyPhDproject_EcoleDoctorale_UniCorse.pdf/file
Official PhD description (English translation)
https://www.mediafire.com/file/leieuufrpyin5ya/PhDThesisDesription_TranslationInEN.pdf/file
Report of the jury in French: Notice of Excommunication (ajury of five male mainstream economists for my multidisciplinary PhD, plus director of the School of Doctorate)
https://www.mediafire.com/file/2r9u1cumkqvpsb2/PhDJury_rapport_T_A_K%25C3%25BCt%25C3%25BCkc%25C3%25BCoglu.pdf/file
Members of the jury:
* Olivier Beaumais (chairman, the most arrogant and aggressive member of the jury)
* Paul-Marie Romani (PhD director)
* Dominique Prunetti (co-director)
* Claudio Detotto
* Dominique Torre
* Alain Muselli (director of Doctorate School)
Report of the director of School of Doctorate in French
https://www.mediafire.com/file/s83kj7zruiyiebw/PhDJury_Tun%25C3%25A7_Ali_K%25C3%25BCt%25C3%25BCkc%25C3%25BCoglu.pdf/file
Last paragraphs from my email to contributors:
Of course, I don’t find all this fair or just; I am not yet finished with the University of Corsica. I will demand justice with strong and sound arguments. I will soon publish an “Open Letter” to the University of Corsica, and inform other departments –especially departments like ecology, sociology and anthropology– about the fate of my PhD, and tell them that “a university should not be dominated by the gatekeepers of a pseudoscience, who confuse public interests with business interests”.
Meanwhile, I decided to stay away from economics departments, however they define themselves (open-minded, broad-view, pluralist, heterodox, ecological etc.). Now, I plan to complete my PhD at the department of “Political Ecology” of any suitable university. Any critiques, comments and suggestions are very welcome.
Email to my PhD contributors on 4. August 2021
Dear contributors
I had informed you in February 2021 (email attached below) that I may not be able to complete my PhD at the University of Corsica due to serious ideological conflicts with my supervisors about the status and nature of mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economics.
Interestingly, in November 2020, my second PhD poster that summarized main findings of my work won a prize from a French technology organization named SATT (www.sattse.com). The School of Doctorate of the university thanked me for answering the interview questions of this organization in a comprehensive and precise manner. The interview was published here:
https://www.sattse.com/la-journee-des-doctorants-de-luniversite-de-corse-associe-enjeux-professionnels-et-scientifiques-et-pluridisciplinarite-pour-faire-du-doctorat-un-passeport-vers-lentreprise/
The PhD poster mentioned above that won the prize can be downloaded here:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/0njdfezk3ecenek/MyPoster2_20200924_WithLogo.pdf/file
After winning this prize, I hoped that my PhD work would be accepted after all, without too much difficulty. I hoped, the School of Doctorate would bring together an interdisciplinary jury as I asked for, which is not dominated by economists, and they would give me a fair chance to defend my PhD work.
But no! I submitted the first draft of my thesis in January 2021 to the School of Doctorate, and waited until May for a zoom meeting with a jury. To my disappointment, all the five members of the jury were hardcore mainstream economists, and the zoom meeting was more like a court of catholic inquisition than an academic meeting.
According to the final and undisputable verdict of the court, I was excommunicated from the PhD program of the university with following claims:
1. disagreements with a co-adviser (in my case Prunetti) are not acceptable for any PhD (as if I had personal problems with him, the problem was ideological)
2. It is very difficult to talk with me, and I am impolite (repeated several times; I guess, they were meaning my critical and sometimes ironical writing style)
3. I am only a student (repeated several times); e.g. how can I dare to suggest an interdisciplinary jury?
4. I need to find other supervisors from other universities; this cannot go on like this.
5. my PhD thesis is not an academic work; the methodology is not clear. It is a collection of personal (subjective) opinions without a methodology
6. my PhD subject is too broad (???)
7. my PhD thesis (draft document) is not really about the official PhD description, it is about something else (???)
8. apparently, I am not looking for a solution (stated several times by the chairman of the jury, which would probably mean, full obedience to the authority of supervisor without arguments)
I wasn’t given any chance or time to respond to these claims and defend my work. After about 40 minutes of one-way communication with a slow internet connection, they told me that the decision was already taken and the meeting was over. As I tried to explain myself, they muted my voice in the zoom application.
It was for me first-hand field experience, how “blasphemers” are excommunicated from the “church of economism” (phrase and article by R. Norgaard). My email-response to this meeting is attached as pdf file.
I don’t take any of these claims seriously in the academic sense. I think, they didn’t like the content and conclusions of my PhD thesis. They probably took my criticism about mainstream economics quite personally as an insult to their position, authority and profession. What they told me in the zoom meeting were only some academic and legitimate sounding, superficial pretexts to discredit the whole work.
Of course, I don’t find all this fair or just; I am not yet finished with the University of Corsica. I will demand justice with strong arguments. I will soon publish an “Open Letter” to the University of Corsica, and inform other departments –especially departments like ecology, sociology and anthropology– about the fate of my PhD, and tell them that “a university should not be dominated by the gatekeepers of a pseudoscience, who confuse public interests with business interests”.
Meanwhile, I decided to stay away from economics departments, however they define themselves (open-minded, broad-view, pluralist, heterodox, ecological etc.). Now, I plan to complete my PhD at the department of “Political Ecology” of any suitable university.
Any critiques, comments and suggestions are very welcome.
Best regards
Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu
The Church of Economism and Its Discontents (2015), Richard Norgaard
https://greattransition.org/publication/the-church-of-economism-and-its-discontents
***
Email to my PhD contributors on 21. February, 2021
Dear contributors
I submitted the first draft of my PhD thesis to the Doctorate School (University of Corsica) on the 6. of January, 2021. Now I am waiting for instructions about the next steps.
You can download the latest draft-version of my PhD thesis here:
Why does mainstream (neoclassical) economics ignore ecology?
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
If you find time to read it, I recommend you to read parts A (introduction) and D (conclusions) first, before diving into the details of parts B and C. I attached snapshots of some sections that might interest you.
Because my thesis is very critical about mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economics, I asked for a well-balanced and multidisciplinary jury for my PhD defense, which is not dominated by mainstream economists. I don’t know yet, if this will be possible.
My PhD is currently placed in the department of “economic sciences”, and one of my supervisors (Prunetti, an economist) seems to be quite reluctant to let it pass (to the stage of defense) without making explicit critiques about my thesis. He implies, my thesis doesn’t comply with academic and scientific conventions, but he doesn’t explain which conventions and why.
In this blog article of mine, you can find brief information about my PhD, why I chose to do it at the University of Corsica, and my plans after completing my PhD:
http://tuncalik.com/2021/02/my-phd-thesis-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/
If I can’t complete my PhD at the University of Corsica, my Plan-B is, completing it at another university. It doesn’t matter for me in which department (e.g. political sciences, sociology, philosophy, ecology, economy etc.) provided that I can have a multi-disciplinary supervisorship.
Any comments, critiques and suggestions about my PhD thesis, my Plan-B and my intentions after completing the PhD are very welcome. Thank you again, for your contributions.
Best regards
Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu
Email to Doctorate School of the University of Corsica, on 9. August 2021:
Mr Muselli (French translation attached below)
Last week, I finally found time to read English translation the report of the jury again. I will send you a detailed letter about all the errors in the report of the jury (attached). In this letter, I will respond to every claim in the report. This letter will be a part of my “Open Letter to University of Corsica” that I will publish in my blog site in a couple of months. All relevant official PhD documents like PhD descriptions, progress reports and PhD posters will be attached to this Open Letter.
Why publish blog articles and Open Letters? Because this is the only power I have; open and transparent academic discussion (i.e. democratic force of arguments) against the institutional power of position, secrecy, mobbing and politics. If I didn’t publish my PhD thesis in internet, no one would know the content of it apart from some deprecative economists in the University of Corsica.
In this particular email, I will mention only the grandest error in the report: It claims, my PhD was not actually about a broad and qualitative question like “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology”; it should only be concerned with the “place of ecology in modern undergraduate economics education in three European countries” in the narrow sense, without investigating the historical reasons of the ecological ignorance.
Now I understand better, why some jury members repeatedly said things like “your PhD subject is too broad”, or “your PhD is not about the given subject, it is about something else” (during the zoom meeting).
This claim is totally wrong. I hope, this grand error is only a mistake or misunderstanding; not deliberate cheating to discredit my PhD work.
I came to the University of Corsica with a definite PhD idea in mind, and it was about “the reasons of ecological ignorance in mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economics.” This can be seen in all my PhD offers, progress reports and PhD posters (attached). I wouldn’t be interested in a narrow PhD topic like just “place of ecology in modern undergraduate economics education in three European countries” without historical and qualitative analysis of the underlying ideological ignorance of ecology (a case of ideological blindness).
The original topic of my PhD was “the reasons of ecological ignorance in mainstream economics” and this was the topic that PhD director Mr Romani found interesting. And that’s why “historical and qualitative analysis” was emphasized in the official PhD description (attached).
From the beginning on, Mr Prunetti never liked the term “ecological ignorance”; he probably found the phrase insulting for his profession. Once in a meeting with Prunetti, Romani and I in Corte, Prunetti argued that it would be wrong to say “mainstream economics ignores ecology” to which Romani responded: “Of course mainstream economics ignores ecology, we need historical analysis to understand why”.
So, it was in fact my PhD director Romani who was originally interested in my PhD topic, co-director Prunetti was not really interested. He continuously tried to narrow my PhD description down to a “harmless” quantitative inquiry (structured questions, surveys, tables, numbers) that would exclude dangerous qualitative questions like “why don’t economics students learn first foundational fields like ecology (especially human ecology), evolutionary anthropology, history of economic thought, philosophy of science etc.” before learning theories of an economic school like neoclassical/neoliberal economics that totally excludes ecology and anthropology.
Official PhD title: “La place de l’écologie dans l’enseignement de premier cycle en Science Economique : le cas de trois payseuropéens”
This official PhD title, which was formulated by Prunetti, was only a polite formulation of the same question (i.e. the reasons of ecological ignorance). Prunetti explained it to me in Corte as follows: “Such a polite formulation is necessary for acceptance of the PhD application; insulting phrases like “ecological ignorance” would not be accepted by the authorities in France. Once the PhD offer is accepted, you can write whatever you want.”
“The case in three countries” was a later addition by Prunetti; the core inquiry was always “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?” This can be seen in my PhD offers, progress reports and PhD posters (posters are attached). Note that PhD posters are official, confirmed PhD documents (attached).
The real scope of the PhD can be found in the details of the official PhD description (attached). For example, in part “abstract-1” of the document:
“Quels sont les facteurs qui expliquent que l’enseignement dans les premiers cycles deScience Economique semblent généralement déconnectés des enseignements d’autres
disciplines tels que la biologie, l’écologie ou bien encore l’anthropologie ? Ce travail de thèse s’attachera, à travers une approche essentiellement qualitative, à tenter d’apporter des réponses à cette question en relation avec les enseignements qui peuvent être tirés de l’histoire économique de la pensée et des pratiques d’enseignement de la Science Economique en premier cycle dans trois pays européens.”
In English (google translation):
“What are the factors that explain why teaching in the first cycles of Economics seems generally disconnected from the teachings of other disciplines such as biology, ecology or even anthropology? This thesis work will focus, through an essentially qualitative approach, in trying to provide answers to this question in relation to the lessons that can be drawn from the economic history of thought and teaching practices in science. Economics undergraduate in three European countries.”
In all my progress reports and posters, I always emphasized that my PhD thesis had two parts:
***
(a) Why does the mainstream (neoclassical) theory of economics ignore ecology?
(b) What is the place of ecology in undergraduate education of economics in three European countries?
(a) is the more philosophical and qualitative part that requires a multidisciplinary and holistic approach.
(b) is the more empirical part whose conclusions will be based on concrete surveys, facts and fact tables.
***
(b) is the part that was added later by Prunetti to the original PhD offer.
In my PhD thesis, the analysis of part (b) can be found in part C, based on several reports and surveys published by other students and academicians: C. REPORTS: PLACE OF ECOLOGY IN MODERN ECONOMICS EDUCATION
So, even if the jury misunderstood the content of my PhD, their claim “my PhD thesis is not about the subject, it is about something else” is wrong.
For part (a): Reasons of ecological ignorance in mainstream economics:
1. I first explained in part A (introduction) briefly the history of economic theory: How did “political economy” of the 19. century became first “neoclassical economics” and then “neoliberal” economics in the 20. century? What are the main features of mainstream (neoclassical/neoliberal) economics? Mechanistic and monetary
reductionism are among these features; both features have the tendency to exclude ecology and qualitative/holistic analysis
2. I explained the principles of ecology, and the differences between shallow and deep ecology in part A (introduction)
3. In part B (fundamentals) I explained core beliefs like growthism in mainstream economics and their historical roots
4. In part B and D (conclusions) I explained how principles of deep ecology collide with core beliefs in mainstream economics. I summarized my conclusions in a table in part D (see table-1 in D.2.)
5. In part D, I argue: Because core beliefs of mainstream economics (e.g. monetary reductionism, growth obsession, technological optimism, ignoring imperialism,
ignoring power relations etc.) collide clearly with basic principles of ecology and anthropology, the institution of economics education have two choices: (a) radically change/update its theory and education according to the ecological and historical realities of life, or (b) ignore all critiques of student and academic associations, insist on keeping status qua (along with entangled business interests), ignore ecology and anthropology.
Unfortunately, the institution of mainstream economics seems to have taken the second path (i.e. business interests first), even in our era of ecological disasters like climate crisis and sixth extinction.
Regards
Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglui
Email to a group of French economists who were interested in the fate of my PhD (14. July 2021):
…
The latest version of my PhD draft can be downloaded here as PhD document:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
I began with my PhD officially in December 2018 at the University of Corsica, after lengthy negotiations with the co-adviser Prunetti about the PhD offer. Troubles began already in the first half of 2019, as I realized that Prunetti was not happy at all with the direction my research was taking:
http://tuncalik.com/2019/08/why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology-my-3-phd-progress-report-august-2019/#comment-2520
Because Prunetti tried to discredit my work at every opportunity without any constructive criticism, I decided to publish my PhD work in the summer of 2019 to make it available for everyone.
Interestingly, my second PhD poster that summarized the main findings of my work won a prize from a French technology organisation named SATT (www.sattse.com). That was in November 2020:
https://www.sattse.com/la-journee-des-doctorants-de-luniversite-de-corse-associe-enjeux-professionnels-et-scientifiques-et-pluridisciplinarite-pour-faire-du-doctorat-un-passeport-vers-lentreprise/
The poster which won the prize can be downloaded here:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/0njdfezk3ecenek/MyPoster2_20200924_WithLogo.pdf/file
After winning this prize, I hoped, my PhD would be accepted after all, without too much difficulty. I hoped, the School of Doctorate would bring together an interdisciplinary jury as I asked for, which is not dominated by economists, and they would give me a fair chance to defend my PhD work properly.
But no! I submitted the first draft of my thesis in January 2021 to the School of Doctorate (Ecole Doctorale) and waited until the May for a zoom meeting with a jury. All the five members of the jury were hardcore mainstream economists, and the zoom meeting was more like a court of catholic inquisition than an academic meeting.
According to the final and undisputable verdict of the court, I was excommunicated from the PhD program of the university with following claims:
* disagreements with a co-adviser (in my case Prunetti) are not acceptable for any PhD (as if I had personal problems with him; the problem was ideological)
* it is very difficult to talk with me, and I am impolite (repeated several times; I guess, they were meaning my critical and sometimes ironical writing style)
* I am only a student (repeated several times); for example, how can I dare to suggest an interdisciplinary jury?
* I need to find other supervisors from other universities; this cannot go on like this.
* my PhD thesis is not an academic work; the methodology is not clear. It is a collection of personal (subjective) opinions without a methodology
* my PhD subject is too broad (???)
* my PhD thesis (draft document) is not really about the official PhD description, it is about something else (???)
* the chairman of the jury asked me if I had any degree in economics (I said yes, bachelor degree from the University of Zürich. This was mentioned in the introduction part of my PhD in A3).
* the only solution for me is, I need to find other supervisors from other universities (repeated several times)
* apparently, I am not looking for a solution (stated several times by the chairman of jury, which would probably mean, full obedience to the authority of supervisor without arguments)
I wasn’t given any chance or time to respond to these claims and defend my work. After about 40 minutes of one-way communication with a slow internet connection, they told me that the decision was taken and the meeting was over.
Of course, I don’t find all this fair or just. I am not yet finished with the University of Corsica. I will ask for justice with strong arguments.
Meanwhile, I plan to finish my PhD at the department of “political ecology” of any suitable university. Any critiques and suggestions are very welcome.
Best regards
Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu
My tweet chain about my excommunication from the Church of Economism on 10 August 2021:
My first-hand field experience supports @ProfSteveKeen’s claims:
My PhD subject was “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?”
Started in December 2018, excommunicated from the Church of Economism in May 2021
https://twitter.com/tuncalik/status/1425093435497893897
My first (original) PhD offer to the University of Corsica: Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream (Neoclassical) Economics (27 August 2017)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/gd7w56mxm9i4o54/PhD_Plan_Tunc_draft1.pdf/file
My second PhD offer: Institutional ecological ignorance in the theory and education of mainstream economics (English):
https://www.mediafire.com/file/gidn6wky3cjciy5/PhD_Offer_Tunc_draft2.pdf/file
French:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/e48pytuy68kvb5v/PhD_Offer_Tunc_draft2_french.pdf/file
Third and last (officially confirmed) version of my PhD offer: Ecological ignorance in the theory and education of mainstream economics (2018)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0b8py3bv1uchnm4/PhD_Offer_Tunc_draft3.pdf/file
Email to my PhD contributors on 21 August 2021:
Dear contributors
The single-disciplinary PhD jury which gave me an excommunication notice claims “my PhD should only be about the place of ecology in the undergrad economics education in three European countries” in the narrow sense, without investigating broad questions like “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?”.
This claim is completely wrong! So wrong that I ask myself, is it a mistake, misunderstanding, sloppiness or outright cheating? Desperate measures to remove serious criticism from the institution of mainstream economics?
A section from my PhD thesis in part D.1 (conclusions), on page 116:
“Like every established discipline or belief system, neoclassical economics tends to reject all kinds of theories, sometimes even whole disciplines like evolutionary anthropology and ecology, if their knowledge causes serious conflicts with its core assumptions (Kuhn, 2012).
This rejection (i.e. barriers) may come in many different forms: Conscious or subconscious, ideological or institutional (Hunt & Lautzenheiser, 2011); in form of omission, undervaluation, belittlement, sometimes even willful ignorance, contempt and hostility, especially if much more than a scientific argument is at stake, like social order, privileges, careers and money (Berry 1996, Afterword). In such cases, ostensibly scientific arguments become mere political tools for displaying on which side one stays.”
Actually, the behavior of the monodisciplinary jury (five male mainstream economists) confirms these paragraphs in my PhD thesis.
Attached below, you may find my email to Doctorate School of the University of Corsica about the fallacious claims of the jury. All relevant PhD documents are attached including the official PhD description of the university.
As I wrote before, I plan to complete my PhD thesis in a department of Political Ecology, but I am not yet finished with the University of Corsica.
For Your Information
Best regards
Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu
***
See above: Email to Doctorate School of the University of Corsica, on 9. August 2021
The extremely profitable Ecosystem Mutilation and Patching Business, which works like a money machine for the big multi-corporation investors, can be explained with the following fundamental principle of ecology:
***
The more complete and balanced an ecosystem (forest, farm, lake, aquarium etc.) in terms of its bio-diversity and biochemical cycles, the less human intervention (maintenance) and technology is required for its sustenance, and vice versa; more maintenance, energy and technology is required for incomplete, unbalanced or mutilated ecosystems, like monocultures in agriculture (e.g. wheat, rice, maize, potato, cotton).
***
complete/balanced ecosystems: maximum ecology, minimum technology (biological automation), self-sufficient, healthy, sustainable; not profitable for external investors and technology providers
incomplete/mutilated/imbalanced ecosystems: minimum ecology, maximum technology (mechanical automation), not self-sufficient, unhealthy, unsustainable; very profitable for external investors and technology providers
My second PhD poster summarizes the fundamental principles of ecology, and shows how core beliefs and assumptions in mainstream (neoclassical, neoliberal) economics collides with these principles:
PhD poster: Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology? (October 2020, pdf)
https://www.mediafire.com/file/0njdfezk3ecenek/MyPoster2_20200924_WithLogo.pdf/file
Report of the jury (excommunication notice, original in French) as pdf file
https://www.mediafire.com/file/2r9u1cumkqvpsb2/PhDJury_rapport_T_A_K%25C3%25BCt%25C3%25BCkc%25C3%25BCoglu.pdf/file
My response to an allegation in the report of the jury (excommunication notice):
Allegation (original in French):
Le comité de suivi individuel de M. Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu a été saisi d’un conflit entre le doctorant et ses directeurs de thése. Ce conflit s’est en particulier matérialisé par la publication d’un post sur le site web du doctorant mettant en cause les orientations méthodologiques de M. Dominique Prunetti. L’audition du 4 mai 2021 a confirmé la réalité de la posture conflictuelle du candidat, qui n’est par ailleurs pas titulaire d’un master recherche en économie.
In English:
The individual monitoring committee of Mr. Tunc Ali Kütükcüoglu was seized of a conflict between the doctoral student and its thesis directors. This conflict materialized in particular by the publication of a post on the doctoral student’s website questioning Mr. Dominique’s methodological orientations Prunetti. The hearing on May 4, 2021 confirmed the reality of the candidate’s confrontational posture, which does not hold a research master’s degree in economics.
My response:
See my comments above for my discussions with the co-director Prunetti. Here, I will respond only to the last sentence of the paragraph.
“The hearing on May 4, 2021 confirmed the reality of the candidate’s confrontational posture, which does not hold a research master’s degree in economics.”
Confrontational posture? In the zoom meeting, they (the jury) didn’t give me much chance and time to explain my opinions and to defend my work. They call my critical stance about the theory and education of mainstream (neoclassical,neoliberal) economics as “confrontational posture”, as if I should be obedient to the strict rules and hierarchy of the Church of Economism, and accept everything said by Prunetti without objection and dispute (unconditional obedience). Besides, their decision (excommunication) was already taken before the meeting (ask director of the School of Doctorate, Mr Muselli).
My formal education in economics:
Vordiplom in Economics at the University of Zurich in Switzerland (Vordiplom was like bachelor degree in the old German university system)
Completed Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) education, obtained the degree, resigned from the Swiss CFA Society in 2012 due to its deceptive ethics (a religion of investor rights) that ignored social and ecological criteria:
http://tuncalik.com/2013/02/why-i-left-the-swiss-cfa-society/
Many people consider the prestigious (!) CFA education like a master degree in finance. I also considered it like a master specialization in finance, before I realized within a year a so, that it was just a kind of pseudoscience (an ideology of business and money) like mainstream economics. Nevertheless, I completed the CFA education in three years (i.e. three annual examinations in three years).
I have a master degree in electrical engineering from ETH Zürich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology). My most recent CV can be downloaded here:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/w889dobr9z0j1pz/CV_TuncAliKutukcuoglu_EN.pdf/file
See also: About me
http://tuncalik.com/about-me/
More importantly, I have more than 40 years of experience in theoretical and applied ecology, especially in the context of aquatic ecosystems (e.g. conventional and natural aquariums).
I began to keep different kinds of aquariums as I was already eight years old. I began to read popular science books (e.g. R. Dawkins, J. Diamond, C. Sagan) as I was 12 years old. I began to read philosophy books as I was 15 years old, including history and philosophy of science.
You may see part A.3 of my PhD thesis for more information about my background:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
Realizing that mainstream economics has grown into a pseudoscience in the 20. century (i.e. the evolution from political economy to neoclassical and neoliberal economics), I began to write blog articles about economy and environment in 2013. Most of my blog articles are in Turkish (tuncaliku.wordpress.com), some of them are in English (www.tuncalik.com). I had lots of discussions with academicians, students, lay people, journalists and politicians about the issues I handled in my blog articles. I authored several articles that were published in newspapers and scientific journals. I’ve read many books about history of civilizations and anthropology. I have seen many places, societies and ecosystems in the world (incl. South Africa, Americas, Corsica, Sardinia, Turkey, Egypt, Greece).
My PhD multidisciplinary requires first of all: History of economic thought, history of economy, ecology, history of civilizations, anthropology and philosophy. I think, I have a sufficiently broad and strong background in all these fields.
The question is, does the single-disciplinary jury of five male economists have this necessary broad and multidisciplinary background? I guess not. My impression is, my co-director Prunetti’s knowledge in such fields is quite shallow, like a typical mainstream economist. He can explain himself if he thinks otherwise. Unlike Prunetti or any other economist in the jury, I am quite open to contrary opinions.
How about Olivier Beaumais, professor in economics (University of Rouen Normandy), the most arrogant, impudent and aggressive person of the jury, who told me several times (during the zoom meeting) that “it was apparently very difficult to talk to me (as Prunetti already told him)”?
I wonder, what is his background in fields like ecology and anthropology? Note that environmental economics, as a branch of mainstream economics, is about shallow ecology that views nature still as a resource or infrastructure for the human economy; not as the primary reproducer, not as a grand living organism of which we humans are only a part. My PhD requires but a deeper and broader understanding of ecology. What kind of ecosystems did Mr Beaumais study? Does he have experience in applied ecology? I guess not; otherwise, he would be very critical about the core beliefs and assumptions of mainstream economics.
I wonder, how and why did Romani or Prunetti find Mr Beaumais, a typical mainstream economist, as chairman of the jury for a multidisciplinary PhD? Why wasn’t my PhD director Romani, who was really interested in the subject of my PhD, the chairman of the jury?
In my opinion, the single-disciplinary jury was not qualified for my multidisciplinary PhD; neither technically, nor ethically.
An addition to my response above, about my formal economics education:
A section from “How Green Are Principle Texts” by Jack Reardon:
https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJGE.2007.013067
Adverse selection in the profession of economics?
“Discrete [quantitative] analysis intrinsically involves value judgements with a concomitant acknowledgment of an ethical position – anathema to neoclassical economics which assumes a value-free ‘scientific’ economics. Yet, to abnegate one’s ethical position not only is intellectually dishonest, but as Colander (2003) laments, will cause our profession to “lose the more perceptive students who might leave the economics major [yet keeping] the less thoughtful student who thinks that economic policy is easy if only everyone understood economics” (p.83).”
…
“The perceptive and historically-minded student can easily ascertain the intrinsic bias in neoclassical economics. As Dowd (2004) elaborates, “the rationale for [neoclassical] economics [is] the ‘science of economising, maximising and efficiency and, at the same time, by removing its analysis from history and becoming a theory of ‘statics’, it serves as a theory for working within and preserving the status quo” (p.83).”
As I studied mainstream (neoclassical) economics at the University of Zurich, I was certainly among the more perceptive students, who realized that something was wrong with the standard economics education. A section from my PhD thesis (A3):
“With my master degree in electrical engineering, with my keen interest in wildlife, evolution, animal behaviour and human history since childhood, and with my many years of hands-on experience in aquarium keeping, I already had a strong background in disciplines like mathematics, physics, linear and nonlinear dynamic systems and ecology as I started to study economics in 2002. With this broad background, I became aware of many misconceptions like premature mathematisation, inverse fitting, rational consumer (Homo economicus) and technological optimism quite early, as I began to study conventional economics. I didn’t know then, what I was learning was called neoclassical economics. I didn’t know much about the history of economic thought either, except for superficial information about famous names like Adam Smith and Karl Marx.”
My response to following allegation of the PhD jury (see above report of the jury, excommunication notice)
“The individual monitoring committee of Mr. Tunc Ali Kiitikcüoglu was seized of a conflict between the doctoral student and its thesis directors. This conflict materialized in particular by the publication of a post on the doctoral student’s website questioning Mr. Dominique Prunetti’s methodological orientations.”
I guess, they mean the following paragraph that I published on 16 July 2020:
http://tuncalik.com/2019/08/why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology-my-3-phd-progress-report-august-2019/#comment-2520
“Another problem could be, Mr Prunetti tend to think, real and respectable science is only about quantitative analysis (well-known Newton or physics envy in the history of economic thought). My impression is, he lacks the experience and philosophical/historical background required for qualitative analysis. I wonder, what kind of PhD work he has supervised so far.”
I still have the impression today that Mr Prunetti doesn’t have much experience in broad-view qualitative and historical analysis. As I explained above, he used stereotyped arguments about methodology and formalism as a tool to limit my multidisciplinary PhD to narrow and (for mainstream economics) harmless inquiries. Narrow formalism before quality of content; this is a well-known disease in mainstream economics (see “The Econocracy” by Earle,Moran,Perkins).
It is explained in the official description of my PhD that my PhD requires broad-view qualitative and historical analysis. Apparently, my co-director Dominique Prunetti didn’t want to understand or accept this requirement.
As feedback to my 3rd and 4th PhD progress reports, Prunetti wrote me by email that these reports didn’t meet academic criteria, without explaining concretely, what academic criteria he was talking about.
I wrote him back several times and asked, what criteria he was talking about with concrete references to the content. He didn’t answer my questions. Because he took the path of “ambiguous and destructive criticism”, seemingly to devalue my whole work, I decided to publish my work in my personal blog site (tuncalik.com) to make it available and transparent for everyone. Otherwise, Prunetti could claim anything about my work without offering any justified explanation. Who would know or care?
I didn’t publish any opinions about Prunetti’s private life; I informed my readers about the status and development of my PhD. If Prunetti can talk to other jury members claiming that “I am a difficult person with a confrontational posture”, I can at least inform my readers (to whom it may concern) about the status of my PhD, obstacles and difficulties etc., in an objective and critical manner. I plan to contact student and academician associations in Corsica that can support my case, and help me to defend my rights as a PhD candidate.
In my PhD thesis (draft), I claim that “short-term monetary business interests” are among the biggest ideological and institutional barriers to ecological literacy in education, along with other barriers like industrial paradigm (machine world paradigm, mechanistic reductionism), Western ideology of progress, dominance of neoclassical/neoliberal economics and career path dependence.
Once, as I was in Corte, Prunetti told me in a meeting that he didn’t like my sharp criticism of narrow business interests. When I asked him why, he admitted that he didn’t have any objective and scientific explanation; just a matter of taste, he simply didn’t like it.
He may have his personal preferences, but these preferences are not relevant for my PhD (unless they can be explained in a scientific manner) that requires broad, multidisciplinary and critical thinking. If Prunetti expects conformity to his personal preferences, he is confusing “science of economy” with “Church of Neoclassical/Neoliberal Economism” (as many mainstream economists do), and therefore, he is not qualified to supervise such a critical PhD.
Similarly, Prunetti may not like a phrase like “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?” (which was accepted and found interesting by the PhD director Romani), but again, his personal taste is not relevant for my PhD, unless it can be explained in a scientific manner.
I explained in the section A.8 of my PhD thesis (“Does mainstream economics really ignore ecology?”) why I accepted “ecological ignorance” as a fact (e.g. check mainstream university textbooks, lecture plans, mission statements, job market, mainstream economy journals and newspaper columns). Constructive criticism would be, first reading this section, then arguing that some of my arguments here don’t make sense, and explaining why.
Another interesting and suspicious feature of the jury report is, that it makes no references at all to the content of my PhD thesis, not even for criticism, reducing the whole PhD affair to relations with directors (esp. with Prunetti), as if I haven’t written a 192-page PhD thesis, whose content complies to the official description of the PhD.
All comments, critiques and suggestions are welcome to improve the subsequent editions of this book, including English language corrections. After all, English is not my mother language. My email for this book: phd at tuncalik dot com
“The Econocracy” by Earle, Moran and Ward-Perkins is an important book to understand the institution of mainstream (neoclassical, neoliberal) economics, that is, the “Church of Economism”:
https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526110138/
Two other important resources to understand the “Church of Economism”, telling the story of student movements since 2000 that protest the established (neoclassical) mode of economics education:
1) Introduction: Broadband Versus Narrowband Economics
http://www.paecon.net/Introduction.htm
2) Open Letter: International Student Initiative for Pluralism in Economics (isipe.net)
http://www.isipe.net/open-letter
My original PhD thesis as PDF file can be downloaded here for free:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
This document doesn’t include some of the chapters included in the book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics”, and it is not updated anymore.
My second PhD presentation poster that illustrates the collisions between core assumptions/myths of mainstream economics and principles of deep ecology can be downloaded here (PDF):
https://www.mediafire.com/file/0njdfezk3ecenek/MyPoster2_20200924_WithLogo.pdf/file
This poster won a prize from a French technology organisation named SATT. My answers to their interview questions are published here:
https://www.sattse.com/la-journee-des-doctorants-de-luniversite-de-corse-associe-enjeux-professionnels-et-scientifiques-et-pluridisciplinarite-pour-faire-du-doctorat-un-passeport-vers-lentreprise/
Music of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics” (audio)
https://audiomack.com/tuncalik/song/music-of-my-book-ecological-ignorance-in-mainstream-economics
Main inquiries of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics” (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZB9H5uBWuU
Description of my PhD study at the University of Corsica (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdUUOcLKPcQ
“Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics” may help you find answers to critical questions like… (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nro4C5pGh4A
Playing the song of my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics” on ukulele (audio)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U04lC8qGgz8
Another natural aquarium I started to set up in April 2021: Natural aquarium in our balcony with paradise fish from Vietnam
https://www.instagram.com/p/CRiZYBxhqYd/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Balkondaki doğal akvaryum: maksimum ekoloji, minimum teknoloji (video)
EN: Natural aquarium in our balcony: maximum ecology, minimum technology
https://youtu.be/jrp—wdsWU
What have I done since January 2021? (today: 23.12.2021):
* I have been in Turkey since 11th April.
* I submitted my multidisciplinary PhD thesis (political economy & ecology) to the Doctorate School of the University of Corsica (Università di Corsica Pasquale Paoli) in January 2021. They let me wait until May without any comments, and in May in a zoom meeting they (a single-disciplinary jury of mainstream economists, I call it today the Church of Economism) told me that my PhD thesis cannot be accepted, with a rhetoric based on some contrived claims and lies to discredit my work, without giving me any chance for defending my PhD.
More information about the tragic story of my excommunication from the “Church of Economism” (phrase and article by Richard Norgaard) can be found here:
http://tuncalik.com/2021/02/my-phd-thesis-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/
* I wrote a short children story in Turkish in the style of a fairy tale in May 2021, to celebrate the birtday of my daughter. This story will be publised soon by a publisher specialized in ecology books in Turkey.
https://tuncaliku.wordpress.com/2021/07/24/bir-anadolu-masali-elmali-koyun-vahsi-davulcusu/
* I began to set up a natural outdoor aquarium in our balcony in Davutlar-Kusadasi in April 2021.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrp—wdsWU
* I worked as voluntary workforce in an organic orchard in Kemaliye in June 2021, in order to learn more about practical aspects of permaculture. Then I spent three weeks in Ovacik/Tunceli to see the landscape, people and culture, especially from the viewpoint of ecological farming (agroecology).
* I played and recorded two beautiful songs together with my daughter Elif:
Academy Song (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CHAJAJMvcE
Dust in the Wind (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsWdQ1xuEqU
* I began to learn ukulele in July 2021. I publish some songs that I play on ukulele (and sing along) at my soundcloud and audiomack accounts.
* I went to Göce/Agva in September and October 2021, to inspect our organic orchard. I also visited some friends in Istanbul.
* In November 2021, I published my book “Ecological Ignorance in Mainstream Economics” which is a product of my excommunicated PhD.
http://tuncalik.com/2021/11/my-book-ecological-ignorance-in-mainstream-economics/
The CFA (Chartered Financial Analyst) Institute was very adept at promoting “seeing investors’ rights above everything, even above financial advisor’s own interests” as the highest ethical value.
Students with poor ecological, philosophical & historical literacy (a feature that is often fostered by modern pro-corporate industrial education) were easy prey for the CFA Institute; they didn’t see the neoliberal ideology and deep ecological ignorance built in the education program of CFA institute. Some sincerely believed, CFA curriculum was the highest science; an opinion that was naturally supported by the promise of higher salaries.
Another example of ethical reductionism was, promoting “compliance with the laws of the country of investment” as highly ethical and sufficiently conscientious attitude for a financial advisor, as if Big Money and big multinational companies didn’t have the power to manipulate and bend laws of many countries according to their narrow interests. Laws related with GM seeds and pesticides is an obvious example (i.e. investor-friendly industrial agriculture with lots of pesticides and GMOs)
It is essential to have some knowledge in human history, ecology, philosophy and political economy to differentiate real/honest Green Transformation (aiming sustainable wellbeing for all) from Green Washing and image polishing (aiming stable or more profit for Big Money).
This means, an average graduate of modern industrial education, which is typically poor in holistic thinking, philosophy, ecology and human history, can easily be deceived by the Green Washing propaganda of business and state (e.g. technological fixes, Green Growth, Green Capitalism).
My related blog article: What is industrial paradigm? Industrial vs Ecological Paradigm
http://tuncalik.com/2019/08/what-is-industrial-paradigm/
PHILOSOPHY AND INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION
From the point of view of Big Money (global investors) and corporatocracy, philosophy must be relegated to the invisible background in industrial education, and if possible, excluded altogether.
Why?
Because philosophy tries to see the whole picture. It asks important questions such as why do we exist, where did we come from and where are we heading, why is the world like this and not otherwise, where did these religions and moral rules come from, and so on.
The type of employees that the industry needs are not individuals who try to see the big picture and asks all kinds of questions about it. Because, the person who tries to understand the big picture starts to ask, sooner or later, inconvenient questions like “what and whom am I serving by working in this company? What is the meaning of my job, for me, for my family and for the society?” Then s/he begins to ask questions about the economic system, society, ecosystem, evolution and so on.
However, such a critical and questioning mindset is not desired in industrial order. That’s why, narrowly focused industrial thinking (technical expertise in a special field) is exalted in industrial education and science; not philosophical thought that tries to understand the whole across disciplinary boundaries.
People who tend to ask inconvenient questions about the big picture can hardly be employed as “useful idiots” (like mainstream economists) who willingly serve to the narrow interests of Big Money.
ARE ALLEGEDLY “GOOD SCHOOLS” REALLY GOOD?
Most of the prestigious so-called “good schools” are not actually good schools; these are schools whose graduates are predicted to make “good money”. That is, schools that produce well-paid “tamed technicians” for companies… In this sense, I have seen the best schools in Switzerland so far.
What I mean by “tamed technician” here is people like Adolf Eichmann; one who focuses on his own narrow field and does his job perfectly in the technical sense, but does not ask disturbing questions about the big picture like “what is the meaning of this job; to whom and to what does it serve?”
In modern industrial education, this narrow-minded specialization is often promoted as the rational or scientific approach.
I observe people around me: One of the primary factors that keep parents captive to dirty and crowded cities that have become a concrete and traffic hell like Istanbul (Turkey) is the mainstream concern of “sending children to good schools”.
This is an anxiety that does not question at all notions such as “good education” and “good life”, partly due to following the herd without much thinking, and partly due to money and livelihood problems… There is also mechanistic reductionism: Abstracting education from family, social and ecological environment, culture and art, and reducing it to school and lessons…
If a person is a graduate of the so-called good schools, he is assumed to be well educated, otherwise he is assumed to uneducated (!) Things learned outside of school have no importance and value (!) This attitude is closely connected with “monetary reductionism”; the habit of measuring the value of everything with money, including the value of education.
I created an open google discussion group to collect opinions about my PhD thesis:
Why does the theory & education of mainstream (neoclassical, neoliberal) economics ignore ecology? (comments, critiques, suggestions)
https://groups.google.com/g/ecology-and-economics/c/4mHpQDH9T5A
Two important authors about the necessary social transformation:
1) Erich Fromm (1900-1980), “Haben oder Sein” (book: to have or to be); away from the superficial, money & market oriented consumption culture
Erich Fromm – Gespräch zu “Haben oder Sein” (youtube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_2mn39AU0c
2) Christopher Lasch (1932-1994) with his books like “The Culture of Narcissism”, “The True and Only Heaven: Progress and its critics” and “The Revolt of the Elites”
A magnificent audiobook that I hear again and again:
The Revolt of the Elites (youtube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ_B1VPWniI
Post to my LinkedIn account: My current interests
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tunc-ali-kutukcuoglu-10566445_ecology-education-permaculture-activity-7008747513138581504-eOcz?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
This is the music that I composed for the first chapter of my short story “Wild Drummer of the Apple Village”. I wrote the notes of this music with Dorico software. The composition is not yet completed (audiomack/tuncalik)
https://audiomack.com/tuncalik/song/vahsi-davulcu-1-bolum-muzigi-28122022
An excerpt from my PhD thesis that can be downloaded here:
Why does the theory & education of mainstream (neoclassical) economics ignore ecology? (pdf download)
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
Barriers to sustainable human life on earth
industrial paradigm, Western ideology of progress, narrow business interests, etc.
One of the greatest barriers to sustainable & equitable human life is the technology fetish (misinformed and misleading technology optimism) in mainstream economics that claims, economic growth (GDP growth) and technological progress can solve every (social & ecological) problem of humanity.
My tweet chain (thread) about technology fetish (10 January 2023):
https://twitter.com/tuncalik/status/1612834409232703488
An excerpt from my PhD thesis (why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?) that can be downloaded here as pdf booklet:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
Features of mainstream (neoliberal) economics
Excerpts from my PhD thesis (why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?) that can be downloaded here as pdf booklet:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/y455nvq3r5803sv/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf/file
Misconceptions in mainstream economics and their possible causes (I)
Misconceptions in mainstream economics and their possible causes (II)
The music piece that I composed for the first chapter of my short story “Wild Drummer of the Apple Village”: Wild Drummer is coming!, played by the virtual instruments of Dorico music notation software.
https://audiomack.com/tuncalik/song/wild-drummer-is-coming-dorico-drums
New instagram account for Wild Drummer: wild.drummer
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CosdUC0rDW_/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Bir Anadolu masalı: Elmalı Köyün Vahşi Davulcusu
https://tuncaliku.wordpress.com/2021/07/24/bir-anadolu-masali-elmali-koyun-vahsi-davulcusu/
An interesting academic paper:
Climate Change and Economics 101: Teaching the Greatest Market Failure
“Our finding shows that not all texts touch upon climate science, and a small subset deviates from the scientific consensus on the human causes of climate change. All texts conceptualize climate change as a problem of carbon emission’s negative externalities and the preferred market-based solutions, such as emission trading and Pigouvian tax.”
“market-based solutions” (!) without serious social transformation for sustainable human life on earth! Brain and Green Washing continue at the #economics departments of most universities in the name of “objective social science”
See my suggestions for a serious social transformation for sustainable human life on earth, summarized in 12 points: What does “sustainable well-being economy for all” require?
Another extremely popular myth of mainstream economics (Church of Economism):
“Have unquestioned faith in the market! Market based solutions (alone) will solve every (social & ecological) problem of humanity.”
Implies: There is no need for social transformation.
We need but radical social transformation for sustainable human life on earth, like the GDP degrowth policies. GDP degrowth means “regrowth of nonmonetary & sustainable production of nature & society”.
An excellent introduction to the degrowth issue: Degrowth and Ecosocialism | Jason Hickel (podcast)
I have a related tweet thread posted on 28.08.2023
In this podcast, anthropologist & economist Jason Hickel explains the social transformation that is needed for sustainable & equitable human life on earth quite well.
Degrowth and Ecosocialism | Jason Hickel (youtube)
My comment to this podcast:
Vandana Shiva is my favorite among the suggested speakers at the and of this podcast. She was the prime inspiration for my PhD in economy & ecology, with the subject “why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?”. I think, Jason Hickel summarized the social transformation that is needed for sustainable & equitable human life on earth very well. Two points that might be missing were maybe (1) decentralization of economy (increasing local self-sufficiency in every aspect of human life), and (2) transition from industrial to ecological lifestyle, education & farming. Personally, I don’t believe in the “sustainable cities” rhetoric; population must be dispersed back to the countryside. You may see my blog article: What does “sustainable wellbeing economy for all” require? (summarized in 12 points). George Monbiot has an excellent formulation for (7) in the article: Private sufficiency, public luxury! (as Jason Hickel says, decreasing the commodification of basic human needs like healthcare, education and recreation)
Here, you can read and download my PhD thesis as pdf document:
Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf
My email for your opinions about this PhD thesis: tuncalik1968 (at) gmail dot com
Here, you can read and download my PhD thesis as pdf document:
Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
http://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf
My email for your opinions about this PhD thesis: tuncalik1968 (at) gmail dot com
Elmalı Köyün Vahşi Davulcusu (EN: Wild Drummer of the Apple Village) is published in Turkey in May 2023, by the publisher “yeni insan” as a children book (age appr. 10-15) with pictures and music: yeniinsanyayinevi.com/kitaplarimiz/elmali-koyun-vahsi-davulcusu/
We now plan to publish it, probably through self-publishing, in various languages like English, German, French, Spanish etc.
Do you thing natural aquariums and music get along well?
My daughter Elif Sumru and I played first an old pop song (Mamy Blue) on the ukulele in front of the semi-natural aquarium in our kitchen. Then we talked about the aquarium: fish, plants, maintenance, how plants purify water, natural cycles etc. (in Turkish)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRZjcSQ4_HE&list=PLlKiATrbw1ktanKE3k6g7W-oXeyQBrxUX&index=15
Our latest recordings:
1) Wild Drummer’s song on the piano, rehearsal 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXC1uRCR1rQ
2) My daughter and I sang Wild Drummer’s song accompanied by piano
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0PRvdvQzUE
A person, who is not aware of the huge loss of knowledge & technology caused by every species extinct and every ecosystem mutilated, can easily believe in the continuous progress of humanity, by simply looking at human-made things like academic papers, computers, smart phones, cars, roads & buildings.
Pictures from the zero-technology natural aquarium that we set up in the sunlit corridor of our apartment building in Ankara (30 September 2023, instagram/tuncaliku)
https://www.instagram.com/p/Cx0Qj59s523/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
An excerpt from my PhD thesis: This 7th principle of ecology mentioned in the image above (maximum ecology, minimum technology) may explain, why natural aquariums need little technology & maintenance (i.e. external intervention), and also why most aquarium companies & shops (and their investors) don’t like the idea of natural aquarium.
Following expression by the musician Brian Eno summarizes perfectly the relation between mainstream economists and mainstream economics: “For every bullshit job there is a bullshit education.” (see “bullshit jobs” by anthropologist David Graeber)
https://youtu.be/cuBpOXGLn_o?si=55rqjdEnty5HXU6T
Brief story of my PhD at the University of Corsica (Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology):
* Dec 2018: Officially started with my PhD, after lengthy and tiresome negotiations with my co-director Dominique Prunetti, who never liked and wanted to change the subject of my PhD. Prunetti was a typical mainstream economist (quite shallow minded) for whom science was all about maths and statistics. My PhD director Paul-Marie Romani was the more philosophical type compared to Prunetti, who was sincerely interested in my PhD subject from the perspective of economic thought.
* Oct 2020: My second PhD presentation won a prize from a French technology organization named SATT-SE. An interview with me for this occasion was published on their website:
https://www.sattse.com/la-journee-des-doctorants-de-luniversite-de-corse-associe-enjeux-professionnels-et-scientifiques-et-pluridisciplinarite-pour-faire-du-doctorat-un-passeport-vers-lentreprise/
* Feb 2021: I submitted my PhD thesis to the school of doctorate, and waited for feedback.
* May 2021: I had to wait until May, without any feedback. In May, I was invited to a zoom meeting, in which the jury (excommunication committee) told me that my PhD thesis was not acceptable; I could go where ever I want.
You may find the details like members of the jury and their accusations on this page:
https://tuncalik.com/2021/02/my-phd-thesis-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/
In short, I was excommunicated from the Church of Economism* (phrase by Richard Norgaard, one of the 15 contributors of my PhD) without giving me a chance to defend my thesis.
*) The Church of Economism and Its Discontents, Richard Norgaard (2015)
https://greattransition.org/publication/the-church-of-economism-and-its-discontents
For more information about this kind of narrow mindedness and willful (institutional) ignorance in the academy of mainstream economics, you may refer to the book “The Econocracy: The perils of leaving economics to the experts”
https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526110138/
These people were the members of my PhD jury (excommunication committee):
* Olivier Beaumais (chairman, the most arrogant and aggressive member of the jury)
* Paul-Marie Romani (PhD director)
* Dominique Prunetti (PhD co-director)
* Claudio Detotto
* Dominique Torre
* Alain Muselli (director of Doctorate School)
As soon as I find time from my other projects (literature & music, I will write my tragic story of excommunication in more detail.
My multidisciplinary project ideas: Books, music, ecology, aquarium
Download project document (pdf) version 13.11.2023
Once established properly within a year or so, natural aquariums are a beauty. In that sense, they are a kind of living visual art. One can produce very attractive documentary videos with music, using modern techniques for close-up filming. So, another outcome of maintaining natural aquariums would be a well visited video channel for documentary films.
There’s another term often used in the place of “industrial paradigm”: Exceptionalism
Ecologist and economist Willam E. Rees explains exceptionalism and its implications for the future of humanity: “The Fundamental Issue – Overshoot” | The Great Simplification #53 (Nate Hagens – youtube)
An episode that illustrates the mindset of the Church of Economism* (mainstream economics) that dominates modern industrial education, which is aligned with the narrow and short-term interests of Big Money:
A prominent resource economist says to ecologist William E. Rees: “Look Billy, if you continue to spread ideas about the ecological carrying capacity for humans, I can guarantee you that your career at UBC (University of British Columbia) will be nasty, brutish and short.” (begins at 24:00 in video)
https://youtu.be/LQTuDttP2Yg?si=OM3CsLWhYVUYslV0&t=1440
*) phrase and related article by Prof. Richard Norgaard, one of the contributors of my PhD in ecology & economy.
Four important resources about the current state of the theory & teaching of economics at universities:
1) Open Letter: International Student Initiative for Pluralism in Economics
https://www.isipe.net/open-letter
“It is not only the world economy that is in crisis. The teaching of economics is in crisis too, and this crisis has consequences far beyond the university walls.”
2) The Econocracy: The perils of leaving economics to the experts
https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526110138/
3) The Church of Economism and Its Discontents, Richard Norgaard (2015)
https://greattransition.org/publication/the-church-of-economism-and-its-discontents
4) Generally, the section D (conclusions) in my PhD thesis, and specifically the subsection D5: Keyword and content analysis of some popular economics university textbooks
https://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf
I totally agree with the American sociologist & economist Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929), author of books like “The Theory of the Leisure Class”, who said: “Economics should have been defined as human ecology. Unfortunately, it has been degenerated into a crude ideology of business and money.”
My impression is, most people, who are interested and knowledgeable in fields like history, ecology, anthropology, philosophy and sociology, have similar opinions. That’s maybe why mainstream economics is generally hostile to such broad and qualitative fields.
After 10+ years of research, I’ve come to the conclusion that mainstream economics has been grown into a pseudo-science that promotes narrow and short-term interests of business as “interests of all” (public benefit), using airy and pseudo-scientific business terms like growth, development, added value, modernization, infra structure, investment etc. as justification.
I think, (a) ecological ignorance, (b) blind belief in continuous & limitless progress and (c) technology fetish can be counted among the core ideological pillars of mainstream economics. Most economists, who are sufficiently ignorant in the forementioned fields, sincerely believe that economic growth (GDP growth) and technological progress can solve every (social & ecological) problem of humanity; there is no need at all for serious social transformation (lifestyle, consumption, values, education, economic and political system, relations with nature).
I wrote: “Primary function of industrial education is to engrave into the minds of children from an early age that it is an inevitable fact of life to work in colorless, unlikable and monotonous jobs in order to make a living.”
Colorless, unlikeable and monotonous jobs… “Useless” and “pointless” could also be added to this list of gloomy subjectives as explained in the revolutionary book “Bullshit Jobs” written by the brilliant anthropologist David Graeber.
https://www.youtube.com/live/kikzjTfos0s?si=wjYtT0elfl2wbL3v
I completely agree with the journalist George Monbiot, who says, a sustainable wellbeing economy for all is not only about a balance between business and state; there is the third sector, namely the commons. Common resources like a shared pasture or farm, are mostly about nonmonetary production of nature and local communities. In that sense, commons represent the nonmonetary (and nonmarket) side of the economy, which is often cannibalized for the sake of monetary economic growth (GDP growth).
Not capitalism, not communism; George Monbiot on why we need the commons
https://youtu.be/QUIRRp0i-3w?si=9kirIBq4DN0u6hOh
Projektidee (Entwurf): Ein Lokal (wie ein Kaffeehaus in einem Gewächshaus) mit Bühne, Naturaquarien, Musik, Büchern (Musik, Ökologie, Literatur)
Some quotations from the article “Against Economics” (2019) by the brilliant anthropologist David Graeber:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-against-economics
Graeber: “Mainstream economists nowadays might not be particularly good at predicting financial crashes, facilitating general prosperity, or coming up with models for preventing climate change, but when it comes to establishing themselves in positions of intellectual authority, unaffected by such failings, their success is unparalleled. One would have to look at the history of religions to find anything like it.”
Graeber: “To this day, economics continues to be taught not as a story of arguments—not, like any other social science, as a welter of often warring theoretical perspectives—but rather as something more like physics, the gradual realization of universal, unimpeachable [absolute] mathematical truths.”
Graeber: “… the basic psychological assumptions on which mainstream (neoclassical) economics is based [like the rational consumer fallacy]—though they have long since been disproved by actual psychologists—have colonized the rest of the academy, and have had a profound impact on popular understandings of the world.”
I agree with ecologist and economist Prof. William (Bill) Rees: Overshoot (planetary boundaries, ecological limits), ecological carrying capacity and over-population of humans are primary issues.
Confronting Overshoot: Changing the Story of Human Exceptionalism (youtube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MVmkIYy9aI
You can order a printed copy of my PhD thesis at lulu (paperback coil bound, 193 A4-size pages, black & white interior). Check the price at lulu.
https://www.lulu.com/shop/tunç-ali-kütükçüoǧlu/phd-thesis-2021-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/paperback/product-65rygn9.html
You can order a printed copy of my PhD thesis at lulu (paperback coil bound, 193 A4-size pages, black & white interior). Check the price at lulu.
https://www.lulu.com/shop/tunç-ali-kütükçüoǧlu/phd-thesis-2021-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/paperback/product-65rygn9.html
PhD: Why does mainstream economics ignore ecology?
You can either download my PhD thesis here (pdf) and get it printed and coiled yourself,
https://tuncalik.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/PhD-Thesis-Tunc_DRAFT_2021.pdf
… or order a print copy at lulu. Paperback coil bound, 193 A4-size pages, black & white interior. Check the price at lulu.
https://www.lulu.com/shop/tunç-ali-kütükçüoǧlu/phd-thesis-2021-why-does-mainstream-economics-ignore-ecology/paperback/product-65rygn9.html
The great service of the chemical-rich “industrial agriculture” business to the drug-rich “industrial healthcare” business: The skyrocketing increase in extremely expensive chronic diseases like autism, dementia and cancer.
https://youtu.be/Aw16LPVnNco?si=z3AL_H0MYaOHLgQT