So far I have suggested that human beings are constantly in the process of working with resources at the levels of possibility-light, development-verb, and things-noun. This is daily existence. You also saw that how you work with resources at each level is different. What you do with seeing possibilities in light, which you choose to manifest as verbs, is different than how you work with the inflows and outflows of verbs to accumulate what you need at a specific time. This is different than how you work with what is available here and now, to satisfy needs in the noun form. You know this, from your own experience. And, what you know has major implications for your existing agreements.
Current agreements tend to be structured based on the belief in the “big 3” factors of production – land, labor, and capital – a belief that has dominated economic, political, and social thinking for the past century. This belief focuses on the things-noun level of resources. The name gives this away — factors of production. They are inputs used to produce something. What you can do depends on how much you have. This is a very specific form of noun thinking. It does not include the verb and light levels. It is therefore no surprise that agreements based on the noun thinking of “factors of production” experience the verb and light level “costs of scarcity.” Not making explicit agreements around the verb and light levels of work with resources must, by definition, lead to expensive resources, lost opportunities, the lack of necessary resources, unintended consequences, a higher probability of obsolescence, and a lack of new opportunities. The good news is that you have seen how it is very natural for people to work with resources at these three levels. If this is so, then you can make new agreements that make this process explicit.
What you have also seen is that the direction of the process is critical. When you start with a noun level understanding of resources and try to add time to get verbs and possibility to get light, you start with the scarcity of nouns, and find that you cannot get there. You cannot see the same breadth of verb processes and relationships when starting with scarcity, and you cannot see into the same depth of possibility from scarcity. Starting from the other end, from light, you start with the assumption of infinite possibility, choosing to manifest specific verbs, which will meet in particular ways to become nouns here and now to address specific needs we choose – all from abundance. Both processes work with the interweaving of light, verb, and noun, and arrive at completely different experiences of what is possible. The other goods news is that people have figured this out, and have developed a myriad of ways to work with abundance-based agreements. Ecosynomics shows you how to find these people and learn from their experience.
You can already see that the big questions around what resources are, how to accumulate them, and how to use them start to move us into the big questions around how you organize your interactions with other people, and how you exchange value. While you can keep these three areas relatively isolated at the noun level, at the verb level they are interwoven, and at the light level they are different instances of the same lightness.
Specifically, questions around the things-noun-level resource of “labor” at the verb and light levels also deal with organizing questions around how you bring people’s contribution into the work, and with value questions around their experience of the value they receive from being part of the group. Likewise, “capital” questions deal with its accumulation and use as a verb-level resource, how you organize around it, and how it flows in value. At the light level, you begin to see what “capital” is, in its deeper essence. You also see that the noun-level resource of “land” becomes the flow of and relationship to all that exists in this realm at the verb level, and how you choose to manifest possibility at the light level of resource.