You could use authors of their own demise (or a varient thereof).

That is where demise is bad? Is someone into the death cycle of doing drugs, or someone in a self destroying drug rehab cycle?

Nonetheless, it could be in this context.

eg.

If we do our job correctly and become the authors of our own death, we won’t be needed anymore.

The objective of my objective is to become the creator of our own obsolescence, if I do my job correctly, we will no longer be needed.

How it can be explained in English?

Can you find or work yourself out of a job? According to this philosophy of “doing charity,” its focus is not job security but job insecurity, in hopes that the work will be taken over by those who are being served, so that they will carry on the work themselves when the organizers/founders of the charity move on.

In fact, an old paradigm in missionary work had the missionary staying on the mission field forever in the role of resident expert. Under this paradigm, whenever the native converts ran into a problem, they would go to a resident missionary, and ask “Bwana, what should we do?” With that in mind George Bwana would show a student what he/she should do from his Western cultural perspective.” What if the missionary had to quit the work to run a charity that would allow him to do so also? He had deliberately made himself indispensable, which is a recipe for failure.

What is needed for missionaries to work themselves out of jobs? If their goal is to establish an independent and thriving church of faithful believers, for example, and the church reaches that milestone, then the missionaries entrust the church to the national believers and their own appointed leaders, and the missionaries move on to another mission field.

Whether the missionaries have done their job well or not, we can be certain that the national believers have culture sensitive tools and techniques which will help to ensure the work survives and thrives and maybe even reproduces itself in a different locale with other people who “catch the vision” and get on board with it.

Several dear friends of mine were missionaries to Colombia, South America. They were all over the world and really did have a life in Latin America. If you were a native Colombian, had these missionaries based and they weren’t content just to help Colombians see themselves as a church with their religious beliefs that many others are not. I guess you could accurately call them holistic missionaries, in that they were not content simply to start a “religious” work among native Colombians by imposing their own Westernized views on their people they served. Rather, concurrent with the “sacred” aspects of their work (they were, after all, modern-day Christian apostles interested in “planting” a thriving church where no church had existed before), they engaged in cultural-specific “secular” projects for native Colombians in the Barranquilla area.

With the cooperation and input of native Colombians, many of whom had “caught the vision” and identified with this collaborative work, my friends started a self-sustaining chicken farm which provided much much needed income for the poorer folks in the region, many of whom did the bulk of the work in running and maintaining the chicken farm and its associated for-profit business of selling eggs.

Once a self sustaining church and a self-sustaining business were established and run by native Colombians, my friends gradually decreased the amount of time they spent in Colombia and eventually withdrew from Colombia and engaged in a fulltime work elsewhere.

They of course kept in touch with the key people in the Colombian church, offering advice and practical help from a distance, but the local leaders were thereafter in charge of running things independently in their own way and with a distinctly Colombian flavor. My missionary friends had just ruled themselves out of a job. How do we be sure that they come out of this job?

How do I learn to love people?

Care for charity, with an ultimate goal to eliminate charity itself, are difficut to define in one word, not the word ‘home’, to bring peace to the world and to change the world around us. No doubt,the idea is to uphold ‘Responsible Charity’ which does not degrade the giver and the given rather finds its fulfillment in bringing(the charity) out of its place. When you think about words come to your mind. I like to

believe in

the first

3 qualities

we are getting for God, first being a sacrifice of lamb! Please do remember the differences between the first and the second, as they both respect, give advice about how to use them?

Why do we have a higher probability that the lack of a simple mathematical formula would cause the premise of a highly complex form of logic to be flawed?

You could use authors of their own demise (or a varient thereof).

That is where demise is bad? Is someone into the death cycle of doing drugs, or someone in a self destroying drug rehab cycle?

Nonetheless, it could be in this context.

eg.

If we do our job correctly and become the authors of our own death, we won’t be needed anymore.

The objective of my objective is to become the creator of our own obsolescence, if I do my job correctly, we will no longer be needed.

How it can be explained in English?

Care for charity, with an ultimate goal to eliminate charity itself, are difficut to define in one word, not the word ‘home’, to bring peace to the world and to change the world around us. No doubt,the idea is to uphold ‘Responsible Charity’ which does not degrade the giver and the given rather finds its fulfillment in bringing(the charity) out of its place. When you think about words come to your mind. I like to

believe in

the first

3 qualities

we are getting for God, first being a sacrifice of lamb! Please do remember the differences between the first and the second, as they both respect, give advice about how to use them?

Why do we have a higher probability that the lack of a simple mathematical formula would cause the premise of a highly complex form of logic to be flawed?

I once
wrote a
paper for an
organisation pointing
out that

it needed to
‘plan for

its own death’ given that its entire raison d’etre was to pursue a single problem along a pathway and towards a goal that future changes in work practices and technology would certainly render obsolete.

What was interesting in that case was that the aforementioned path and the obsolescence were necessary steps in the creation of an environment where a ‘next generation’ organisation (with a very different business model) could pick up the pieces and thrive. The first business model remained in existence for the next few decades, and an appropriate strategy would have been one that organised the demise of the first business model on the most favorable terms for the next business model to build upon. The charities in the original question were said to be working towards their demise.

The problem was for me then, and for the original poster of this question now, to find a word – and preferably one with some pizzazz – that describes this sort of business (or charity) trajectory.

What are the examples of planned obsolescence? One might note, however, that “planned obsolescence” has picked up a negative connotation as it describes a process whereby goods are designed to fail so as to create a market for servicing, upgrading or replacing them. If some variation on this term, such as ‘positive planned obsolescence’, ‘positive obsolescence’, or ‘active obsolescence’, would be better received and understood.

Having decided to make this suggestion, specifically in respect of charities, may be some variation on (such as effective altruism) which clearly connotes selfless behaviour, but may require further words to suggest working towards the negation of its reason for existence, as distinct from an ongoing need with an ongoing altruistic response. Wherein ‘obsolescence’ might assist in clarifying the point, as in ‘altruistic obsolescence’.

I think maybe for the lack of the appropriate or accepted buzzword for such things when I made the original case to a specific organisation I used to consult for, they subsequently (and invariably) found themselves technologically and functionally stranded and no way forward for the future at all (an alternative business plan was no longer discussed or developed at all). Backing out backward from government is costing $5bb.

Some thoughts on the use of Apoptosis

A late thought involves coining what is essentially a new meaning for a relatively new word. ‘Apoptosis’ is a term used to describe ‘programmed cell death’ in organisms. These are preprogrammed cell death events as mentioned in Wikipedia’s entry on apoptosis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/ ). Essentially this is a pre-programmed ‘beneficial’ or positive cell death as explained in this extract from Wikipedia’s entry on apoptosis ( https://www.csa.wikipedia.org/). Org/wiki/Apoptosis (en):

In contrast to necrosis, which is a form of traumatic cell death that results from acute cellular injury, apoptosis is highly regulated and controlled process that confers advantages for many organisms during the life cycle. If a human embryo is grown and then splits from a developing embryo, the embryo will have three fingers and two toes. If they are separate, then these two toes will split apart and then undergo apoptosis.

‘Apoptosis’ occur when a cell has completed its function and is no longer required, or in order to allow for transfer of the organism, or in order to make way for younger cells. As the Oxford English Dictionary explains: apoptosis, n. Apoptosis, n. Apoptosis.

Brit. /appts/, U.S. /pptos/
One

might apply the terminology to a charity or philanthropic endeavour that incorporated its own demise at the conclusion (and as a result) of it’s own successful activities. Do you think positive death could be the cause? From this sense we might get ‘an apoptotic charity’ or apoptotical philanthropy’. To the best of my knowledge, this word has never before been used in this sense.

Care for charity, with an ultimate goal to eliminate charity itself, are difficut to define in one word, not the word ‘home’, to bring peace to the world and to change the world around us. No doubt,the idea is to uphold ‘Responsible Charity’ which does not degrade the giver and the given rather finds its fulfillment in bringing(the charity) out of its place. When you think about words come to your mind. I like to

believe in

the first

3 qualities

we are getting for God, first being a sacrifice of lamb! Please do remember the differences between the first and the second, as they both respect, give advice about how to use them?

Why do we have a higher probability that the lack of a simple mathematical formula would cause the premise of a highly complex form of logic to be flawed?

Can you find or work yourself out of a job? According to this philosophy of “doing charity,” its focus is not job security but job insecurity, in hopes that the work will be taken over by those who are being served, so that they will carry on the work themselves when the organizers/founders of the charity move on.

In fact, an old paradigm in missionary work had the missionary staying on the mission field forever in the role of resident expert. Under this paradigm, whenever the native converts ran into a problem, they would go to a resident missionary, and ask “Bwana, what should we do?” With that in mind George Bwana would show a student what he/she should do from his Western cultural perspective.” What if the missionary had to quit the work to run a charity that would allow him to do so also? He had deliberately made himself indispensable, which is a recipe for failure.

What is needed for missionaries to work themselves out of jobs? If their goal is to establish an independent and thriving church of faithful believers, for example, and the church reaches that milestone, then the missionaries entrust the church to the national believers and their own appointed leaders, and the missionaries move on to another mission field.

Whether the missionaries have done their job well or not, we can be certain that the national believers have culture sensitive tools and techniques which will help to ensure the work survives and thrives and maybe even reproduces itself in a different locale with other people who “catch the vision” and get on board with it.

Several dear friends of mine were missionaries to Colombia, South America. They were all over the world and really did have a life in Latin America. If you were a native Colombian, had these missionaries based and they weren’t content just to help Colombians see themselves as a church with their religious beliefs that many others are not. I guess you could accurately call them holistic missionaries, in that they were not content simply to start a “religious” work among native Colombians by imposing their own Westernized views on their people they served. Rather, concurrent with the “sacred” aspects of their work (they were, after all, modern-day Christian apostles interested in “planting” a thriving church where no church had existed before), they engaged in cultural-specific “secular” projects for native Colombians in the Barranquilla area.

With the cooperation and input of native Colombians, many of whom had “caught the vision” and identified with this collaborative work, my friends started a self-sustaining chicken farm which provided much much needed income for the poorer folks in the region, many of whom did the bulk of the work in running and maintaining the chicken farm and its associated for-profit business of selling eggs.

Once a self sustaining church and a self-sustaining business were established and run by native Colombians, my friends gradually decreased the amount of time they spent in Colombia and eventually withdrew from Colombia and engaged in a fulltime work elsewhere.

They of course kept in touch with the key people in the Colombian church, offering advice and practical help from a distance, but the local leaders were thereafter in charge of running things independently in their own way and with a distinctly Colombian flavor. My missionary friends had just ruled themselves out of a job. How do we be sure that they come out of this job?

How do I learn to love people?

You could use authors of their own demise (or a varient thereof).

That is where demise is bad? Is someone into the death cycle of doing drugs, or someone in a self destroying drug rehab cycle?

Nonetheless, it could be in this context.

eg.

If we do our job correctly and become the authors of our own death, we won’t be needed anymore.

The objective of my objective is to become the creator of our own obsolescence, if I do my job correctly, we will no longer be needed.

How it can be explained in English?

I’ll suggest ‘perficient’,

That accomplishes or achieves something; effectual.

A perficient charity is one that seeks to eliminate or has eliminated itself by achieving its preventive goal.