Ideas for Unifying Principles of B3D
This is a working document to capture ideas coming out of the B3D webinars on Unifying Principles, including possible insights provided by these ideas, opportunities that they might create and examples (Ashok's homework assignment for us).
| Idea | Insights | Opportunities | Examples |
| In nature, design is cheap and materials are expensive (Vincent) |
requires more and better information |
what might make technical design similarly inexpensive? |
Michael Pawlyn reports finding the concept useful Christopher Alexander's A Pattern Language |
| 'Making' vs. 'Being' (Vincent) |
importance of hierarchy implies self-organization |
reduces the complexity of understanding the system |
|
| Focus on relationships |
complexity from simplicity co-evolution shift from product to process |
leveraging swarm behavior leveraging resonance Taryn Mead: Planetary Boundaries designing human behavior/interactions extend concept of function? |
REGEN Energy power controller Ray Lucchesi's Living System Design Peter Bane: Keystones and Cops: An Eco-Mystery Thriller
|
| Focus on systems |
unintended consequences explore evolving human relationship with natural systems |
high-impact innovation tools/methods for dealing with complexity better alignment of natural/biological contexts potentially easier implementation through understanding current human context underlying principles of well-functioning systems (Stuart Kauffman's 'connectedness' research) rethink concept of function? |
Meadows: Thinking in Systems large scale systems modeling (Terry Love) |
| Focus on Motifs (Randy) |
Incorporates simplicity and complexity Allows for multiscale abstraction Modeling formalisms exist (affords cognitive utility) Avoids the 'too abstract to act upon' problem Inherently recognizes context and limits |
Specialized research domains within a general framework Developing tools for exploring decision impacts and platforms for efficient discovery Potential for integrating complementary systemic formalisms Potential for neutralizing interpretive biases and hence enabling productive reframing of solution spaces |
Serometrix drug discovery platform Behavioral genetics of model organisms Antonio Gaudi - Sagrada Familia |
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License
Sustainable Innovation Network 2010-2012
Comments
Some general
Some general thoughts:
Generally, so far, I like all the ideas!
The "extreme efficiency" for idea #1 troubles me a bit because my reading of that work by Vincent suggests either (a) efficiency "means" something different to nature than to humans, or (b) nature seems to balance efficiency and effectiveness/resilience/robustness, whereas extreme efficiency (as I understand those two words) means something else.
I wonder if we'll find that any set of principles remain quite tightly coupled, and what impact that will have on advocating for any one (or even subset) of a complete set of principles.
It seems to me that systems thinking pervades the other ideas to one degree or another. This raises the questions of whether the pervasiveness is perceived or actual, whether its pervasiveness makes it the principle we're after, or whether the pervasiveness means instead that it is an assumption underlying the way principles are identified and described.
re: Some general thoughts
Fil, thanks for your feedback! I was thinking of identifying solutions that use dramatically less energy by figuring out how biological systems manage this feat. Obviously there is more at play than just efficiency.
I think the term 'unifying principle' is a bit misleading. Randy Olson also talks about a 'narrative' but that does not capture the intent either. I belive we are looking for a conceptual framework that encompasses the source, process and target of B3D.
I separated 'relationships' from 'systems' for pragmatic reasons - although systems thinking occurs at all levels, the kind of systems modelling that Terry Love seems to be doing involves serious heavy lifting.
Into the mix
Thought I'd add a little something to the mix
Incorporates simplicity and complexity
Allows for multiscale abstraction
Modeling formalisms exist (affords cognitive utility)
Avoids the 'too abstract to act upon' problem
Inherently recognizes context and limits
Specialized research domains within a general framework
Developing tools for exploring decision impacts and platforms for efficient discovery
Potential for integrating complementary systemic formalisms
Potential for neutralizing interpretive biases and hence enabling productive reframing of solution spaces
Serometrix drug discovery platform
Behavioral genetics of model organisms
Antonio Gaudi - Sagrada Familia
Comments on the webinar- Unifying principles 2
I am using the opportunity to add up my comments/ideas/ thoughts from the webinar today.
First, concerning the name "Unifying principles", I think it is great that people are asking what does it mean! If they knew themselves, it would not be interesting. I am saying this because I have some experience from my own company. In the begining, nobody knew what our name meant, but that caused people to ask what it was, which on its turn resulted in explaining and them learning something more. And because it si something worthy, it got their interest. By giving the explanation you actually grasp the other party's interest.
I am slightly bothered by the word "unifying", since as we saw, unity is not possible within this discipline (if there is any such), so there is nothing to unify. I like better "common".
Second, concerning the difficulty with having different mindsets and diversity in this sense, even within the panel, I look at it as something good- I love diversity and differences! I think it is, however, essential to find a common language, or let me call it- "what unites us". I was thinking of maybe thinking about and spending 5 minutes- each of us on the panel- to speak about what bio-inspiration/biomimetics/biomimicry is to each and then picking up the "unity" from there. It's just an idea...