Skip to main content

systemics are the logics of design

There is a commonly expressed fear among scientists and other rational agents that design is too nihilistic and relativistic. Design is dismissed as merely expressions of intuition, fashion or ‘whatever’ and not objective, rational inquiry. This has raised many barriers between scientific thinkers and design practitioners. It has confused design educators and students alike. However, systemics provides dimensions of critical reasoning to designing that many assume or fear are missing.

In systemic designing, systems and design are not only interrelated, they are inseparable. Systemic design is a compound whole and not merely two interrelated strategies of inquiry. It is an integration of knowledge and skill that enables prudent action—wise action—to transpire. It is a manifestation of the integration of theory and action—wisdom. This is the original definition of sophia—in philosophy (philo (love) + sophia (wisdom))—as the wise hand. It is a holistic synthesis of cultures of inquiry that is designed to see or create ultimate particulars while acknowledging generalities and universalities. Systemic designers pay attention to environments, contexts and the provenance of any design activity while paying full attention to the particulars and people of the moment. Systemic designing is a compound, not an aggregated assembly of approaches. Systemic designing strives to be rational, beautiful, just and good while remaining practical.


Popular posts from this blog

Center for Systemic Design draft prospectus

    PROSPECTUS Center for Advanced Systemic Designing Introduction  Our futures can be approached in four ways: 1) drifting—adapting to whatever happens,  2) colliding—reacting and enduring,  3) retreating—backing away from undesirable states or conditions, or   4) advancing—navigating into desirable states-of-affairs. The norm nowadays is to drift, collide or retreat into the future. The fourth approach, the proactive approach, is the more apt response given the complex challenges and rising expectations that are the new norm for the foreseeable future.  The fourth approach depends on the agency of individuals who have the capacity to handle the challenge of securing desired outcomes in indeterminate situations on behalf of concomitant stakeholders and clients. They achieve this by serving—design agency—as members of design teams and design cohorts. These systemic designers are skilled polymaths who have the ability to create assemblies of essential elements into coherent whole system

Design, Wicked Problems & Throwness

Horst Rittel is one of the seminal residents in my 'Berkeley Bubble'. Recently a friend and colleague sent me an article about ‘double-wickedproblems’ . I have become ever more aware of the increasing number of references to ‘wicked problems’ in all forms of media that seem to have missed Rittel’s deeper insights . This brought up the concern I have about the use and miss-use of the term ‘wicked problem’.  The term ‘wicked problem’, first introduced by Rittel in West Churchman’s seminars at Berkeley, was in reference to his conceptualization of the impossible challenge of dealing with significant social issues using traditional, rational, ‘problem solving’ methods. In most cases what are miss-diangnosed as ‘wicked problems’ are actually complex or complicated problems that can be simplified or broken into smaller 'tame' problems allowing for a straight forward 'problem solving' approach to be taken. This approach is believed by many to be capable