Psychosocial engagement in design

Magic Carpets as Psychoactive Systems Diagrams (Part #7)

Given the highlighting of 'centres' by Alexander, there is a strong case for exploring their significance in a psychosocial context. They recall both the the topoi that have been a focus of mnemotechnics and the topos vital to a sense of place -- hence topography and topics. Curiously considerable attention has been given to 'centre of gravity' in market research. Given the sense of aesthetic configuration explored by Alexander in carpets, and more generally in design, the question is how the configuration of centres catalyzes or entrains psychoactive engagement, as previously discussed (Topology of Valuing: psychodynamics of collective engagement with polyhedral value configurations, 2008).

Design in the material world: In developing the relevance of Alexander's insights to the weaving of magic carpets, it is useful to recognize his commitment as an architect to design of material 'objects' and imbuing those 'objects' with meaning. In his exploration of this lifelong commitment he has given attention to the relevance of insights from mathematics and the complexity sciences. His study of the nature of order integrates the challenge of cognition and the 'subjective' relation of the observer to those objects. This might be described in terms of the cognitive entanglement discussed previously (Cognitive entanglement, 2010). However he clarifies his understanding of subjective as follows:

...union of system behavior with the subjective experience of the observer is fundamental to what I have to say of wholeness as something not merely present in an objective material system, but also present in the judgment, feeling, and experience of the observer. In short, cognitive/subjective experience is affirmed by objective reality. (New Concepts in Complexity Theory, 2003)

Seemingly missing from Alexander's approach is the implication of that remarkable synthesis for the design of collective strategy -- epitomized by the current situation in the region cultivating the culture within which many valuable carpets have originated. His understandable bias towards the built and natural environment assumes that its inhabitants can be appropriately conditioned by (re-designing) context -- a characteristic bias of those with an architectural bent. Quality for the collective is thereby elicited through the tangible constructed environment and its appropriate design. He seems to be completely reluctant to explore the relevance of his insights to the psychosocial realm, as though this did not have its own challenges of design. The unfortunate assumption is that it is through design of the material environment that the psychosocial environment can be appropriately 'conditioned' to experience quality. To an unfortunate degree Alexander might be said to be interested in the 'packaging' of humans rather than the content so beautifully 'packaged'. This might be caricatured as a design focus on 'clothing' in the sense of the adage dating back to classical Greece: clothes maketh the man.

Design of the psychosocial world: The question is the relevance of such design insights, notably his 'pattern language', for the quality of the intangible environment -- the realm of structural violence, cultural violence and possibly spiritual violence. Why are these insights, as he elaborates them, seemingly irrelevant to the design challenges of the Middle East, even though they are focused on 'geometric adaptation'? (And When the Bombing Stops? Territorial conflict as a challenge to mathematicians, 2000). This is especially curious given the origin of the powerful designs on which he focuses -- and of the insights from which they may well derive their power.

It was for this reason that an experiment was undertaken to adapt Alexanders classic set of patterns to psychosocial realms (5-fold Pattern Language, 1984). Such patterns are necessarily basic to any concern with the strategy of sustainability (Psychology of Sustainability: embodying cyclic environmental processes, 2002).

His explicit integration of a form of subjectivity, whilst much to be appreciated, seems to avoid the active role of cognition -- as explored from perspectives such as enactivism, through which reality is to a degree engendered (En-minding the Extended Body: Enactive engagement in conceptual shapeshifting and deep ecology, 2003; Walking Elven Pathways: enactivating the pattern that connects, 2006; Intercourse with Globality through Enacting a Klein bottle, 2009; Existential Embodiment of Externalities: radical cognitive engagement with environmental categories and disciplines, 2009).

Ironically, if they are as fundamental as Alexander claims, there is every probability that the 'geometry' and descriptors of his 15 transformations/properties correspond to cognitive processes/conditions of the kind recognized in many meditative practices, as explored previously (Navigating Alternative Conceptual Realities: clues to the dynamics of enacting new paradigms through movement, 2002), and especially with regard to any qualitative 'ascent' to 'beauty', as reviewed in the annexes of that paper:

Curiously, it is with q-analysis that mathematician Ron Atkin (Multidimensional Man; can man live in 3-dimensional space?, 1981; Combinatorial Connectivities in Social Systems, 1977) has perhaps best integrated comprehension and communication of increasing complexity into the geometric terms favoured by Alexander, offering a realistic sense of the (constraining) 'feel' of the geometry -- but without any reference to its beauty.

Main menu

Directions

You are here

Main menu

Search form

Directions

You are here

Psychosocial engagement in design