The future, as an inherently transcendent concept has always intrigued us limit-bound humans. We are consumed with thoughts of prediction as a means of prevention and precaution. This is not folly, though. These are remnants of evolutionary pressures. After all, the survival of the fittest is the survival of the most well equipped — or the most prepared. But what is the future? And how can one predict it?
Innovation is not a continuous notion. Novelty is a concept predicated upon immediacy, which, by definition, does not last. Hence, originality fades — it becomes comfort, and paradigm shifts simply become new paradigms. We perceive this empirically, but these lag periods may be a systemic property, anchored in natural law.
Thermodynamics is a branch of physics which deals with the dissipative energy and work of a system. The study of thermal systems involves the study of incredibly large numbers of particles, which allows for a statistical treatment. As such, their behavior is determined by the four laws of thermodynamics and those of probability. Briefly, these thermodynamic laws specify that energy can be exchanged between physical systems as heat and work and note the existence of a quantity called entropy. Entropy is an important quantity that, essentially, defines chaos. One cannot reverse an entropic process without an energetic cost. Thus, and given that the total energy of the Universe remains constant, its entropy can only increase. Complemented by Claude Shannon’s Information Theory approach, chaos can also be defined as uncertainty. Furthermore, a physical system is defined when a boundary between itself and the surrounding environment exists. A thermal system is then classified as closed, as the result of exclusively energetic transactions. Or, as Shannon would put it, information.
One could thusly view academia as a set of functionally different subsystems (i.e., fields of knowledge), which can communicate between themselves via the same act of information exchange. In fact, a name has already been given to this process — interdisciplinarity. As with any given divided system, the exchange of information between its parts is a way for each to expand upon their original functions, allowing for new possibilities. Furthermore, because these are closed systems, their surroundings cannot cause any permanent structural or statal change. Just like the afore mentioned thermal systems, the environment can only cause disturbances, but the system will always restore itself in the direction of least entropic cost, or equilibrium. In other words, the system will evolve in the direction of least effort.
This tendency for complacency is thus a result of the laws of nature. The question then becomes: how can one rise above the established epistemological bounds in the pursuit of actually new knowledge?
The answer, much like the problem, lies within nature. It is entropy. A stable system can only be disturbed as a result of the incorporation of foreign variables, thereby creating a state of disarray within it. Only in such an environment can the new be fostered. This is true for every aspect of academia. With respect to the discipline of Design, Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby propose it as a tool to create not only things but ideas. For them, “one of the most interesting uses for conceptual design is as a form of critique” (Dunne & Raby, 2013). To critique is to ask, and to ask is to disturb. Considering all of this, I really believe Design is an essential aspect of building that which follows; of ideating, and of innovating. Design is conception. It is the process of creating novelty, and of proposing futures. To design is to teeter on the edge between the known and the new, and critique is the chaos which breeds it.
Estudos Contemporâneos em Design 