Good stuff. I love Christopher Alexander, but he is not always the best explainer of his own ideas. Now I can link people here, to help them get the gist of this important idea. Very useful! Thank you.
Thanks for this article. It’s important to keep these ideas moving forward.
The thing I’m struggling with is how to apply Alexander’s ideas to a temporal process, such as a workflow. Applying Alexander’s eleven step process, for me, seems to shift the focus to my working plan *document* rather than to the process itself. His actual temporal process for making seems to be more in line with design thinking, ie. Empathize (see the wholeness) —> ideate —> test —> build.
I find kaizen to be a philosophy compatible with Alexander’s theories, but I think kaizen lacks the component of “vision.” I also find a lot of heuristics such as “two minute rule” or “a place for everything and everything in its place” have potential for a Pattern Language of temporal processes, but that’s about as far as I’ve gotten.
Good stuff. I love Christopher Alexander, but he is not always the best explainer of his own ideas. Now I can link people here, to help them get the gist of this important idea. Very useful! Thank you.
Thanks for this article. It’s important to keep these ideas moving forward.
The thing I’m struggling with is how to apply Alexander’s ideas to a temporal process, such as a workflow. Applying Alexander’s eleven step process, for me, seems to shift the focus to my working plan *document* rather than to the process itself. His actual temporal process for making seems to be more in line with design thinking, ie. Empathize (see the wholeness) —> ideate —> test —> build.
I find kaizen to be a philosophy compatible with Alexander’s theories, but I think kaizen lacks the component of “vision.” I also find a lot of heuristics such as “two minute rule” or “a place for everything and everything in its place” have potential for a Pattern Language of temporal processes, but that’s about as far as I’ve gotten.