Coding for Complexity

I’ve always had a soft spot for the work of Adam Curtis. His latest series, Can’t Get You Out of My Head, has caused me to think more deeply about a recent project; producing a National Model Design Code for the UK with MHCLG. In typical Curtis style the series seeks to tackle an ambitious grab-bag of themes, but what struck me was a section on the simplification of data required for humans to understand the complexity of the world.

 

Simplification of complexity for the purpose of understanding is the essence of what the National Model Design Code is seeking to do. Questions have been asked both about the validity of such an aim, and the ability of a codified process to create intangible outcomes like “beauty”. 

 

Embracing Complexity

 

In around 300 BC Aristotle tried to define what it means to be virtuous. “Virtue” stands on the podium with “Beauty” in the Indefinable Concept Olympics and Aristotle understandably struggled. He said virtue means behaving in the “right manner” in every situation, and that making a habit of doing so would eventually make you virtuous.

 

Errr, great Aristotle, but what does behaving in the “right manner” look like?  

 

Apparently, it means choosing the “golden mean” between two extremes – e.g. courage is the sweet spot between cowardice and recklessness. The trouble is, that middle way changes depending on your abilities as an individual and the situation you’re experiencing. 

 

Thanks for nothing Aristotle. 

 

Aristotle’s, let’s be honest, pretty vague approach to the task of defining something suggests that we once had a degree of comfort with the idea of complexity.

At the same time the I Ching, an ancient divination book was being used throughout Chinese society for “moral self-cultivation” which sounds a lot like the pursuit of virtue. The practice involves the study and interpretation of generated hexagrams (figures composed of six stacked horizontal lines). These can be consulted to aid decision making, but more than that, by engaging in the practice, an individual can understand the deeper patterns of the universe and build good character. This is not a book of “right answers” it’s a tool for reflection. 

 

In both instances, it seems accepted that the best outcomes arise from individual pursuit, the results of which will vary from person to person. It is also accepted that this will take time.

 

Codifying for Simplicity

 

After a while humanity seemed to get tired of that approach. We decided we didn’t have time for everyone to go bumbling along their own path. It created messy inconsistency. We wanted simplicity and conformity; predictable, consistent results -FAST!

 

In the 1600’s Gottfried Leibniz’ interest in the I Ching led him far away from slow, nuanced reflection. A scholar named Shao Yong had rearranged the hexagons of the I Ching into a format similar to modern day binary numbers. This convinced Leibniz of the validity of the binary system he had been developing. It inspired him to refine it, developing a bedrock of computation that is still used today. Two values, two possible states: 1 or 0; “yes” or “no”, “on or off”. Eeeeek. 

Then in the 1800’s George Boole took poor old Aristotle’s musings on virtue and turned them into a mathematical formula. He assigned symbols to the various components ( v = virtue, h = habits etc) and, using his own algebraic rules, was able to quickly draw the same conclusions that Aristotle had to ponder over. 

 

In hindsight maybe we were never ok with complexity. It turns out this desire to simplify is an inherent part of human nature and a core component of how our brains work. Daniel Kahneman’s work shows that in order to deal with the amount of chaotic data human brains are bombarded with, our understanding of the world has to be broken down into a set of tiny, unrepresentative observations. 

 

In the complex world of the built environment this natural tendency towards simplification is….a bit of a problem. The places we live and work are complex, there’s no getting around it. So that’s a lot of data potentially being missed and a lot of incorrect conclusions potentially being drawn. In a recent article, Thea Snow also highlights the important fact that the tendency to simplify complex systems can be a powerful tool of control. 

 

Shared Language

 

A slow progression towards bespoke outcomes makes it difficult to communicate a collective idea or build on what’s gone before. Simplification allows quick sharing and development but is reductive and oppressive.  Something must sit between “everything in the whole universe all at once” and a complex system reduced to 1’s and 0’s.

Christopher Alexander writes that this “something” is a shared language. A set of simple, fixed components that are easy to learn and understand, and can be configured into a multitude of complex forms. Within a framework of common language he says, you can “generate a town that is whole and unpredictable without control”. In A Pattern Language he says that:

 

“The people can shape buildings for themselves and have done it for centuries, by using languages which I call pattern languages. A pattern language gives each person who uses it the power to create an infinite variety of new and unique buildings, just as his ordinary language gives him the power to create an infinite variety of sentences.”

 

The National Model Design Code and Guidance Notes are attempting to create a shared language for writing good design codes. Using that shared language, it is hoped that a huge diversity of people can create design codes for an infinite number of scales and contexts. 

Maybe you are a community group wanting to create a code for a mid-density neighborhood focused on the needs of children. Maybe you’re a Local Authority wanting to set some ground rules for infill development in a conservation area. Maybe you’re a master developer keen to define key parameters to guide the development of a multiphase project designed by different architects. 

This shared language should enable you to prepare a code that does just that. The hope is that this will bring greater certainty for everyone involved in the process of making new places.

Hopefully you enjoyed going to down that particular rabbit hole with me and didn’t mind the slightly lofty characterisation of one of our recent projects at the end there!

 

The consultation on the National Model Design Code runs until the 27^th March 2021 and the Government is inviting expressions of interest from Local Planning Authorities in England to test the National Model Design Code until 22^ndFebruary.