What do i mean by Higher and Lower Order Designs? Imagine if every higher order design were a functioning machine with enough variables to simulate infinite many outcomes. I call these outcomes, secondary designs or “Lower Order Designs”.
Imagine a skate park that never looked the same every-time you visited. How could this be possible? Well, start thinking about how you could achieve this in an automated way and then you are thinking of “Higher Order Designs” or what i call Meta-Designs.
To continue with this example, you would ideally make every secondary configuration unpredictable in its design, but predictably sound in certain required metrics and qualitative standards. The benefit is enormous, but the trade off is that you must make sure that these higher order configurations work intuitively at the lower level no matter what they produce. This is HARD, but WORTH IT.
Ultimately what this means in a capitalist environment is that people are competing to produce higher order designs that produce more intuitive results in the secondary level (i.e. a better user interface and experience). This involves different niche training in different industries, and a lot of of functional proofs of the design itself that literally prove usefulness. General proofs for higher abstract primitive levels of design, and more specific proofs for industry.
Thus a primitive language for design would look similar to and perhaps function like Euclidian Geometry with applied physics in the mix.
That means developing a shared formal language of design as if it were some sort of logical reality. Then representing these intuitive inputs in such a way that you can create balanced equations that provably represent a quality output or a provably infinite set of outputs with varying degrees of quality.
In reality, set-theorists would like to also help out to prove thresholds within a set of outcomes which is what industry would require to be realistic and give the appearance of infinite possibilities.
Each industry designs in different creative spaces with different limitations different rules of engagement, different expectations of quality, different safety requirements, etc. Thus there is no one size fits all model to represent the design goals of each industries lower-order designs.
A skatepark needs to be skate-able not just intuitive in its look and feel. Clothing that changes? What does that mean? Watch Back to The Future for a hint. Do you see what i mean? Too many possibilities and not enough time to capture them all. A new economy based on a new limitless design paradigm that requires entirely new sets of principles, manufacturing processes, abstract theories, and new business models to accommodate investment and present opportunity.
Who is going to do all of this? Let’s just say, this is a vision and will not be possible for one person or one team to embrace its full potential. An entire economy is needed to explore this curiosity and the end of it is not entirely visible.