Why fundamentalism?

Why Fundamentalism? was an exhibition proposal and critical writing project developed from concept phase through to detailed proposal. It included an edited video document that lay out its core ideas and presented the diverse voices of each collaborator. A number of key themes were engaged around the hot-button (and much misunderstood) concept of Fundamentalism. The proposal included an exhibition layout, developed test imagery, ideas and animations, proposed forms for future works and a process whereby design briefs would lead to subsequent commissions. Two major grant applications were submitted to the Australia Council and Arts Queensland, with the support of State Library of Queensland, the University of Adelaide and numerous others. The project remains at the developed proposal stage awaiting suitable funding----- Critically the show became an active vehicle for drawing and exploring a line of distinction between ideas of ‘what is fundamental’ and ‘fundamentalism’ as it rested in the popular imagination, as well as in political and philosophical debates. It teased out and engaged with a number of key questions that included The Problem of Ungroundedness, A Politics of Finitude, The Post-modern/Pluralist Problem, Silent Fundamentalisms (Voices of Reason and Neo-con Religions), Fundamentalism as a Media Construct, The Pre and Post Cold-war Other, The Pressing Need for Foundations in the West and Islam as Foundationalism (rather than fundamentalism).

A large-scale computing infrastructure for design education

Most departmental computing infrastructure reflects the state of networking technology and available funds at the time of construction, which converge in a preconceived notion of homogeneity of network architecture and usage patterns. The DMAN (Digital Media Access Network) project, a large-scale server and network foundation for the Hong Kong Polytechnic University's School of Design was created as a platform that would support a highly complex academic environment while giving maximum freedom to students, faculty and researchers through simplicity and ease of use. As a centralized multi-user computation backbone, DMAN faces an extremely hetrogeneous user and application profile, exceeding implementation and maintenance challenges of typical enterprise, and even most academic server set-ups. This paper sumarizes the specification, implementation and application of the system while describing its significance for design education in a computational context.

A generative design system based on evolutionary and mathematical functions

Previous work by Professor John Frazer on Evolutionary Architecture provides a basis for the development of a system evolving architectural envelopes in a generic and abstract manner. Recent research by the authors has focused on the implementation of a virtual environment for the automatic generation and exploration of complex forms and architectural envelopes based on solid modelling techniques and the integration of evolutionary algorithms, enhanced computational and mathematical models. Abstract data types are introduced for genotypes in a genetic algorithm order to develop complex models using generative and evolutionary computing techniques. Multi-objective optimisation techniques are employed for defining the fitness function in the evaluation process.

An evolutionary framework for enhancing design

A computational framework for enhancing design in an evolutionary approach with a dynamic hierarchical structure is presented in this paper. This framework can be used as an evolutionary kernel for building computer-supported design systems. It provides computational components for generating, adapting and exploring alternative design solutions at multiple levels of abstraction with hierarchically structured design representations. In this paper, preliminary experimental results of using this framework in several design applications are presented.

Creative design and the generative evolutionary paradigm

Design as seen from the designer's perspective is a series of amazing imaginative jumps or creative leaps. But design as seen by the design historian is a smooth progression or evolution of ideas that they seem self-evident and inevitable after the event. But the next step is anything but obvious for the artist/creator/inventor/designer stuck at that point just before the creative leap. They know where they have come from and have a general sense of where they are going, but often do not have a precise target or goal. This is why it is misleading to talk of design as a problem-solving activity - it is better defined as a problem-finding activity. This has been very frustrating for those trying to assist the design process with computer-based, problem-solving techniques. By the time the problem has been defined, it has been solved. Indeed the solution is often the very definition of the problem. Design must be creative-or it is mere imitation. But since this crucial creative leap seem inevitable after the event, the question must arise, can we find some way of searching the space ahead? Of course there are serious problems of knowing what we are looking for and the vastness of the search space. It may be better to discard altogether the term "searching" in the context of the design process: Conceptual analogies such as search, search spaces and fitness landscapes aim to elucidate the design process. However, the vastness of the multidimensional spaces involved make these analogies misguided and they thereby actually result in further confounding the issue. The term search becomes a misnomer since it has connotations that imply that it is possible to find what you are looking for. In such vast spaces the term search must be discarded. Thus, any attempt at searching for the highest peak in the fitness landscape as an optimal solution is also meaningless. Futhermore, even the very existence of a fitness landscape is fallacious. Although alternatives in the same region of the vast space can be compared to one another, distant alternatives will stem from radically different roots and will therefore not be comparable in any straightforward manner (Janssen 2000). Nevertheless we still have this tantalizing possibility that if a creative idea seems inevitable after the event, then somehow might the process be rserved? This may be as improbable as attempting to reverse time. A more helpful analogy is from nature, where it is generally assumed that the process of evolution is not long-term goal directed or teleological. Dennett points out a common minsunderstanding of Darwinism: the idea that evolution by natural selection is a procedure for producing human beings. Evolution can have produced humankind by an algorithmic process, without its being true that evolution is an algorithm for producing us. If we were to wind the tape of life back and run this algorithm again, the likelihood of "us" being created again is infinitesimally small (Gould 1989; Dennett 1995). But nevertheless Mother Nature has proved a remarkably successful, resourceful, and imaginative inventor generating a constant flow of incredible new design ideas to fire our imagination. Hence the current interest in the potential of the evolutionary paradigm in design. These evolutionary methods are frequently based on techniques such as the application of evolutionary algorithms that are usually thought of as search algorithms. It is necessary to abandon such connections with searching and see the evolutionary algorithm as a direct analogy with the evolutionary processes of nature. The process of natural selection can generate a wealth of alternative experiements, and the better ones survive. There is no one solution, there is no optimal solution, but there is continuous experiment. Nature is profligate with her prototyping and ruthless in her elimination of less successful experiments. Most importantly, nature has all the time in the world. As designers we cannot afford prototyping and ruthless experiment, nor can we operate on the time scale of the natural design process. Instead we can use the computer to compress space and time and to perform virtual prototyping and evaluation before committing ourselves to actual prototypes. This is the hypothesis underlying the evolutionary paradigm in design (1992, 1995).

The way forward : report on the preparatory phase of prefabricated building design and construction methodology: identifying critical issues and recommending the way forward

This is an initial report of the PolyU SD part of the team to study Pre-fabricated Building Design and Construction Methodology and marks the completion of Phase 1. It follows our first notes prepared for the meeting on 2 February that identified some critical issues including future lifestyles, life expectancy of buildings, sustainability, size, flexibility and planning considerations. It is also an expansion of our presentation in Dongguan on 23 February. It is not a comprehensive survey of existing approaches or possible ways forward, but it has homed in on certain specific issues and does give specific examples to make the suggestions concrete. It is recommended that more comprehensive research be done to establish previous work and experience internationally. It is also recommended that more research be done on lifestyles as a preliminary to developing at least three concepts for evaluation before proceeding to the detailed design of one concept for full prototyping and market testing. The goal at this point is not to define a single direction but to suggest several future trajectories for further consideration. By the same token, this report is not intended as an exhaustive description of the considerable base of knowledge and ideas brought by the PolyU team to this exciting task. Before taking on an issue of this magnitude and importance in the definition of Hong Kong's future, one must carry out a thoughtful analysis of the issues at hand and an informed definition of paradigms, directions, goals and methods whereby our energies can be best used in the next steps. This report is the result of this analysis

Making sense of an everyday science text : linguistic, visual and spatial design

In this article, we take a close look at the literacy demands of one task from the ‘Marvellous Micro-organisms Stage 3 Life and Living’ Primary Connections unit (Australian Academy of Science, 2005). One lesson from the unit, ‘Exploring Bread’, (pp 4-8) asks students to ‘use bread labels to locate ingredient information and synthesise understanding of bread ingredients’. We draw upon a framework offered by the New London Group (2000), that of linguistic, visual and spatial design, to consider in more detail three bread wrappers and from there the complex literacies that students need to interrelate to undertake the required task. Our findings are that although bread wrappers are an example of an everyday science text, their linguistic, visual and spatial designs and their interrelationship are not trivial. We conclude by reinforcing the need for teachers of science to also consider how the complex design elements of everyday science texts and their interrelated literacies are made visible through instructional practice.