forbes.com
More-Than-Human Design: From Horse Sandals to Inter-species Collaboration
The Design Museum's "More Than Human" exhibition explores design's role in addressing the consequences of industrialization, showcasing projects ranging from ancient horse sandals to contemporary, interspecies collaborations, such as Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg's Pollinator Pathmaker software, which designs gardens optimized for insect perception.
- What are the key elements of a truly more-than-human design process, and how might such processes be designed and implemented in the future?
- More-than-human design necessitates a fundamental change in the design process itself, involving non-human stakeholders directly. Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg's Pollinator Pathmaker exemplifies this, integrating insect visual perception into garden design software, creating a symbiotic design process.
- How do projects like Studio Ossidiana's City of Birds and Ant Farm's Embassy to the Dolphins highlight the challenges and potential of more-than-human design?
- The exhibition reveals a shift in design philosophy, moving from simply fixing human-created problems to considering non-human perspectives. While some projects, like coral reef scaffolds, offer practical solutions, others, like Studio Ossidiana's City of Birds, satirize anthropocentric approaches.
- What are the primary implications of the shift in design philosophy showcased in the "More Than Human" exhibition, from solely addressing human-made problems to incorporating non-human perspectives?
- The Design Museum's exhibition, "More Than Human," showcases design projects addressing non-human needs, from centuries-old horse sandals to modern coral reef scaffolds. These projects highlight the growing awareness of humanity's impact on the environment and the need for interspecies collaboration in design.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames more-than-human design as a necessary and positive evolution of design practice. While acknowledging potential limitations, the overall tone is optimistic and promotes the adoption of this approach. This framing might overshadow potential challenges or negative consequences.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral and objective, although terms like "backhanded generosity" and "forced compliance" suggest a slightly critical stance toward human actions. However, this is balanced by a focus on the potential for positive change.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on design interventions for non-human species, but omits discussion of the ethical implications of human intervention in natural systems. It mentions the potential negative consequences of some designs, but doesn't delve into the broader ethical debate surrounding human manipulation of the natural world. There is also no mention of alternative solutions that do not involve human intervention.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy between human-centric design and more-than-human design. While it highlights the limitations of anthropocentric approaches, it doesn't fully explore the potential for integrating human needs with environmental sustainability. The portrayal of human efforts as either purely helpful or purely harmful oversimplifies a complex issue.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses design projects aimed at improving the habitats and lives of non-human species, such as creating artificial coral reefs and bird skyscrapers. These initiatives directly contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem restoration, aligning with SDG 15 targets. The projects also highlight the need to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change and habitat destruction, which are also crucial aspects of SDG 15.