# More Than Human World

“The Earth is what we all have in common.”

—Wendell Berry

Someone rightly said that the earth is what we have in common and when it comes to designing with a human centric approach we mustn’t think that the humans are the pinnacle in this Eco-system, as Earth also existed when humans weren’t there with much more simplicity and self sustaining properties. So, Continuing to design and implement with a stable future can only be possible by engaging the whole eco-systems or in simpler words co-creating and with the nature for a viable co-existence.

I had a brief idea about what anthropocene actually means, but these articles made a much more clearer vision about the geological time we living in, the time when earth has been altered to serve the human mankind, and being inconsiderate about the non-human world. We as practicing designers or the professionals needs to acknowledge the fact the centricity just shouldn’t revolve around the humans but also the non-humans as well thereby creating a safer spaces for them to thrive in Co-existence.

A very good example that I would like to cite from the article itself is the adding calcite minerals which are a necessity for the birds to the windows. The concept could help avoid the millions of bird deaths occurring due to windows of the high-rise in the cities. So, that window which is serving the purpose for the buildings but also warning the birds of the incoming obstacle is one great way to ensure the purpose and safety of the human and the non human species.

It was interesting to note that when we google “design for animals” we will be shown the  results of the products that are designed to keep those animals in structures provided by the humans with an intention to mimic their living standards. One example could be the food given to the pet dogs such as pedigrees for dogs will have a royal variety and the basic ones will be just for the sake of giving. 

One question that arises is devising for humans is easy as we can communicate with them but what about the non Human species, where the communication is not so easy? How can we know what these non-human species need? 

Its true that idea of Post-human enjoys widespread currency in the era also known as the anthropocene, which pushes us to think about the influence of human’s opinions and cultures on this planet also the ethical relations, norms and the values that deserves to the complexity of our time we living in. Post-human deals with the extended focus towards from the humans to the non-humans as well be it animals, nature etc., and has challenged the assumption that the humans are the exclusive domain of the actions they involve in and the community they evolve through and yes of course, the influence on the non-humans within the eco-system.

R. Bradiotti talks about cartographies in his article which literally means the science behind making maps. One of an interesting aspects he suggested  to look at post-humans  was, both methodologically and politically a post-human approach requires careful cartographies of different degrees and the extent to which any one of us can be said to be human. We might need to introduce more grounded and complex cartographies of the post human conditions so as to strike a balance between the intense state of excitement and the negative opinions about the technologies in the future, that we assume to be humans, This sounds to be more like humans are not HUMANS any more but there actions, assumptions and subjectivity revolving around the so-called social animals to be as humans and mapping these complex interconnectedness could actually lead towards bringing out a balance between there cultural thoughts & opinions and there mindful state. 

He also says that what all we need is a careful negotiation in order to constitute new assemblages or union between humans and non-humans while accounting to the fact of technological meditation which actually means to analyse the roles technologies play in human existence and the society around. Rather approaching technologies as material objects opposed to human subjects, or as mere extensions of human beings, it sees them as mediators of the relation between the humans and the worlds around.

 I liked the way, how he highlights “humanity to be recreated as a negative category, had together by shared vulnerability and the spectre of extinction, but also struck down by environmental devastation in various forms”, the one such as the pandemic, the whole world witnessed. 

The author talks about the post-human ethics which is looking into ways to enact sustainable transitions of the current working systems in this era of human dominated world, with many human and non-humans that could enhance one’s ability to regenerate, renew and expand the boundaries of what these transversal and non-unitary subjects could become. Post-human ethics also expresses accountability, based on collectivity and relationality or interconnectedness between the people, which results in a reviving the claim to community and belonging by the  singular subjects as highlighted by the author.

The author concludes that the post-human is just the question, the answer is what ‘we’ are capable of becoming and this answer can only be a practical and pragmatic one. We not as an individual but including and becoming a multitude of the missing people as well, a world of ‘we’ together amidst the painful contradictions of the anthropocene moment we have entered, when the planet is in the state of a feedback loop of erasing the face of a species that will have been our own.

If we talk about design people would say, its a form of art to make a better and easier for the humans, But is that all? As said in the article design is a conscious effort to impose meaningful order be it designing an app or arranging the drawers in the desks. When it comes to design and an order, the intent plays a driving force towards building those designs as stated as an example in the article, if we arrange a pile of coins randomly, its just simply there but if we arrange based upon the size or value, that order would hold some intent thereby producing some symmetrical alignment. And further shifting of the same would lead to more number of asymmetrical arrangements with higher level of some experience and participation that would be understood and appreciated by the user.

I believe that the design as a problem solving activity, can never yield one right answer, it has always lead to producing an infinite number of answers not sure if it has to be classified as right or wrong? ‘The Brightness' of any design solution will depend on the meaning with which we invest the arrangement.’ That is where I think defining the intent becomes important so as to see how closely the solution works hand in hand with the problem. 

Todays world is witnessing a drastic change in terms of products getting outdated especially when talking about technology. The idea revolves around incorporating enough technical changes to make it really superior to last year’s offering. But the economic pattern if were to be sensed is of purchasing-owning than a dynamic one of leasing-using. The author highlights an interesting fact about this trend that ff a television set, for instance, is to be an every-year affair, rather than a once-in-a- lifetime purchase, the price must reflect it. Instead, the real values of real things have been driven out by false values of false things, a sort of Gresham's Law of Design.

 ‘Human beings are enclosed by an iron triangle that forms for their race a veritable prison cell. One side of this triangle is the medium in which they must live; the second is the equipment they have, or can fashion, with which to live; the third is the fact of their mortality. All effort, all being, is directed upon the elimination of the sides of this enclosure. If there is purpose to life, that purpose must be to break through the triangle that thus imprisons humanity into a new order of existence where such a triad of limitations no longer obtains.’ I would agree with this point that the author makes about human beings being enclosed in a triangle and the only way the new order of existence would exist is by breaking those edges. But the author says the iron triangle, why an iron to describe an enclosure that the humans are living in? Is it because it has become so rigid or strong that it is not easy to break?

The designer must be conscious about the social and moral responsibility and accountable of its decisions and solutions as design, is one of the most powerful tool yet given a man to shape the world and the products. We should analyse the past as well as the speculating the future consequences while using these tool.

It is the prime function of the designer to solve problems. Frequently a designer will 'discover’ the existence of a problem that no one had suspected before or even they had, they might have just touched the surface. First defining that problem and then attempt to solve it can be interpreted as a definition of the creative process. Without doubt the number of problems that exist as well as their complexity have increased to such an extent over the period of time especially in the anthropocentric stage that new and better solutions are needed to solve the same.

The article had many interesting snippet articles which either talked about the innovations using the material and the concept of design governing the same right starting from understanding what is design to design for survival. I was familiar with some of the aspects of design and some of them were really new to me such as Creativity v. Conformity which were interesting to read and ponder upon, I might have to read them once again to actually map out the commons in all the examples that they shared but otherwise it was an interesting read and would love to read it again.

Design is not just about aesthetics but also about informed discussions that every designer witnesses and had to take depending upon what the demand is then? Not just for the humans but also extending  towards and understanding what does the environment want and devise effective solutions for their co-existence and the survival of the humans. The design is bound to change over the time, but foreseeing the future in advance can also leave a pattern of change developing, with the nature, for the future generations to feel, witness and take over from the nature they will be living with then.