I think it’s a good idea for all of us involved in this initiative to share our perspectives and motivations about it. I hope it would spark a wider and critical discussion on the many issues and concerns underlying this idea.
First, as a citizen of the developing world, I have been at the receiving end of ‘design solutions’ that have been conceived in (and often for) other socio-cultural-political contexts. Don’t get me wrong, much of it could be attributed to the development perspectives and policies of my own country. However, to me, that only emphasizes the various forms and formats in which colonialism persists and propagates itself: I like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy definition of the term — “Colonialism is a practice of domination, which involves the subjugation of one people to another.” (full text at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/colonialism) And it is this essential process that I object to.
Second, as a designer and educator, I have witnessed (and been involved in) the deluge of ‘ethnographic design’ initiatives (mostly sponsored by large multinationals) that aspire to developing design solutions that cater to the ‘bottom of the pyramid’ market segments. I have an issue with the basic assumption here that a set of cultural and contextual probes (not all of them methodologically robust) are considered adequate to be fed to a remote (in more than the geographical sense) design team, to develop appropriate solutions. Even more than the methodology, it is the politics that I find worrying. In my view, design worldwide (including in India, I may add) is remarkable for its rather naïve and outdated politics — and certainly does not seem to have engaged with developments in social, cultural and economic theory of the last two or three decades (for all the talk about interdisciplinarity). Hence, my instant attraction for the ‘reversal’ proposed here — even if it is taken merely as a spoof.
Third, as one who believes in the potential of design as a discipline to enhance our quality of life (yes, I still do!), I support any idea or initiative that I consider would inform, enrich and expand the discipline towards incorporating greater complexity, criticality and sophistication in its practice. I believe this initiative affords such a promise, even if in a limited or partial sense. I’ve talked elsewhere about un-yoking the discipline from its identification with and submergence within business and industry in this context.
Finally, I would like most of all to see this initiative feed into and evolve into the broader discussion on the future of humanity (and the planet that we live on), that includes diverse voices and views, thereby throwing up many more visions and models for the future than the handful (even that is stretching it) that we seem to have currently.
Share the love
Dx1W elsewhere
Dx1W on Twitter
adeanitz: Concurso: "Diseñá para el primer mundo": Reenvío información de interés: http://t.co/sucgLLBkaD ¡La dif... http://t.co/7QKuRqZflw
2 months agoRestartProject: Design for the First World (@dx1w) is cheeky and serious - "up here" we should learn from people "down there" http://t.co/0ZpqEFOZ
4 months agoRestartProject: Meeting with three of our favourite people this afternoon - @phat_controller @nwin @carolinavallejo (of Design for the First World @dx1w)
4 months agoLogin
Join our mailing list









3 Comments
1 xieyuting wrote:
We are a group of students from China, and have great interest in this project. I would like to know if there is a limit on the number of group members?
2 carolina wrote:
Hi! Yes, you can work in teams as large as you want, as long as you feel comfortable with many people in a team :) !
3 iohana wrote:
Subject: Proposition of Model
Salutation.
My name is Ioana-Noemy Toma. I am a translator, and the president of the eco-civic association “Pro vita universale”, from Roman, Romania.
In this letter, i submit to your attention the proposition of a new model of society, which could solve better the developmental, social and environmental problems.
The history of the terrestrial life and of the humankind shows that life, with all the realizations, is unique, irrepeatable, complex and valoric, priceless. The living beings always tried to improve their personal and social lives. The humans, with a superior capacity of knowledge and exploration, understood more of the world they live in. Philosophers, scientists, politicians, artists, from the antiquity to the present, were interested by a rational “common good”. Today, thanks to the progress of the science, the conservation and the amelioration of the life is more feasible. Good examples of the human genius are the ecological administration of the Lord Howe Island, the voluntary work in NGO’s like Mercy Corps, or free quality products, like Linux’s.
I propose to the scientific and civic community a model of a rational human society (logocracy), based on the teachings of this history, which should be adopted in order to ethicize the human existence on Earth.
The rational human society will be founded on the rationality, understood as the superior capacity of humans to act beneficially, with the respect of the general moral principles : peace, justice, liberty, responsibility and help, for the protection and the amelioration of the life on the Earth and in the Universe, by education, balance, perfectioning, conservation, progress, coöperation and healthy rest. This first value, which implies along with the reason the moderation and the compassion, is needed in order to preserve the patrimony of human and universal values, and to realize beneficial activities in science, economics and culture. The existence of the other forms of life (minerals, plants, other animals) will be respected, avoiding their destruction and ensuring their continuity as much as possible.
In the rational society, it will be ensured for all the citizens, decently : a house and a garden at the level of family or social group, legal and chargeless (free) education, the free access to beneficial and rationalized (non-excessive for the health and the environment) activities, in useful domains, to be realized voluntarily, according to the individual capacities and the social needs, the scientific, objective, non-monetary, computer-aided evaluation, conservation and distribution of the natural and artificial resources, to natural and legal persons, according to normal needs, in moderated limits, and the support in case of sickness, disability or death. Money and other damaging artifacts, by the inutility, the waste, the falsification and the corruption they imply, will be banned. The products will be stored and distributed scientifically and chargelessly.
The natural and legal persons will act in an independent and coöperative régime. Everyone will have the obligation to preserve the rationality of his/her activities, in conditions of health and efficiency.
Humans will no more be considered as resources, but as intelligent managerial actors (i.e. persons who act) on the Earth and in the Universe. The human activity will be correctly evaluated, by a wise list of qualitative (non-numeric) and numeric indicators.
The scientific knowledge will respect the important criteria of truthfulness and beneficence of the affirmations, because the falseness is a fraud, and a source of errors, and because the maleficence endangers the life. As there are constant and evolving or improvable truths, respectively goods, the scientists will state the degree of reserve they give to the truthfulness, respectively beneficence, of their works.
The cultural, religious and occult societies will be normalized, in the sense of the rational interpretation of their patrimony, recognizing the falseness of their myths, proven by the scientific means, and of the realization of beneficial activities, with the respect of the rationality, the reality and the science.
The immoral, useless, wasteful of capacities and resources, toxic, destructive, will be recognized as dangerous for the humans and the environment, and will be forbidden. All the persons implicated in such activities will be reeducated, counseled and supported to realize beneficial activities.
In the rational society, everyone will have the possibility to thrive, and to contribute to the well-being of the society, and of the surrounding nature. This model is not fictitious, it is realistic and necessary, and it can be realized by good, science-based laws.
Please, send me your observations concerning this model. You would participate to the project of its scientific and civic development ? And you could recommend me other possible collaborators ?
I am looking forward to your response.
Wishes of well.
Ioana-Noemy Toma
One Trackback