biomimicry and the strategy of mischief

==
“Life runs on sunlight. Life rewards cooperation. Life builds from the bottom up. Life banks on diversity. Life recycles everything. Life builds resilience through diversity, decentralization, and redundancy. Life optimizes rather than maximizes. Life selects for the good of the whole system. In short, life creates the conditions conducive to life.”
biologist Janine Benyus

==

Strategy of mischief: a mischievous concept, derived from a Rob Estreitinho’s ‘school of mischief’ thought, i.e., you know all the fundamentals, but are mischievous in using them.

==

Generally speaking mimicry is a strategy of mischief. What I mean by that are those who mimic typically have mischief in mind. They seek to mimic in order to better their own situation, not the situation at large. That said. Mimicry tends to be thought of as “jumping onboard existing movement.” I say that because we all know creating your own movement takes more energy than using existing movement. So mimicking is a strategy of efficacy. Well. A mischievous strategy of efficacy.

Which leads me to mimicry and movement.

Despite the feeling many things seem ‘stuck’ all around us, we are in a constant state of transformation. It is the normal byproduct of nonstop information flow which used to be considered revolutionary, but is simply ubiquitous to constant learning and new information. Simplistically, information changes the conditions of what is: how we see things, how we think about things, how we do things. Boundaries exist; and yet they don’t. Boundaries, in life, are, well, mischievous and because they are mischievous, they are in constant conflict between stasis and change. What it means is nothing has meaning in and of itself – alone -, but rather finds its meaning through the sometimes abrasive changing things rubbing against it. Unfortunately for many of us, this means simplistic labels or heuristics (which we like) don’t offer us truth.

Which leads me to say reality is often created through the encounter with a world that is making and shaping us.

This creates some anxiety because the action and the reaction occurs almost at the same time. In fact, it’s what McLuhan called the “age of anxiety” where you are compelled to commit and participate. I almost call it the age of demanded participation. This is different than in the past where many actions could be taken without too much concern for instant feedback and instant response. But we continue to think in the old fragmented space and time patterns. We just simply must become better at exploring and revealing the patterns of current happenings instead of seeing isolated events and expanding them beyond their true effect. Since it is no longer safe to wait for the harsh judgment of the results of our thinking or even the events it’s almost like we need to become better at discovering how to anticipate effects with the viewed causes in order to avoid simply assuming that something is inevitable or that some particular fate is destined based on myth or what I mean by that is past thinking.

Which leads me to mischievous thinking and grand strategies.

Anticipating effects and grand strategies are tools to battle against mischievous boundaries which seem to change upon a whim. A grand strategy’s purpose is to create long lasting advantages; Despite the fact in their creation they will inevitably create unforeseen second order consequences. Never confuse (or discredit) a larger concept or idea simply because the strategic thinking leading up to it is a bad one. That said. Refusing to do a ‘grand strategy’ does not permit one to escape the dilemmas a mischievous world constantly puts in front of you. In fact, it will only exacerbate uncertainty, confusion, and contradictions. The truth is the more formidable the conditions, the higher the value in an intellectually driven, future looking strategy. This means a new mischief is at hand. What I mean by that is grand strategies have layers to navigate time and space. As Stuart Brand (Pace Layering) states:

“Fast learns, slow remembers. Fast proposes, slow disposes. Fast is discontinuous, slow is continuous. Fast and small instructs slow and big by accrued innovation and by occasional revolution. Slow and big controls small and fast by constraint and constancy. Fast gets our attention, slow has the power.”

Yeah. Strategies have shape and yet are malleable. In addition, they will accommodate fast and slow, but will tend to lose effectiveness at one continuous speed. Yeah. Even strategies have to be a bit mischievous.

Which leads me to biomimicry.

Simplistically, for most challenges we face, nature offers some interesting insights to solutions and strategies. This means if we rummage around the patterns of how nature and species survive and thrive, we can usually identify ways to do things. Biomimetics or biomimicry is the emulation of the models, systems, and elements of nature for the purpose of solving complex human problems (Wikipedia). Biomimicry is defined in the book as a “new science that studies nature’s models and then imitates or takes inspiration from these designs and processes to solve human problems” (Janine Benyus). Biomimicry offers an empathetic, interconnected understanding of how life works and ultimately where we fit in. It is a practice that learns from and mimics the strategies used by biology to adapt and survive and the goal is to create products, processes, and systems, new ways of doing things, that solve the future through more thoughtful design. We can use biomimicry to not only learn from nature, but also to solve some important planet issues in the process. Well, it’s a strategy of mischief, or, well, a mischievous way to deal with a mischievous world.

Which leads me to a strategy of mischief.

The objective is to construct a strategy that accommodates a layered system with a strong but flexible structure built to absorb and incorporate disruptive aspects of the external world. The system is a bit malleable but aspects move so slowly that they almost appear unchanging. Remember. Fast learns, slow remembers. Fast proposes, slow disposes. The issue, with most things, is we ‘go small’ ignoring the layered aspect of systems. It’s almost like we believe if we manage things at the molecular level the structures will emerge from there ignoring the fact that not all molecules are compatible. Its like the world has embraced nanotechnology (without really understanding nanotechnology). It fools us into believing we are playing with atoms. What I mean by that is nanotechnology is engineering done at the molecular scale and represents the ability to deliberately shape new structures atom by atom which feeds into the business ideology of manipulating and controlling things at the smallest scale. And when you begin discussing thongs like you are manipulating things at an atom level, well, the possibilities to create new things appear endless. But it also strips out all the natural mischievousness of nature itself, humans, and the boundaries one needs to navigate. Just to remind everyone, David Nye pointed out the narratives of technological utopias:

1. natural where technologies are a natural outgrowth of society.
2. ameliorative in which new machines improve everyday life.
3. transformative in which technologies reshape social reality.

Which leads me to technology is attempting to become a bit more mischievous.

What I mean by that is data analysis, data recognition, machine learning are all grounded in pattern analysis, i.e., fitting data to recognizable patterns in order to be able to offer insights, observations, and conclusions. That said, today’s technology is now attempting to be a little bit more mischievous. Researchers from Carnegie Mellon and the University of Bonn have created an open source AI platform that can learn and predict user behaviors; just from video. It is called ‘nature methods.’ What they are implying is that technology can analyze the behavior of anything if there are identifiable patterns. In my words, technology is shadowing our behavior attempting to mimic the patterns and then offer some predictions for behaviors. I am sure there are a number of positive consequences to this innovation, but I would suggest, once again, beware mischievousness.

Which permits me to circle back to strategies of mischief and mischievousness in general.

Technology is not mischievous. Biology and humans are mischievousness. And humans are humans and biology is biology. Reducing everything to biology strips humans of their humanity aspects. Yes. Biology can mimic some human aspects just as humans can mimic some basic biology, but humans are unique in that, well, they are uniquely mischievous – irrational and dubious reasoners. Therefore, I would suggest that biology and biomimicry take into consideration a Kissinger thought: ““if you are seeking examples and exact parallelisms by studying history you will be disappointed. The study of history is the study of analogies.” I suggest that because business is rife with non-mischievous mimicry thinking. Mimicking is uncreative and not particularly effective. Or maybe better said mimicry more often than not degrades in value every single day it is implemented. That isn’t to say that the nature of things and the natural cadence can’t teach us a number of important things, but simply mimicking more often than not we’ll run afoul of a mischievous world. Ponder.