12.1.10 | Ideas
A Ruler We Can Trust
“Scale comes from measuring, but also must be juxtaposed against something.” – Jamer Hunt
In our Design For This Century course, Jamer Hunt made the point that all measurement requires something in which to be measured against. This seemingly obvious statement provided great context as to why most of us who live in a technology-centered world feel as though we are in a state of quasi-chaos. With the scale of much of what we interact with now bearing no resemblance to the space or time humans were created to exist in, most of what we digest on a daily basis has quite literally become incomprehensible. By understanding that measurement used to be at a scale we could understand – physical and relatable – it becomes apparent why so many of us find ourselves feeling somewhat paralyzed as of late.
It seems this crippling feeling stems from the combination of not understanding the magnitude in which information is presented, as well as not having a clear, tangible entry point into the conversation. How can we make a difference when we cannot see where the problem starts or where it ends?
As Ted Byfield said, “Seeing is understanding and if you can’t see everything, you can’t do anything and therefore you’re left with only the option to feel strongly.” Certainly many of us feel very strongly about a host of issues, but that is often where our engagement ends. For when the next step after feeling passionately is never clearly defined or made accessible, we are left with only the option to feel strongly that we wish we could act.
Thinking about scale, order, chaos and proximity, I can’t help but wonder what the new manageable scale might be? Certainly our fast-paced modern lifestyle has extended our ability to comprehend a variety of scales, but at what point does the scale become unmanageable? Are we already there? Do we need to create a new measurement system for the 21st century that doesn’t leave us feeling paralyzed?
But here is the million dollar question – if we truly do need a Ruler 2.0 – who gets to decide it, I mean, design it?
Comments
Leave a Reply
The scale became unmanageable long ago Amanda. In response, a variety of tools were developed by people that invented a new market called ‘time management’. It is lifestyle design, and seeks to ween people away from information overloads, the escalating quantity of choices, and towards a simpler existence where decisions become less muddy and more poignant.
A couple moments browsing strategies coined by Tim Ferriss or David Allen might prove useful to prototype new daily routines to plow through the rest of it.
While “Time Management” certainly ties in to what this post is getting at, I think what Amanda is really suggesting here is the need for something greater than management of concepts, but a rather a fundamental shift in our ability to even grasp them at all. Which is critical information to have if we are making decisions in our lives that have significant consequences.
Also, another interesting thought to note: Perhaps there won’t be one centralized body that creates this new “ruler”, but rather a decentralized approach where each individual creates their own system of measuring the information that surrounds them. The question then will be: How do we navigate through and collaborate between these distinctly different measurement systems?
Data visualizations seem to be today’s attempt at understanding the complexity of systems and understanding the magnitude of cause and effect, chaos and scale.
At some point though when these methods evolve, I think we’ll look back and laugh at how rudimentary and reductionist our methods currently are, comparing them to the pseudo-scientific diagrams of the earth at the center of the universe before Copernicus.
The good news is that there seems to be a growing awareness of the idea of infoporn, and the idea that data is can be misused and misrepresented. This was a great point in one of Ted Byfield’s lectures as well. It is our job as designers particularly to carry a level of fairness, transparency and responsibility, as we are going to be interpreters for the language of data. The positive side is that we have relatively new interactive technologies (web, mobile, film) that Copernicus never had. The question is, as always is, how we use it.