Introduction
 How I Conceived Tychiformation
 Definition of Tychiformation
 The Potential for Applying Tychiformation
 My Reasons for Writing
 The Preeminance of the USA as a World Leader
 Book Approach/Content

Introduction

“Tychiformation” is a term that I coined in December of 1998. It is derived from the Greek “tychi” meaning “future”, and “forma” meaning “shape” to signify “shaping the future”. 

We participate every day in shaping our collective destiny as each of us pursues his own ulterior motives. For example, many of us endeavor to own bigger homes and bigger cars, without giving much thought as to how fulfilling our wishes could impact the environment and the long term chances for the survival of future generations. Institutions and governments also shape the future by their action. This is exemplified by the present US administration’s actions that are proclaimed to be aimed at fighting terrorism and spreading democracy in the world.

Tychiformation however, is conceived to shape the future in certain ways that are different from the ways in which prevailing conditions tend to shape the future. Tychiformation proposes a more purposeful and strategically oriented rational approach to shaping the future. It also envisages the application of democracy by directly involving the general public in shaping the future. This book expounds the concept of tychiformation and explores the potential for its application.

 

HOW I CONCEIVED TYCHIFORMATION

The conception of tychiformation resulted from many years of professional experience and relates to: a) my education in architecture and my efforts in the early nineteen sixties to prepare a doctoral thesis in architecture, and b) my professional practice for over four decades as an architect and urban planner. Thus, tychiformation is a synthesis of ideas derived from theoretical research, and insights gained from professional practical experience. 

Influence of Theoretical Research

Work on my doctoral thesis in architecture led to research in philosophy to understand how different people disagree in assessing buildings. It can be empirically established that peoples’ assessments regarding particular matters could vary from complete agreement by all, which is very rare when large numbers of people are involved, to various degrees of disagreement among different individuals and factions. Opposing philosophical positions have been developed to interpret this empirical phenomenon. 

Some philosophers maintain that assessment is subjective, not objective. The position of this group of philosophers is exemplified in the statement that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. This means that disagreement in the assessment of a given object results from differences in the perceptions of different beholders. The differences relate to each beholder’s unique make-up and experience. This type of position has been applied by various philosophers in Aesthetics, Ethics, and in the Theory of Knowledge. Accordingly, it has been maintained that the assessments of beauty and ugliness, right and wrong, and in certain cases even truth and falsehood, are subjective and thus could vary between different people. Holders of this type of position are referred to as “relativists”. 
Other philosophers put forth opposing views. For example, Plato presented the concept of “universal forms”, which classifies aesthetic and moral values together with mathematical relations, as entities that exist independently of the beholder, and which humans strive to perceive. I have come to refer to this type of position as “absolutism” to highlight its contrast with relativism. The relativist says that he tends to believe that there are no objective values in the world out there for people to disagree and quibble about. The ‘absolutist’ on the other hand asserts that values exist in the world, and that some astute people are able to perceive them; those who do not should be educated in order to be able to perceive these values. The world today appears to hold numerous factions that feel and act adversely towards each other, often due to assuming ‘absolutist’ attitudes in adhering to their differing and often opposing views.                      

When I started work on my thesis I was a young idealist. I believed in, and sought ‘perfection’. One of my main motives in selecting the subject of my thesis was that I thought that I could find out what is good and bad in the field of architecture. This means, in retrospect, that I held platonic views, and was thus by my own definition an ‘absolutist’. From this initial attitude, I dug as deeply as I could in my research to find solid grounds to build on in my platonic endeavor. Alas, I did not succeed! Instead, my research led me to switch from ‘absolutism’ to relativism. My reason for switching is that I did not find any grounds to adhere to ‘absolutism’, which usually leads the ‘absolutist’ to think: “I am right, and all those who disagree with me are wrong”. Accordingly, my research in philosophy led me to become a relativist. 

My belief in relativism had certain consequences on my attitudes in thought and in practical matters. Generally, I tend to think of my assessments as my subjective value judgments, and preferences, and to present them as such, rather than present them in the form of assertions about the value of an object or an idea. This is reflected in my use of language. Instead of using the words “good”, “bad”, and “better”, I tend to use “I like”, “I dislike”, and I “prefer”.  

My relativistic attitudes influenced my conception of tychiformation. This is reflected in my suggestion to integrate people’s values democratically in the processes of reaching decisions in public affairs. I suggest this, instead of asserting my own personal views regarding particular matters in the public domain. The reader will note that the notion of tychiformation itself is being presented as a suggestion for the public to assess and to decide upon. Following are some of my exploits relating to the democratic aspects of tychiformation.

In March of 2002, I applied for a patent for an invention entitled: “Method for Interactive Communication and Information Processing”. The patent application basically outlined the concept of tychiformation. It indicated the systematic interactive participation of the public in all the steps of a rational planning process as a method for reaching decisions in public affairs. My application was rejected in June of 2006. The patent examiner pointed out that a patent had been recently awarded to “Urken” who described an almost identical process. For personal reasons I did not have the time to review Urken’s patent and to compare it with my application. I accepted the patent examiner’s decision. However, earlier in September of 2003, I obtained a “Service Mark” for “Interactive Opinion Poll Surveys, in Class 35” in conjunction with my web site “Tychiformation” at www.tychiformation.net.

 

Influence of Professional Experience

My professional practical experience included assignments in architecture and urban planning. I got involved in projects ranging in size from the design of a small house, to the preparation of a strategic plan for the future development of a city with a population of over a million people. My experience was not limited to one particular area or country, but involved projects around the world. Over the years however, I became increasingly more involved in the field of urban planning. 

My practice in urban planning led to the reinforcement of an intuitive tendency to plan for action with respect to significant matters, rather than improvising as I go along, and to adopt a systematic planning approach in addressing such significant matters. In addition, if I undertake a planning assignment that involves others, my relativistic attitude leads me to a preference to invite those directly affected by planning to participate in the planning process, and, should conflicts arise among those involved, to resolve conflict through development of consensus in democratic fashion.

I have found that the adoption of a systematic planning approach to problem solving helps in maintaining internal consistency in addressing issues. Furthermore, the systematic approach provides a framework to display one’s arguments in a rational way that facilitates the participation of others in debating the issues under consideration in a democratic spirit. For these reasons, I thought that the planning process could be applied with advantage in addressing numerous types of public issues.

Another important lesson I learned from my practice in urban planning is to attempt to consider each planning assignment in a wider context. For example, if the assignment is to plan a residential neighborhood in a particular city, then one needs to consider planning the neighborhood in the context of the development of the entire city that comprises that neighborhood. The same concept applies in the case of planning a city which needs to be considered within the context of the region where the city is located.  Likewise, the planning of a region needs to be considered in a national context. Ultimately, national planning requires consideration of international conditions.

The idea is that one can hardly plan a discrete area in isolation. For example, after consideration of pertinent international conditions, planning at the national level involves the consideration of the location of national resources such as raw materials, and the establishment of industries as appropriate in proximity to these resources and to the means of transportation that might be needed to distribute goods nationally and to export them internationally. The decisions involved, as well as many others that can be contemplated at the national level, impact the economic development and the population distribution among the regions of the subject country. Similar considerations at the regional level affect the development of all cities in the region under consideration. The principle holds as one proceeds from a wider context to the consideration of smaller areas designated for a planning exercise within that context. This is referred to as a “top down approach”. It starts from more general conditions at the international and national levels, which are usually strategic in nature, and develops in more detail as one proceeds down the hierarchical ladder. Thus, the wider context affects considerations at the next lower level of investigation.

In contrast, if one does not consider issues in a wider context, one runs the risk of developing unrealistic and often impractical solutions. Generally therefore, I found that widening the context of considerations in addressing any planning assignment, or any issue for that matter, is paralleled with greater confidence in one’s assessments, and in the viability and practicability of one’s solutions. 

Conclusion

The initial conception of tychiformation emanated mainly from the notion of consideration of issues in a wider context. I had occasion to review the National and Regional Plans of some countries that took international conditions into consideration. However, the question arises: who is planning at the international level? The answer is: virtually nobody! In other words, the highest possible level in the planning hierarchy seems to be missing. Of course there are practical reasons for the absence of planning at an international level: mainly, no single global entity has the authority to conduct such a planning exercise that would consider the analysis and the integration of issues relating to the world’s numerous independent and sovereign entities. The United Nations occasionally conducts planning studies; however, UN studies are fragmented when compared with the comprehensive scope of planning studies that are conducted at national and sub-national levels.

Obviously, prevailing conditions in the world evolved, and continue to evolve from egocentric considerations relating to separate national entities, without the benefit of rational planning to relate and integrate the different facets of development of these entities from a global perspective. This results in a deficiency in strategies at the global level which could have belonged to the topmost hierarchical level of planning, and that could have provided a wider context for planning at different national sublevels. Such strategies remain mostly unarticulated. In my opinion, this renders all national planning exercises somewhat questionable, since planners at national levels cannot avail themselves of the potential benefits that are usually derived from consideration of planning in a wider context; i.e. benefits that could have been derived from a comprehensive strategic plan at the global level.

In recent years, I have contemplated widening contextual considerations for planning to a global level. It was clear to me that political and moral issues would be involved in such an exercise. This did not deter me from pursuing the idea of widening the contextual considerations in planning, because, after some deliberation, I came to the conclusion that issues such politics and morality could be also addressed through the application of a systematic planning methodology. Further deliberation suggested expansion of the time frame for planning beyond the five or ten year spans common in city planning, which appeared to constrain consideration of certain future issues that were going through my mind. Accordingly, I conceived the idea of expanding planning considerations in space, time, and number of parameters, or types of issues to be considered in the way of addressing global conditions.

The conception of tychiformation also emanated from relativistic considerations. The notion that ‘good’ and ‘bad’, and ‘better’ and ‘worse’ are ‘in the mind of the beholder’ suggests refraining from imposing one’s personal preferences in public affairs on others. Thus relativism encourages seeking consensus in democratic fashion when addressing public issues. Furthermore, empirical Social Science indicates that nations and groups of people who practice democracy tend to generally reflect conditions that ‘the people’ consider to be more favorable, compared with conditions where democracy is not being practiced. These considerations led to the conception of a democratic approach in addressing public issues as one of the main theoretical tenets of tychiformation.

Recent technological developments in telecommunications make it possible to directly reach more people than in the past. The advent of such advances gave rise to new ideas regarding the practice of democracy. In “The Future of Teledemocracy”1, Ted Becker and Christa Daryl Slaton express dissatisfaction with the practice of representative democracy, and promote “Deliberative Polling” as a method that directly involves groups of people in reaching decisions affecting their respective communities. Deliberative polling envisages factually informing the electorate about particular issues, allowing them time to digest the information, and subsequently to debate the issues at hand among themselves. Ultimately, they would be polled to reach decisions in a democratic fashion. This approach was tested in several projects in the USA starting in the nineteen seventies. In sympathy with such ideas, tychiformation envisages the direct interactive participation of the public in the democratic process in an effort to avoid some of the pitfalls that seem to be inherent to representative democracy. Ideally, the public would be involved in all steps of the planning process, and would be encouraged to participate in the planning process in democratic spirit, in a way similar to that which is practiced in some urban planning studies. 

It became clear to me that what I was contemplating in respect of addressing global conditions, which involves addressing moral and political issues and involving the public directly in this exercise, does not fit the conventional meaning of the word “planning”.  It appeared to me that I was embarking on a course to influence the future development of civil society through application of a systematic rational planning approach.  This led me to consult an English-Greek dictionary and to coin “tychiformation” to embody the expanded role for systematic planning that I was contemplating.

 

DEFINITION OF TYCHIFORMATION


Tychiformation is an attempt to influence or shape the future of civil society through application of systematic planning processes that involve direct public participation. The systematic planning approaches would adhere to the kinds of steps and techniques that have been described and used by urban planners and by many other types of planners. Briefly, a typical exercise in urban planning usually involves the following steps:

Compiling historical data and information pertinent to the area intended for planning.

Assessment of historical data to identify trends, and projection of trends into the future in order to anticipate future conditions.

Assessment of past and potential future condition to identify existing and potential future problems or issues.

Definition of goals and objectives.

Exploration of opportunities and constraints to achieving expressed goals and objectives.

Preparation of alternative courses of action to attain expressed goals and objectives.

Assessment of alternatives and selection of preferred courses of action

Establishing priorities and time frames for action to attain expressed goals.




It is suggested that tychiformation be pursued through widening the scope of application of such systematic planning steps. Thus, tychiformation would address larger physical areas in space, look farther into the future and consider more parameters than has been otherwise customary in planning efforts.

Most of the steps intended to be pursued in the planning process involve subjective value judgment. Therefore, it is suggested that the general public be invited to participate in the planning process. As alluded to above, it is suggested that the general public, rather than the representatives of people, be directly involved in planning. Thus, tychiformation envisages involving as many people as possible directly in the planning process.

The manifesto for tychiformation that is outlined above may appear to be impossible to undertake: a) due to the grounds that are proposed to be covered, and b) due to the potential difficulty of directly polling the population of the world. The answer to the first concern is inherent to the rational planning process. All planning exercises are undertaken within constraints of available time and resources. Accordingly planners address issues within the limits of given constraints. This leads planners to determine the most important issues involved in a planning exercise and to address these in strategic fashion. Thus, tychiformation is not intended to address all kinds of issues at once, but rather address the most important issues in strategic fashion within practical limits. As to the concerns regarding polling, one could poll representative samples of the population, as is customary in polling exercises.

Accordingly, tychiformation is defined as follows:

TYCHIFORMATION
=
Use of Strategic Planning Methodologies to Plan for the Future of Humanity
At the Global Level
+

Involving the Public Directly in the Planning Process

 

THE POTENTIAL FOR APPLYING TYCHIFORMATION


The proposed global approach of tychiformation has two implications: a) it cannot be practically pursued at present, and b) even if it were possible to conduct a tychiformation exercise, its results would not be binding on anybody. This is due to the lack of commitment by a suitable entity to conduct a planning exercise that involves polling a representative sample of the global population, and a political framework that would enforce the results of the deliberations of such an exercise. Accordingly, a suitable entity that has the wherewithal to conduct such a study has to commit to undertaking it in the first place. The results of study, although nonbinding, could possibly influence the course of international developments. Ultimately, if ever, a political system of global government might be conceived that would embrace a form of deliberative democracy as the vehicle for reaching decisions through a tychiformation global approach.

Thus, the global approach of tychiformation reflects a theoretical goal that is not practicable at present. This book is written with full cognizance of this predicament. In particular, the aspect of tychiformation that predicates the involvement of the public in a global planning process constitutes a theoretical, idealistic, and hard to attain proposition. On the other hand however, applying a systematic planning process to address global conditions may be practicable. This book is written with the intent of testing the viability of this proposition.

Should the idea of tychiformation catch on, then initially, the most suitable existing entity that could pursue tychiformation would be the United Nations. It is an international body in which all nations of the world are represented, and it has some form of presence in most of the countries of the world. It is also the main repository of worldwide data and information that are vital to the pursuit of tychiformation. In addition, it is in a unique position to assemble the resources and the capabilities required to cope with a task of such magnitude as tychiformation.

Individual nations and governments are not suitable for carrying out the task of tychiformation since they are generally and traditionally structured to operate from egocentric positions. Universities however could be involved due to their independent intellectual integrity. Tychiformation Centers could conceivably be established in academic institutions.

Generally the extent to which tychiformation might be implemented would relate to the number of people who sympathize with the tychiformation approach, and to the extent of the resources that would be committed to the pursuit of tychiformation. Tychiformation could be initially pursued as a limited experiment or a pilot project to test the viability and practicability of tychiformation. Several experiments with tychiformation could be pursued in parallel. Tychiformation could be alternatively pursued rigorously through allocation of substantial resources matching the Human Genome Project.

 

MY REASONS FOR WRITING


The conception of tychiformation embodies the essence of my life experience, and I wish to pass the idea of tychiformation to others. In this vein, a few years after conceiving tychiformation, I completed a draft for a book that describes the arduous intellectual road that I traveled on my way to conceiving tychiformation. It relates the development of my thoughts that led me to become a relativist, my experience in urban planning, and how I conceived tychiformation in detail. The book entitled “Tychiformation I, Shaping the Future”, is philosophical in nature, and was not aimed at the casual reader. I did not vigorously pursue publishing the book, but created a web site at www.tychiformation.net which presented the concept of tychiformation in a more palatable way that is essentially similar to the way in which I have presented tychiformation in this Introduction. I created the web site with the intent of floating the concept of tychiformation in the hope of generating some momentum to initiate an experiment in tychiformation. The web site has attracted thousands of visitors. However, for personal reasons relating to my wife’s illness and tragic succumbing to cancer, I have completely neglected my web site, and did absolutely nothing in the way of developing my thoughts in respect of tychiformation for several years while I dedicated myself to caring for my wife.

As I began to recover from my dire predicament, I started to reapply myself to the task that is dear to my heart. In the first place, I realized that in order to generate more interest in the concept of tychiformation, I need to illustrate how some practical consequences could potentially ensue from its application. Accordingly, I decided to write this book which attempts to apply the concept of tychiformation, in order to demonstrate that its application could entail some tangible practical consequences.

Another reason for writing relates to what transpired over the few years during which I was engrossed in taking care of my wife. Conditions developed in the United States of America along directions that I consider contrary to what is intended in tychiformation. I wanted to address these developments. Accordingly, my deep dissatisfaction with certain recent developments in the USA constitutes another reason for writing this book.

 

THE PREEMINENCE OF THE USA AS A WORLD LEADER AND ITS POTENTIAL IMPACT ON TYCHIFORMATION


It is noted that the USA is the most powerful nation on earth today, and that by its own admission, the USA is actively engaged in influencing conditions in the rest of the world. Thus, the USA is exerting a great force on shaping the future of humanity and, accordingly, is impacting the potential for tychiformation. For this main reason, and for other less relevant reasons relating to the availability of information and to my own familiarity with what is happening in the USA, the following deliberations will focus more on addressing conditions in the USA than on addressing conditions elsewhere in the world.

 

BOOK APPROACH / CONTENT


The book attempts to apply a systematic planning approach to address global conditions. Essentially, it is an attempt to inject a measure of rationality in addressing world affairs.

I wish to clarify in this context that in my experience as an architect and urban planner, I am accustomed to relying on numerous sub-consultants who, each in his particular discipline, provides essential input to the processes of design and planning. I cannot avail myself of this luxury in the ambitious exercise that I am about to undertake. Accordingly, the breadth and depth of deliberations are limited by my own personal knowledge and expertise, and by the time that I can afford to dedicate to writing this book. Therefore, deliberations will be concise and focused on the issues that I consider most relevant to the task at hand, and will be limited to citing examples illustrating essential aspects of pertinent topics.

The steps involved in the planning process are often undertaken in iterative fashion, and need not be followed in rigid order. For the purposes of this book, I have elected to start deliberation by addressing one of the most important steps in the planning process, namely, the formulation of the goals of planning. Objectives are usually more detailed quantified expressions of defined goals. For example, if the goal is to “preserve the natural environment” an associated objective might specify that a certain percentage of reduction of carbon dioxide emissions is to be attained by a specific date. The deliberations of this book cannot reach this level of detail. Therefore, the formulation of objectives will not be attempted. Furthermore, due to the vastness of the grounds that need to be covered, the step of “preparation of alternative courses for action” will not be formally pursued and thus, the step of evaluation of alternatives and selection of preferred courses for action will not be applicable. Nevertheless, general directions for action will be proposed, and priorities for action will be indicated.

In addition, per my definition of tychiformation, the general public is envisioned to participate in every step of the planning exercise that I am about to undertake. This is not practicable. Thus, I am forced to rely on my own valuation of all facets of the planning exercise that require value judgment. I harbored a personal dilemma in this respect that can be exemplified by the motto about “the chicken and the egg” and which comes first. Am I to wait for momentum to develop in respect of tychiformation, which I recognize requires convincing others of its potential practical implications, or should I attempt to apply the concept of tychiformation to demonstrate its practicability without involving others in the valuation aspects of tychiformation? I tried the first approach by floating the notion of tychiformation on my web site with relatively modest success. I am testing the second approach by writing this book, in the hope of creating momentum for more rigorous application of the concept of tychiformation. In doing so I do not feel that I am contradicting myself. I am not presenting this book as an application of tychiformation, but rather as an experiment to test the applicability of tychiformation. I am alerting the reader beforehand about my intentions to apply my value judgment, and readers will ultimately decide for themselves whether they sympathizes with my assessments.

At the risk of revealing the main thrust and conclusions of the book beforehand, I wish to clarify the title of the book, and explain how “Tychiformation II” is related to “Planning for Survival”. Testing the applicability of a planning methodology to world affairs, which is the subject matter of this book, and in particular the definition of a strategic goal for such an exercise, reveals that matters of life and death are paramount to the exercise. Accordingly, the book is mainly concerned with matters relating to the survival of humankind; survival, as it turns out, entails a reasoned and peaceful evolution of civil society.



BUY THE BOOK: