ABSTRACT
Our concern in this chapter is that this development could also be interpreted as a shift away from aesthetics in general, which would be rather counterintuitive as there are also manifold incentives for an increasingly experience-based society. Ecological theories, planners’ scenarios, eco-tech products, and management pragmatism breathe a more confident aptitude regarding scientific methods such as monitoring, system modeling, quantification, and extrapolation. At times, the general scientific demand for clear methodology, theory, and repeatable results seem to be undermining the methods of conventional design. There is a fraction within the community of landscape architects that intends to serve as advertisers of what serious scientists have determined, providing for a fashionable beautification by an occasionally (eroticizing) style intervention (see Meyer 2008; Selman 2008). Another fraction, mainly consisting of academics, intends to upgrade design arguments and methods to match the results of co-academics. According to us, it is not yet determined what best serves the development of living system design. The indispensable position of design has yet to be found and nurtured.
