Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- the_art_of_futuring [2019-02-23 09:47] – nik
+++ the_art_of_futuring [2019-03-12 14:44] – maja
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==== The Art Of Futuring ====
-<blockquote>
+<blockquote>To describe the creative process of exploring futures, we use the term 'futuring'. We could have chosen other phrases such as 'future studies', 'speculative design' or 'strategic foresight', but 'to future' as a verb encapsulates the engaged, active attitude that we believe is essential when sending probes into these realms. Futuring can be a complex activity involving many facets, or it can be as simple as telling a story that begins with 'What if…'. The process can be individual but is often a collective, participatory exercise. It tends to work best when different modes of knowing and learning are involved – from analytical to generative and synthesising, rational to somatic, intuitive and interpersonal.
-To describe the creative process of exploring futures, we use the term 'futuring'. We could have chosen other phrases such as 'future studies', 'speculative design' or 'strategic foresight', but 'to future' as a verb encapsulates the engaged, active attitude that we believe is essential when sending probes into these realms. Futuring can be a complex activity involving many facets, or it can be as simple as telling a story that begins with 'What if…'. The process can be individual but is often a collective, participatory exercise. It tends to work best when different modes of knowing and learning are involved – from analytical to generative and synthesising, rational to somatic, intuitive and interpersonal.
 </blockquote>
@@ Line 8: / Line 7: @@
   * https://fo.am/events/art-futuring-workshop/
-==== Reading / Extracts / Etc. ====
+==== Techniques from the workshop ====
-  * various fragments from https://libarynth.org/futurist_fieldguide/start
-<blockquote>
+During the [[https://fo.am/events/art-futuring-workshop/|Art of Futuring Workshop]] we experimented with a series of techniques to probe possible futures.
-The general purpose of futures studies could be regarded as the provision of tools for the invention and pursuit of preferred futures; that is, the reconciliation of hopes and expectations. But it begins and ends, finally, with what any individual does in relation to those things. (…) [It is] the most potent political tool, to enable people to systematically redistribute the sensible at will and on their own behalf. (…) development and spread of futures tools rather than the outcomes of their application [is our concern].
+=== Divination ===
+In the introduction round, we used [[http://superflux.in/index.php/and-now-for-something-completely-different/#|Instant Archetypes]] from Superflux...
+<blockquote>... a toolkit for anyone looking to open up possibilities, surface questions and untangle stubborn challenges. A reimagining of the timeless tropes of the Major Arcana for the 21st Century where the Fool is now the Consumer, the Chariot is a Drone, and the Moon is a Meme. </blockquote>
+{{>https://vimeo.com/296869333}}\\
+=== Card games ===
+Learning to work with constraints, wild cards, Four Archetypal Futures and speculative artefacts
+  * [[https://www.kunsten.be/dossiers/internationaal-samenwerken-2/reframing-the-international/about-reframing-the-international#!|Reframing the International]] by Kunstenpunt
+  * [[https://situationlab.org/project/the-thing-from-the-future/|The Thing from the Future]] by Situation Lab.
+<blockquote> The Thing From The Future is an imagination game that helps players generate countless ideas for artifacts from the future; to amuse, delight, explore, and provoke. </blockquote>
+{{>http://vimeo.com/111582424}}\\
+You can print your own card deck [[http://situationlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/FUTURETHING_Print-and-Play.pdf|here]]
+=== Asking questions ===
+Paraphrasing from [[https://www.scribd.com/document/18675626/Art-of-Powerful-Questions|The art of powerful questions]] a powerful question is a three-dimensional one. The three dimensions are: construction, scope and assumptions. Construction is about phrasing of the question (see the paragraphs above) - which words you use can inspire or demotivate people. The scope is about tailoring the question to the capacity of people's action - where can people make immediate difference (e.g. family, organisation, community, global society). Finally, every question will have your or wider assumptions built into it, assumptions that might not be shared in the group. We should be especially aware of negative assumptions (“what did we do wrong?” could be better phrased as “what can we learn from what happened?”). Having a question focus on the problem, can make people defensive or disengaged. It's helpful to check if the question encourages learning, reflection, collaboration and/or exploration rather than blaming, competition or justifying.
+=== Non-predictive strategy ===
+KPUU Framework is a structured technique to think about and discuss the present, based on what is known, presumed, unknown and unknowable. KPUU helps distinguish facts from assumptions, uncover what the participants don't know, and define what is unknowable at this time.
+Read more about KPUU here: https://libarynth.org/futurist_fieldguide/kpuu_framework
+=== Horizon scanning ===
+Horizon scanning is about tracking change. Analysing current developments undergoing change, such as trends and megatrends and observing change on the micro-scale, looking for possible but improbable changes in the future, also known as weak signals and wild cards.
+Trend is a tendency or direction of change. It can be observed when analysing past and present events, and noticing patterns. Megatrends are long-term transformations, with wide-reaching consequences. They are observed over decades (or longer) and have impact across most if not all societal sectors. Weak signals are early warnings that something is changing. Something that isn't important in the present, but could trigger a major change in the future. They might appear in your peripheral vision or a random conversation. You tend to find weak signals when you aren't looking for them. Wild Cards, or "[[black swan]]" events are things that are unlikely to happen, but when they do, they affect massive change.
+Read more about horizon scanning [[:/futurist_fieldguide/horizon_scanning|here]].
+An example of a horizon scanning aggregate website: http://community.iknowfutures.eu/
+== STEEP analysis ==
+STEEP stands for 'social, technological, environmental, economic and political' factors (aka trends, forces, change drivers) that are external to the system, issue or question examined in the futuring exercise, but can influence it.
+Read more about STEEP analysis [[:/futurist_fieldguide/steep|here]]
+=== Causal Layered Analysis ===
+Causal layered analysis is a futures research method focusing on in-depth analysis of current issues and identifying alternative futures.
+<html><a href="https://38.media.tumblr.com/7aca57b3f430dad3779e1a054584edd0/tumblr_inline_mzybcuGj911qc578m.jpg"><img src="https://38.media.tumblr.com/7aca57b3f430dad3779e1a054584edd0/tumblr_inline_mzybcuGj911qc578m.jpg"></a></html>
+Read more about applying CLA [[:/futurist_fieldguide/causal_layered_analysis|here]].
+<blockquote> As a theory [CLA] seeks to integrate empiricist, interpretive, critical, and action learning modes of knowing. As a method, its utility is not in predicting the future but in creating transformative spaces for the creation of alternative futures. It is also likely to be useful in developing more effective—deeper, inclusive, longer term—policy.
+- [[http://metafuture.org/cla%20papers/Inayatullah%20%20Causal%20layered%20analysis%20-%20theory,%20historical%20context,%20and%20case%20studies.%20Intro%20chapter%20from%20The%20CLA%20Reader..pdf|Sohail Inayatullah]]
+</blockquote>
+. Dot-voting
+. Ranking Critical Uncertainties
+. Sociometry
+. U process (presencing/silent reflection)
+. Scenario building (alternative futures)
+    • 2x2 double uncertainty (GBN/Shell)
+    • scenario logic/scenario skeletons/plot elements
+Incasting:
+. Answering core question from different vantage points
+. Visualising scenario answers
+First-person scenarios:
+. Closed eye visioning / mental time travel
+. Personal backstory
+Prototyping
+. Personal profile page (within scenario logic)
+. Postcards from the future (tableau vivants)
+Preferred futures
+. Appreciative Inquiry: Discovery phase (1 of 4)
+. Theory of change: Outcomes Framework
+Prehearsal / pre-enactment
+. Backstories for preferred scenario
+. Speculative Experience Design for concrete situation
+Open Space
+. hosting workshop sessions
+Adaptive Action Cycle
+. What? So what? Now What?
+. Invocation
+==== Quotes/excerpts ====
+<blockquote>The general purpose of futures studies could be regarded as the provision of tools for the invention and pursuit of preferred futures; that is, the reconciliation of hopes and expectations. But it begins and ends, finally, with what any individual does in relation to those things. (…) [It is] the most potent political tool, to enable people to systematically redistribute the sensible at will and on their own behalf. (…) development and spread of futures tools rather than the outcomes of their application [is our concern].
 —Stuart Candy, The Futures of Everyday Life
 </blockquote>
-<blockquote>
+<blockquote>The conundrum of the Unthinkable and the Unimaginable is everyone’s issue – certainly not just ‘futurists’, nor designers, nor those who happen to have dedicated themselves to political theory or activism; nor just the displaced former residents of New Orleans, nor yet the casualties of Detroit’s seemingly inexorable decline. It is everyone’s problem. Futures studies is a community of thinkers that has defined and directly addressed it as such. But the Great Conversation needs to belong to us all, as do all the discursive technologies, principles of experiential futures design, and other paraphernalia of wiser, ongoing conversation and political self-reinvention.
-The conundrum of the Unthinkable and the Unimaginable is everyone’s issue – certainly not just ‘futurists’, nor designers, nor those who happen to have dedicated themselves to political theory or activism; nor just the displaced former residents of New Orleans, nor yet the casualties of Detroit’s seemingly inexorable decline. It is everyone’s problem. Futures studies is a community of thinkers that has defined and directly addressed it as such. But the Great Conversation needs to belong to us all, as do all the discursive technologies, principles of experiential futures design, and other paraphernalia of wiser, ongoing conversation and political self-reinvention.
 —Stuart Candy, The Futures of Everyday Life
 </blockquote>
-<blockquote>
+<blockquote>Imagine a future where the most revolutionary changes in our world have not come from nanotech, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence or even space development–but from cognitive science and a deepening understanding of how humans function (or not) in groups. What would such a future look like?
-Imagine a future where the most revolutionary changes in our world have not come from nanotech, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence or even space development–but from cognitive science and a deepening understanding of how humans function (or not) in groups. What would such a future look like?
 —Karl Schroeder in [[http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2011/08/rewilding-etiquette.html|Rewilding Etiquette]]
@@ Line 30: / Line 156: @@
-<blockquote>
+<blockquote>Scenario planning is not, or rather should not be, about forecasting the future. Instead, it is a tool for collective learning; what matters is what the scenario team learns in creating it. As an exercise, it is useful; as a strategic map for outsiders, it is relatively useless. Therefore, instead of using it as a map for your organization, ignore its conclusion, ignore the scenarios themselves, and think about the trends, forces and events that the NIC identifies, and then add your own, based on your intuition and expertise.
-Some have assumed that key to successfully dealing with uncertainty is to take a deep dive into the long-term future. Even when the difficulty of prediction is acknowledged, effort is still devoted to imagining alternative possible futures. This is the case of scenario planning, one of the most popular of such approaches. […] There is, in fact, a fundamental flaw in such approaches: it assumes that we can somehow successfully imagine the central aspects of the future. There is ample evidence, however, that this is not true. We do a terrible job imagining the future, sometimes with dreadful consequences, and scenario planning (developed commercially beginning forty years ago at Shell) hasn’t helped us much.
 —Silberzahn & Jones
@@ Line 41: / Line 166: @@
 —Silberzahn & Jones
 </blockquote>
+<blockquote>We’re conditioned to see the present moment as “normal,” with all the banality that implies. This is not a banal moment. It’s the sort of intense, chaotic moment, full of strange things, that we previously only found in science fiction. “Right now” feels like all of science fiction happening at once, and needs to be considered in that context
+—Warren Ellis
+</blockquote>
+==== References ====
+  * https://libarynth.org/futurist_fieldguide/start
+  * https://libarynth.org/future_fabulators/background
+  * https://www.zotero.org/groups/235804/future_fabulators/items/collectionKey/92CX4HZR
+  * https://www.zotero.org/groups/235804/future_fabulators/items/collectionKey/I55D6MNC
+  * {{ ::future_of_the_world_jenny_andersson_9780198814337_print.pdf |Future of The World}}
+  * [[https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwy8eTupdOeKcWVmRUZHV09vOVU/view|Practical Foresight Guide]]