If it is a living process, it will create beautiful geometric structure. If it does not create beautiful structure, it cannot truly be a living process.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• We cannot create living order only by concentrating on appearance; we must characterize the geometry that comes from living process.claim0.875
• Such a process will not—in general—create living structure.claim0.867
• The issue is not whether the process will produce living structure if done faithfully — it will — but whether the maker has the stamina and will to keep rejecting versions that lack life.claim0.857
  Alexander's claim that the limiting factor in creating living structure is not method but the maker's persistence.
• The creation of living structure cannot be done in any other way.claim0.855
• A living process is always natural, similar to the best kind of natural process, but it goes deeper and includes additional centers that naive natural process may miss.claim0.854
  Positions living process as an refined version of innate human creativity, not an artificial imposition.
• Nature always produces living structure because it follows a process of unfolding wholeness; human designers can create non-living structure by violating this process.claim0.842
  Core distinction between natural and designed configurations, explaining why properties are ubiquitous in nature but rare in bad design.
• A living process always creates something unique at every point, respecting the uniqueness of every person and every place.claim0.842
• Does this formal creation of geometry really apply to other living processes? Does it apply to the formation of a community? Does it apply to the creation of a human group; does it apply to the brushwork of a delicate painting? Or to the construction of a song played by a flute?question0.840
  The open question that the chapter leaves for future investigation across multiple domains