How can we try to make a living system out of a region, or a city, or a building—even out of a garden—when, according to current scientific orthodoxy, these things are not living systems?

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

• The creation of living structure cannot be done in any other way.claim0.805
• I believe such a system of living processes can be described precisely, can be made practical, and can be implemented.claim0.796
  Alexander's optimistic programmatic statement for a worldwide generative system.
• Living structure in buildings can only be GENERATED. It cannot be created by brute force from designs.claim0.792
  Core thesis of Book 2, stated at the transition to Part Two.
• The structures where life occurs just cannot be made in any other way.quote0.787
  Categorical assertion about the necessity of the living process.
• To have living modern architecture, society must have a process capable of generating building form dynamically, step by step, at all scales.claim0.784
  The need for a new kind of process in society.
• If we were nevertheless trying to get our buildings conceived, designed, and built by the social processes which currently exist - the buildings would still inevitably break life and could not have life.hypothesis0.783
  Prediction about the incompatibility of modern processes with life.
• Such a process will not—in general—create living structure.claim0.783
• A living system is software reprogrammable to the extent that stimuli can be used to alter its behavior and functionality, as opposed to needing physical rewiring.claim0.779
  Proposed continuous redefinition of software/hardware distinction applicable to biological adaptation