Random oscillation in natural objects is a common vital, shape-defining force, 
      while we as humans are excessively limited to the objects that are too easily 
      geometrically definable, we are trying to limit the shape variety of the surroundings
      to these that fit well into boxes or can be painted easily, or reproduced quickly, 
      or fit our body - while the latter is perhaps the closest we ever get to imitating 
      nature’s reflection and that is only because we are forced to do so due to the inevitable 
      strive for comfort coming from the ergonomics which concern an item so close to the body 
      that their implementation seems kind of obvious. But what about the wider perspective, the scale reaching
      further than the direct radius of human body movement circle? what about the inter-human 
      ergonomics, what about the ergonomics of the whole system we are placed in? Imagine rough 
      buildings with their construction elements being not orderly, geometrically defined but 
      in a state of chaos resembling the impact of natural erosion, forces not definable by 
      equally distributed parallel vectors, but acting randomly in different directions, 
      imagine structures being prone to natural interconnectivity and interference of all variety 
      of wind, sun, water etc. connected factors. Isn’t that what we were building our 
      homes like in the very beginning of our species’ existence on this planet? Later we started 
      to gradually shift from being a part of nature, a symbiotically acting element of the ecosystem,
      to trying to get hold of it, be the ones in position of power, using and manipulating 
      it to our needs, and we have finally come to destroying it by overpopulation and polluting,
      the consequences of which we are lately starting to experience more and more apparently.
    
    
      
    
         
            
                Random oscillation in natural objects is a common vital, shape-defining force, 
                  while we as humans are excessively limited to the objects that are too easily 
                  geometrically definable, we are trying to limit the shape variety of the surroundings
                  to these that fit well into boxes or can be painted easily, or reproduced quickly, 
                  or fit our body - while the latter is perhaps the closest we ever get to imitating 
                  nature’s reflection and that is only because we are forced to do so due to the inevitable 
                  strive for comfort coming from the ergonomics which concern an item so close to the body 
                  that their implementation seems kind of obvious. But what about the wider perspective, the scale reaching
                  further than the direct radius of human body movement circle? what about the inter-human 
                  ergonomics, what about the ergonomics of the whole system we are placed in? Imagine rough 
                  buildings with their construction elements being not orderly, geometrically defined but 
                  in a state of chaos resembling the impact of natural erosion, forces not definable by 
                  equally distributed parallel vectors, but acting randomly in different directions, 
                  imagine structures being prone to natural interconnectivity and interference of all variety 
                  of wind, sun, water etc. connected factors. Isn’t that what we were building our 
                  homes like in the very beginning of our species’ existence on this planet? Later we started 
                  to gradually shift from being a part of nature, a symbiotically acting element of the ecosystem,
                  to trying to get hold of it, be the ones in position of power, using and manipulating 
                  it to our needs, and we have finally come to destroying it by overpopulation and polluting,
                  the consequences of which we are lately starting to experience more and more apparently.
                 
                We are desperately looking for a definition to put one into: 
                  let it be finding the right word in a language while describing an item, or 
                  finding the right box to fit the physical item into, or making a statement about 
                  another human’s behaviour. That is all a subject of the same logic of dissonance: 
                  the nature is rough and free, fluid and in a state of constant transformation, 
                  irregular and random, while we are trying to limit that level of complexity to 
                  modules and repetitive sets of geometrically perfect objects. We are, as a majority, 
                  instinctively afraid of the random. 
                
                . . .