→ Form >> solution to the problem

→ Context >> defines the problem

→ The ultimate object of design is form

→ If the world were totally regular and homogeneous, there would be no forces, and no forms. Everything would be amorphous. But an irregular world tries to compensate for its own irregularities as the functional origins of the form... More usually we speak of these irregularities as the functional origins of the form.

→ The following argument [stated above] is based on the assumption that physical clarity cannot be achieved in a form until there is first some programmatic clarity in the designer's mind and actions; and that for this to be possible, in turn, the designer must first trace his design problem to its earliest functional origins and be able to find some sort of pattern in them.

→ The source of form actually lies in the fact that the world tries to compensate for its irregularities as economically as possible. This principle, sometimes called the principle of least action, has been noted in various fields: notably by Le Chatelier, who observed that chemical systems tend to react to external forces in such a way as to neutralize the forces; also in mechanics as Newton's law, as Lenz's law in electricity, again as Volterra's theory of populations.

→ ...every design problem begins with an effort to achieve fitness between two entities: the form in question and its context.

→ ...when we speak of design, the real object of discussion is not the form alone, but the ensemble comprising the form and its context. Good fit is a desired property of this ensemble which relates to some particular division of the ensemble into form and context.

[2] Goodness of Fit