What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos


Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers


Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge


Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more
With rendition switcher


Question: How has architecture embraced the green movement?

Nader Tehrani:
Well you’re asking somebody who is a green architect as a citizen, but I’m not an expert of green architecture.  I’m also one of the people that thinking that most architects are using the banner of green architecture as a kind of soup de jour.  I think it is a serious issue.  I think that we need to think about questions of policy, questions of production in a way that is sustainable, but not everything has direct architectural consequences and one needs to remember that we are not talking about formal determinism here.  We are not talking about a direct consequentiality about a green principle and the actual form of a piece of architecture.  Imagine if you will you make a great piece of green building if you like, a great piece of architecture that is also a green building you know on Route 128.  What is the consequence of that building when the entire planning principles of the United States in a way cultivate an attitude about sprawl?  So the question of sustainability and the green movement needs to deal with the potentials of its impact on planning, urban design and architecture as a larger political effort, the architectural consequences of which have been around for centuries.  Very basic principles of a building’s orientation to the sun, the way it collects heat, the way it stores heat, the way it expels heat at night, these are well documented techniques that go back centuries and centuries.  I think there are many ways of engaging the green movement, part of them through new technologies and part of them through… actually an elimination of the very technologies that we so rely on today.  The building that we are in right now, the room that we’re in has no windows and requires a mechanical system to make it breathe.  Most buildings probably don’t need that and it depends on how we design them, but that is not an excuse not to research technologies that would advance the way that buildings work in new ways and new forms, but the linking, the direct link of determinism between form and function, between form and performance, between form and the greening movement is a myth that we also need to overcome. 

Question: Where are people working to create a more sustainable dynamic?

Nader Tehrani: 
I mean I think the mere decision to invest in our inner cities is one of those efforts.  The idea that through more density, through less public transport…  Excuse me, through less driving and more public transport, through ways of congesting if you like, our social, personal, institutional and daily lives that achieves that.  We don’t need to cultivate that kind of thing in an ever expanding domain you know in the suburbs, so sure.  I think that that is one way that we are already doing it, but that is not enough.

The Greening of Architecture

Newsletter: Share: