
It's more of an aesthetic philosophy than a concept. It describes the acceptance of imperfections, particularly when it comes to letting materials and design elements exist in their more natural state.
Predominantly Psychology but one's mind does wander...Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est.

Sometimes life seems really short, and other times it seems impossibly long. But this chart below helps to emphasize that it’s most certainly finite.
It's based on the Your Life in Weeks post by Tim Urban, from Wait But Why.
Learn to appreciate what you have, before time makes you appreciate what you had.
Try it out yourself at the following link: Your Life in Weeks - Interactive
These are your weeks and they’re all you’ve got.
In Oppositions and Paradoxes John L. Bell explores a variety of mathematical and scientific paradoxes with philosophical precision, while retaining a great sense of humour in his investigations. In this excerpt, Bell formulates and works through “The Problem of the Heap,” asking: how many grains of sand does one need to make a heap, exactly?
The paradox of the heap or sorites paradox (from the Greek sōritēs “heap”) - attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Eubulides of Miletus - arises from the vagueness of certain predicates in ordinary language. In a typical formulation, we consider a heap of sand, from which grains are removed one by one. The paradox arises when one considers what happens when the process is repeated sufficiently many times. For suppose we make the natural assumption that, if we remove a single grain from a heap, we are still left with a heap. Then eventually just a single grain remains: is it still a heap? Or are even no grains at all a heap? If not, when did the heap change into to a non-heap?
We can turn the paradox on its head by starting with a totally bald man, and, noting that any man with just one more hair than a bald man is still bald, conclude that every man must be bald. For a man with no hair is bald, so a man with just one hair is bald, and thus a man with two hairs is bald, … whence a man with any number of hairs is bald.
A related formulation of the paradox is to suppose given a set of coloured chips such that the variation in colour of two adjacent chips is too small - a difference in wavelength of 1 nanometre say - for the human eye to be able to distinguish between them. Suppose that the first chip is coloured violet, which has a wavelength of about 400 nanometres, and the last chip is coloured red, with a wavelength of 650 nanometres. If we assume, as in the case of the bald man, that a chip whose colour differs in wavelength by one nanometre from a violet coloured chip would still be seen as violet, then the ‘bald man’ argument leads to the conclusion that the red chip would also have to be seen as violet.
The paradox can be reconstructed for a variety of predicates—all of which can be seen to be vague - for example, with “short,” “poor,” “young,” “red,” and so on.
A natural response to the paradox is to introduce a “fixed boundary” to the concept of heap by defining a “heap” to be a set of grains containing at least a certain fixed number - 10000, say - of grains. In that case, a set of 9999 grains is not a heap but one of 10000 is. This seems unnatural since there would appear to be little significance to the difference between 9999 grains and 10000 grains. Wherever the boundary is set, it remains arbitrary. A more acceptable, if radical solution would be to call any collection of two or more a heap!
~ From The Paradox of the Heap, from John L. Bell’s Oppositions and Paradoxes - Broadview Press
No one put things more starkly and more bleakly that the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer, often referred to as the “philosopher of pessimism”.
In early youth, as we contemplate our coming life, we are like children in a theater before the curtain is raised, sitting there in high spirits and eagerly waiting for the play to begin. It is a blessing that we do not know what is really going to happen. Could we foresee it, there are times when children might seem like innocent prisoners, condemned not to death, but to life, and as yet all unconscious of what their sentence means. Nevertheless every man desires to reach old age; in other words, a state of life of which it may be said, “It is bad today, and it will be worse tomorrow— and so on till the worst of all.”
If you try to imagine as nearly as you can what an amount of misery, pain, and suffering of every kind the sun shines upon in its course, you will admit that it would be much better if on the earth as little as on the moon the sun were able to call forth the phenomena of life; and if, here as there, the surface were still in a crystalline state.
Again, you may look upon life as an unprofitable episode, disturbing the blessed calm of nonexistence. And in any case, even though things have gone with you tolerably well, the longer you live the more clearly you will feel that, on the whole, life is a disappointment, nay, a cheat.
If two men who were friends in their youth meet again when they are old, after being separated for a lifetime, the chief feeling they will have at the sight of each other will be one of complete disappointment at life as a whole; because their thoughts will be carried back to that earlier time when life seemed so fair as it lay spread out before them in the rosy light of dawn, promised so much — and then performed so little. This feeling will so completely predominate over every other that they will not even consider it necessary to give it words; but on either side it will be silently assumed, and form the groundwork of all they have to talk about.
He who lives to see two or three generations is like a man who sits some time in the conjurer’s booth at a fair and witnesses the performance twice or thrice in succession. The tricks were meant to be seen only once, and when they are no longer a novelty and cease to deceive, their effect is gone.
If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence? Or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood.
- From Studies in Pessimism (1913)
- Al Swearengen (Ian McShane) on HBO show Deadwood; S02 E07.
An arrow can only be shot by pulling it backwards. When life is dragging you back with difficulties, it means it’s going to launch you into something better. So just focus, and keep aiming.
The Backwards Law (Alan Watts): the idea that the more you pursue feeling better all the time, the less satisfied you become, as pursuing something only reinforces the fact that you lack it in the first place.
The more you desperately want to be rich, the more poor and unworthy you feel, regardless of how much money you actually make. The more you want to be sexy and desired, the uglier you come to see yourself, regardless of your actual physical appearance. The more you desperately want to be happy and loved, the lonelier and more afraid you become, regardless of those who surround you.
Thus, wanting positive experiences is a negative experience – and accepting negative experiences is a positive experience.
- by Laura Gilpin
Published in 1977 in her award-winning poetry book, The Hocus-Pocus of the Universe, this poem invites readers to delve into the profound depths of its verses, grappling with themes of identity, acceptance, animal-rights concerns, and the inevitability of change.
There are so many metaphors and meaning in it.
So simple. So perfect.
Box breathing is a simple technique that a person can do anywhere, including at a work desk or in a cafe. It is called box breathing to encourage people to think about a box as they do it.
Favored by Navy SEALs, this technique involves structured breathing that anyone can practice to enhance mental clarity and emotional wellbeing.
Also known as "square breathing" or "four-square breathing," this controlled breathing practice is based on pranayama, an Ayurvedic form of breathwork that originated in India. Box breathing is known for improving physiological responses, helping to calm the mind, and bringing focus.
Box breathing stands out due to its simplicity and accessibility. Unlike some techniques that may require special equipment or environments, box breathing can be practiced anywhere, anytime.
Box breathing involves four basic steps, each lasting 4 seconds:
1. Breathing in
2. Holding the breath
3. Breathing out
4. Holding the breath
Ideally, a person should repeat the three steps for 4 minutes, or until calm returns.
Any detail in a story should have a purpose in the overall narrative.
Chekhov's Gun is a narrative principle where an element introduced into a story first seems unimportant but will later take on great significance. The principle postulates that any seemingly unimportant element introduced into a story - an object, a character trait, a backstory, an allergy - should later have relevance.
Chekhov liked to use guns to illustrate his point, but his advice is not about the weapons at all. Writers create a sort of unspoken contract with readers, according to this principle. That contract states that we include details because they’re important. Readers can trust that if we’ve drawn attention to something, it has significance.
Examples from Movies and TV (warning spoilers):
Chekhov’s Gun is all about making and honoring promises to the audience. It all boils down to plant and payback. When a writer draws the audience’s attention to something, such as a gun, the expectation is that the character will use the gun at some point during the story. If the pistol is not utilized, viewers will be upset, wondering why there were so many close-up shots if it was unnecessary to the plot.
Chekhov’s gun works for viewers because it builds and meets expectations.