You can do what you will, but in any given moment of your life you can will only one definite thing and absolutely nothing other than that one thing. (Schopenhauer)

How can we possibly decide what to do? How can we guarantee refuge from a future of regret? (Questions to be answered by this project [via inappropriately technical means.])

I want to create an existential calculator that answers the philosophical question of “what to do?” Users would input their information into an absurdly basic equation and would get back a non-divinely ordained mandate for what to do with their day… and their life. Based on an assisted-DIY rationalization model, users will be asked to input and rate various criteria to receive answers to their most pressing "what to do?" inquiries. Analyzing the user's intangible goals and desires, whatto.do will output numerically-ordered lists to serve as “non-divinely-ordained” mandates.

Technology and science have succeeded in solving almost all of the problems of humanity. No longer must we toil in the fields for food, maintenance a vengeful god, or waste the day cooking laundry on the stove. Those problems remaining at mankind’s feet are of the decision-making variety (and frankly, we’ve been doing a lamentable job with that lately.) Decision-making has replaced thing-making as the central activity that drives our economy and shapes the planet. And yet we have only primitive tool of subjective reasoning to cope with our one vestigial responsibility. It is now technology’s role to intervene and again lighten the burden of mankind.

Whatto.do will turn existential queries into numbers that can be manipulated as data, helping to quantify all of the unquantifiables. Users will be asked to input at least two activities that they are considering, as well as their aspirational life goals (an activity can be typed in or chosen from suggestions in a pull-down, i.e. “go to work for a bank,” “learn French,” as can life-goals, i.e. “get rich,” “get smarter.”) The user is then asked to numerically rate their life goals in order of importance. With their activities and life-goals now organized into a manageable matrix, users may efficiently “rate” each activity in light of it’s likelihood to help them attain each life-goal. Voila! Through the power and awe of multiplication, the user receives a list of recommended activities for their life (with a few new things thrown in for good measure, perhaps.) With their “rationally-ordained” mandate in hand, they can exit with a new confidence — effectively freed from indecision.

This project takes direct inspiration from Joseph Weizenbaum’s 1966 ELIZA program, which simulates a typed dialogue with a Rogerian therapist (really an automated computer program, which becomes apparent through obviously non-human glitches in the conversation.) Dealing with a more sophisticated 21st century audience, there should be no glitches with the Existential Calculator. With a flawless user experience, the premise of the project is isolated for consideration – inviting inquiries into whether technology can stand in for human reasoning, as well as to consider the implications of manually converting qualitative feelings into quantative data. The program will, however, share with ELIZA user feelings of absurdist-technological-frustration — presenting an ostensible "solution" wherein the user is prevented from ever fully articulating the real "problem."

This is only a rough walkthrough (design and look/feel need some input):

Intangibles goals and desires are weighted according through a 1-10 ranking system. This first step provides each user with a semi-unique/semi-customizable framework within which scoring will occur. (It is, after all, an “assisted”- DIY rationalization model.)

Users will list their current projects to be weighted on this page.

The intangibles from Step 1 form the vertical columns of the matrix, while the individual projects from Step 2 form the horizontal rows. The user is asked to score each project according to their own criteria. In subsequent versions, a section of detractors/must-avoids may be provided to counter and balance the intangible goals/desires for a more complex calculation.

Step 4 outputs the results into an ordered matrix for the user’s consumption. Now that the user has a mandate, she/he can print it or email it to a friend.