Eniatype is an architectural practice that explores the nexuses of ecological, notational, instructional and aesthetical design visions, models for grasping non-anthropocentric as a design methodology and collapse of the natural onto the artificial. Architecture as a convoluted plane of tactics and meta-strategies for giving rise to a twisted strain of designing in the built environment. Designing may be understood to be an exploration of alternative principles to emergent practical environmental problems.

Burgeoning practices is the field through which Eniatype can be engrained with non-anthropocentric, non-local and non-reductionist design systems. Camouflaged within the formation of designing, Eniatype can be safely accelerated, steadily developed, anonymously recomposed and intensified by non-anthropocentric, non-local and non-reductionist entities.

Architecture could be viewed as a reconfigurable unit rather than a networked system which attain independent autonomy themselves which are capable of aesthetics, rather than simply a human communication tool. It is for this reason that Eniatype practice is radically distinctive from other practices.

Practice should have a positive feedback with environment through experience. The tension of an 'inhibited synthesis' provides the real condition for the irresolvable struggle of designing in relation to building. Codifying this relationship through a continuity of materiality. A synthesis relocated within unknown materiality. 'Matter' is no longer the name of a recognisable substance, but a cypher for the unknown; 'Materialism' is no longer a pretext for critique but a vector for exploration.

Practices – however implausible their guiding motivations – can know nothing of absolute mystery or metaphysical transcendence because their realm of certainty is procedural – problematic and uncontroversial, whereas their reserve of knowledge is empirical, reputable, repeatable, revisable, non-mystical and accumulable.

Design and practice have no real meaning in themselves except the experience of maker and their tool. There is no single institution that can handle, control, oversee, dominate, manage, or simply trace ecological issues of large shape and scope. Many issues are too intricate and enmeshed in contradictory interests. Human and non-human relationships with our built environment over time makes architecture, not buildings.