Is copying all that bad?

Recently I learned that the younger generation, us, are growing to be worse.

Reason being, styles + icons. It's widely known that styles do no good as most copycats are plastering the outlook of famous styles on their work - claiming it comparable to those born from pure inspiration and reason OR simply just coming up with a compelling form of no functional enhancement; just for the appearance.

Though I do agree with this statement, I see a possibility of what I imagine as hope.

What IF. Copying is encouraged. Only this time, these fellow sheep copy an effective solution. Bring it back to Corbu all over again. Create a formula of architecture, when replicated, becomes highly effective a machine. Let towns work in sync, let cities combine to change, let countries bind edge to edge to reverse the industrial damage - heal the world as we destroyed it, reverse its course.

Recreate a trend with the help of publicist. Brainwash the no-brainers. Screw the identity, diversity and interesting architectures for the moment. We're already at the edge of losing the physiological need of survival - theres no need to move up for self actualization (following the maslow's hierarchy).

So stop. Take a few steps back. Go for the opportunity cost. Though moving forward seems crucial, what does it all mean if we lose thousands of lives along the way? To progress on others' death wouldn't be a victory at all. Progress can only go thus far until all is lost.

___________________________________________________________________

Would it be called copying if it was a reuse of solutions?

Would it be bad if copying solved the problems?

Would copying be the right word to use if "all has already been done before" in the first place?