In his defense, some design is meant to be purely conceptual, works that are better to be thought about than used. Architects design what are called paper buildings, designs that can’t be built (yet), and fashion designers create haute couture that most people would never wear. This type of work is often unusable, but does advance how people think about the medium.

Also in his defense I think making use of digital prototyping or procedural modeling is as valid as working with any other tool. The tool involves math, but the designer still needs to wield the tool to take advantage of the things it can do, just like any other tool (paint brush etc.)

Having said all of that, does this guarantee his work is good? Matter of opinion. I do like his use of material (concrete stereo), and his use of curves (red couch), but other things, for whatever personal reason, I just find too fussy.