I think the main problem is that when designers look to nature for
inspiration they forget their mantra "Form Follows Function" and
simply copy the shapes in the hope of inspiration and innovation.
This has been called "biomorphism". What happens if you define the
requirements of your design in terms of its function, carefully
removing all specific references to shape and material from your
definition, and then trawl through biology looking for examples of the
same sort of function?
Julian
------------------------------------------------
MA, PhD, DSc, FRES, MIMMM, CEng, FIMechE
Laburnum Cottage
48 Frome Road
Odd Down
BATH
BA2 2QB
tel: 01225 835076
Mob: 07941 933 901
[log in to unmask]
On 9 Feb 2009, at 12:43, Carlos Peralta wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I am trying to understand how designers, using biological knowledge,
> could
> break down traditional boundaries that limits their creative output to
> the sphere of the not living structures, objects, etc. and expand
> their creative production to the realm of organic living structures.
>
> With this in mind, I am looking for existing (or possible) models of
> collaboration and interaction between Designers and Biologists, that
> permit designers to access knowledge on natural/biological processes
> and systems that underpin their design outputs in one hand, and that
> allow the integration of biology scientific research and design
> creative thinking in the other.
>
> I also want to explore some of the ethical, cultural, philosophical
> and ideological issues that may arise from designers creating/
> manipulating/transforming living structures with a functional purpose.
>
> I have found an extensive bibliography that talks about
> Art and Biology interaction and about a number of research projects
> that team up Artists and scientists, but little about product design
> and Biology. Does anyone out there have any good reading
> recommendation, or reliable source on this subject?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carlos Peralta
|