On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Michael Sadd <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> I am a PhD student and hopeful of a hearing on questions about DesignX, a
> thread that does not seem to have been greatly discussed.
>
well, Mike, I think the problem is that you are trying to read a lot more
precision into the DesignX statement than was intended by the writers (And
I wrote the first draft).
The point is really rather simple. Design, today, is called upon to examine
many complex sociotechnical systems, yet modern design training does not
prepare people for this.
We believe it is time for designers to step up to the plate and try
to tackle these problems -- from a human-centered design point of view.
I added the last phrase because there are many disciplines that do look
at complex systems. We do not intend to replace them -- we need to build
upon their work. We offer a designerly approach, which focusses upon
finding the right issues to be addressed, with the major focus upon the
people involved. The focus upon people in the design of systems appears to
be unique to the design profession.
DesignX is not the first design group to have said these things. Since the
time when we wrote that argument we have learned of other
groups attempting similar pursuits. I wish to work
collaboratively with them. Our original declaration sounded as if
we had discovered this issue: that is wrong. We also were not
fully knowledgeable about the work that other groups have done. We are
learning. We are expanding our knowledge.
I disagree that complexity is concerned with emergent phenomena.
Sure, it can be, but this is not a distinguishing characteristic. Your
notion that "complex + systems = Complexity" is wonderfully elegant, but
does not match my limited understanding of complexity. But then, what do i
know?
We are interested in assisting the existing complex sociotechnical
issues. The evolution I am interested in is human-made. Thus, the medical
system evolved, but not in the same way that natural evolution discusses.
The evolution of human-created systems is through deliberate creation.
Designers can deliberately motivate the result,
deleting inappropriate components, deliberately adding new ones. We are
not studying natural evolution.
Much of your arguments about the nature of complexity, emergence,
and evolution strike me as irrelevant to our goal.
We simply want to help improve complex systems such as
healthcare, environmental issues, transportation cities, ecological
issues, inequality. Simple goals -- difficult to do.
Sometimes deep thinking can get people into trouble. Don't think too much.
Designers are makers and doers. Take off your philosophical hat.
Don Norman
Don Norman
Prof. and Director, DesignLab, UC San Diego
[log in to unmask] designlab.ucsd.edu/ www.jnd.org <http://www.jnd.org/>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|