> On Feb 27, 2016, at 10:51 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
> Thank you for your comments. I can see that the Theory of Design Thinking can address many and perhaps all of the challenges to it.
So do I get the theory prize you offered?
>
> What you wrote about a) makes sense - thanks.
>
> For b) I don't think speed is at all an issue. Imagine a situation where a human is generating and reviewing new partially-conceived partial design possibilities (the sort of thing where a designer is focusing at that particular time on one part of a design in a situation where the other parts aren't yet resolved.). In this situation, subconscious influences within the designer shape which new ideas for partial design solutions come to their mind. These are perhaps better described as *subconscious* fixations about how they believe different aspects design will create particular design outcomes.
The theory postulates hierarchical and sequential processes that can be going on concurrently, separately, or associatively. It assumes that subconscious processes are very complex, parallel and extremely fast. They are highly interactive but require 200 milliseconds to engage conscious thought after “data mining” memory to generate a preconscious input or intuition.
>
> During this design activity the designer may use a computerised design tool that predicts design outcomes. The output predictions of this computerised design tool are likely to contradict the designer's subconscious fixated assumptions about what the outcomes are likely to be (if the situation follows the usual pattern of the human processes being in error). This is not an instantaneous process. Time is not of the essence.
> I think "subconscious fixations" is too pejorative and don’t accept human processes as necessarily in error or that computerized predictions are “likely to contradict the designers subconscious fixated assumptions”. Time is always of the essence.
>
> The problem is that there is then a contradiction between the subconscious influences of the designer's subconscious fixations and the designer's subconscious processes relating to the computerised prediction data.
Why do you think there is a contradiction?
> Both influence the subconscious processes of creative idea generation on the creativity leading to new design ideas.
My belief is that subconscious idea generation has a far greater effect on creativity than predictive processes because of the constraints imposed on most predictive models.
>
> So the question I was asking was about how you model this situation and create tools to resolve it to avoid the designer's subconscious fixations forcing the designer's idea generation to follow their erroneous subconscious beliefs. The underlying challenge is that so much of the processes are subconscious and hence hidden and unknown, even to the designer.
I think the designers subconscious conclusions are more often correct or helpful then erroneous. They are not beliefs but propositions before they can be expressed executed and evaluated. My best ideas come as I wake up at 4 am, often solving problems I didn’t know I had. The theory allows error in computer algorithms and predictions unless they are caught by dissatisfaction, doubt, better knowledge, and intelligence during reflective thought. If their errors aren’t caught we’ve got big problems.
So, why are you so negative about human thought processes?
Chuck
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CHARLES BURNETTE
> Sent: Saturday, 27 February 2016 11:20 PM
> To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Theory of Design Thinking and prediction of design outcomes
>
> Terry, Thanks for your response and the questions you raised. Here is my quick shot at answering them.
>
> Regarding a) In the Evaluative component of every mode of thought one hopes to find criteria and methods of sufficient power to suggest when there is a need to use external tools, but habits of mind, preferences and bias built in Reflective thought and projected through Intentional thought often fail to set the threshold of acceptance to do that. However, there is no reason that in a computational version of the theory this could not be done through data mining algorithms, correlations, or a "doubt machine". The fail safe in the theory is that there is feedback through Reflective thought (the "Reflective loop”), that reviews each evaluative “outcome” and adapts the plan of action according to its relevant knowledge and intelligence (capacity to effectively apply that knowledge), an implementation of trial and error that can be as sophisticated as the thinker’s brain or a computerized system allows.
>
> Regarding b) As you know the human brain has quite a good system of error detection but often overrules it as Daniel Kahneman pointed out so well. The problem is that the tools you desire would have to have predictive smarts equivalent to the speed and effectiveness of subconscious parallel processing for them to be able to intervene at the speed of thought itself, which is constantly testing relationships of information in a real time context at subconscious speeds before the slower processes of consciousness can lay hold of and redirect it.
>
> Or, so I believe,
> Chuck
>
>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> The above implies two activities for a Theory of Design Thinking to represent: a) The processes by which designers can identify when their thinking is insufficient or mistaken and there is a need to use external tools and (this is the important bit), when the internal responses within the designer mistakenly tell them that they are successfully and thinking correctly, and; b) the processes by which designers can integrate their thinking about designs with the information from tools (that predict better than the designer), when the information from the tools contradicts the internal experiences and thinking of the designer.
>>
>> It may be the Theory of Design Thinking already does this? If so, could you please explain more as I haven't managed to get it yet.
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|