Don and all,

Just to pick up on one point, you say "if I am designing procedures, traditional aesthetics do not apply." The essence of service design is to recognise that procedures are often undertaken by people (though of course often also by machines), so "traditional aesthetics" - whatever you and Lily decide they are - do apply.  The design of the "touch points", physical and digital, through which service users and providers engage with procedures, must be well designed.  As you yourself have pointed out in relation to industrial design, the visible surface is often the only means by which users can infer the system they are dealing with. 

One of the main reasons why chip design may not require traditional aesthetics is surely that there is exceptionally little human interaction with a chip. 

Stephen


......................................................................................
Stephen Boyd Davis | Professor of Design Research
Research Leader, School of Design | Royal College of Art
Kensington Gore, London SW7 2EU, United Kingdom

www.rca.ac.uk
......................................................................................

> On 30 Jun 2017, at 02:43, Don Norman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> I'm confused.
> 
> There are long debates now taking place on this list in defense of
> aesthetics, of beauty, and of pleasurable experiences.  On several
> different threads.
> 
> What confuses me is why anyone thinks that such defense is required?  I do
> not know of anyone who has argued against these things.
> 
> Now, it is just possible that people think I am in the "anti-beauty" camp.
> After all, I have discussed the need for a different kind of design
> training. I have argued that the crafts part of design is not needed for
> many other aspects of design, for example, the redesign of a medical system
> to reduce medical errors.
> 
> That is true, but I never ever advocated against great crafts, against
> aesthetics as a critical component of design and of life, against beauty.
> 
> I didn't say that we should stop teaching those great skills, but rather
> that would be the focus of one track in the learning of design. Other
> tracks, other specialties, might not need those skills.
> 
> It is simply that if I am designing procedures, traditional aesthetics do
> not apply. Same if I design a new computer chip.  And learning the skills
> of great interactive design or complex system design requires a full
> curriculum, not leaving time for drawing and materials and aesthetics.
> Moreover, the sort of person who does one track probably is not very good
> at the other (there ae many exceptions, I hasten to add).
> 
> But please, do not get rid of the traditional design skills: they cheer me
> up. IO buy those products. I cut out their pictures.
> 
> I refer you to my article, When you come to a fork in the road, take it
> (courtesy of Yogi Berra).
> 
> There I said that there were at least two different forms of design.
> Neither was superior to the other, both are necessary. But each requires
> different skills and knowledge. And one of them does not require the
> aesthetics of the other.  But never, ever did I deny the importance.
> 
> Hell, I vaguely recall that I wrote an entire book on the topic. Emotional
> Design.
> 
> So why am I confused?
> 
> I attach my "fork in the road" paper.
> -- 
> Don Norman
> Prof. and Director, DesignLab, UC San Diego
> [log in to unmask] designlab.ucsd.edu/  www.jnd.org  <http://www.jnd.org/>
> Executive Assistant:
> Olga McConnell, [log in to unmask]  +1 858 534-0992
> 
> Design Forward San Diego: Liberty Station. Oct. 25-27, 2017
> <http://designforwardsd.com/>
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> <Norman. The Future of Design. A fork in the road.pdf>


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------