 |
 |
Hi Terry (and others) On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Wondering, would the output of the activity of a Gestalter be a 'design'? No, that's the point: The output would be a Gestaltung. > In which case, is what we are seeing simply an increasing shift towards > systems design approaches and away from more traditional ways of designing? > That would be my strong preference. We need to stop designing isolated things (or even services) and recognize that they are all part of larger, more comprehensive systems (and we should be designing the entire system). And the tools are part math, part science/engineering, and part art, intuition, and creativity. As an aside, just got off the phone with a good friend (David Kirsh) who explained how he was trying to develop the science of thinking by doing. Designers claim that they (we) think by drawing and by making: David is showing why this is true. Kirsh, D. (2013). Embodied cognition and the magical future of interaction design. *ACM Transaction of Computer-Human Interaction, 20*(1), 1-30. https://quote.ucsd.edu/cogs1/files/2012/09/Kirsh-Final-acm_reading.pdf For me, this is a great paper. Don Don Norman Nielsen Norman Group, IDEO Fellow [log in to unmask] www.jnd.org http://www.core77.com/blog/columns/ Book: "Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded<http://amzn.to/ZOMyys>" (DOET2). Course: Udacity On-Line course based on DOET2<https://www.udacity.com/course/design101> (free). ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------