My Frustration with Design Research

I have been reading design research posts to the point I am getting bogged down. I do not oppose research, else I wouldn't be on the list and join the Design Research Society. I am a staunch believer of methodology, simply because without a sound and effective method of thinking, I cannot get my answers to existing problems.

People have several definitions to research. Design to many people means different things. Design to me is a specific term to a profession that looks into planning of given factors to form a solution. You could jolly call that Strategy, Plan, Architecture,Engineering etc. It basically means the same thing --- systems orgainising and execution to form an finalised solution. It could be a policy, it could be a 2 dimensional product or it could be solid 3D form. It's just that the dimension of the components are different. Different people are playing given factors to a problem differently. Hence the various sayings and arguements. At least that's how I see it.

I usually do not take on to one theory that seriously. But I do view them as opinions mainly because different cultures sort problems differently. And I value and respect that seriously. They need to do so because that's their way of living, seeing things in their own individual perspectives. People love to mention Rittel. Then they would also skew in Tim Brown, then John Chris Jones...or someone who can be recently become controversial as Don Norman ; and before you know it, people will start to debate about who failed to understand what and where it went wrong. Honestly, I don't see that as important as to go down to earth and see the nature of the changing climate. What is crucial and neck cutting is to understand the different sets of problems. An effective design research is one that fully understands the nature of the problem. Once you've understood it, it applies to all different kinds of problems. That makes you a whole rounded poblem solver. Hence, to me, someone who cannot sort out social problems cannot be a true problem solver for a product which is going to be used by people. Products, in my eyes, are to be used by a living being. If we fail to understand the living interaction between a living being and the product, there is no point of desigining, and nevermind the innovation. People may dispute this, but I personally find it a good tool to coming up with ideas to solve problems quickly. We can fly to the edges of the universe, but we must always come back to the concept that we must solve problems permanently and not skirting around it in different fashions.

I often wonder when we can get out of the tangle. Perhaps taking the words out and place in pictures could solve part of the problem. Dan Roam and many others offer some cues to visual thinking. Or at some point, take away all the books and make people really brainstorm for a new way of seeing solutions. Then you will understand why I don't appear to read too much into those books anymore. Not that I don't respect them, but I won't drool over them to the point of hanging there for ages. It sometimes gets you addicted, which is not that healthy for design research. To be able to do research, you must be free spirtited, sharp and quick to act on the materials given. Time is important and hence the aptness of mind to sort problems out outweighs stepping over the same areas again.-- Karen Fu

 

 

 

 

 

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Quick thoughts about 'Abandon Earth—Or Face Extinction' by Stephen Hawking

video via bigthink.com

Can't help but feel compelled to make this draft into the a formal post straight away. Might not be doing much impact but I thought I might as well write it anyway.

I feel Dr Hawkings has over emphasized in the logic of hard core Sciences for survival. For if there is lack of humanity in various ethical thoughts, that our human race would perish despite technological advances.

There are certain uncanny ways about how life and the universe works which perhaps is incomprehensivable even by science. Despite the rules that human mind research could delve into in their individual ways and feelings about how things work. I think we have not developed till that stage where the entire universe can be fully comprehend, else we will not have developed new problems that need new solutions to solve. If we have genuinely understood the root concept of problem solving, we will not problems sprouting out from existing ones. We could have simply sort the problem spot on.

Many of these problems simply morph in form. Not loosing an ounce in essence, the solutions usually require a far more complex way of solving.

If we need to sustain our race beyond the next 100 years or so, we need to find the root problem as to why we have come to this dire point. The thinking process doesn't require a mere escape in the physical space we live.

I have no doubt that one day our race will eventually be left with no choice but to emmigrate to space. That is if we cannot change what what we have been doing in time. The future living space may well be mars; it may well be a human made platform or synthetic space ground for our future generations to live on. Under a totally new environment, a brand new set of problems will sufface if we cannot face out our own humanisitc problems in thought which controls our decisions that shape our living space on earth.

There is no doubt that the brilliance of the human mind could also solve some of the toughest scientific problems around. However, I have the feeling that we may be dwelling in linear thought or rather we are moving into a history old, seemingly genetically formulated code in our genes into digging more deeper holes and simply swapping spaces for our root problem ---- the pertinent issue that we refuse to face the daunting thought that we have been bending rules of nature which is the result for our current dire situation.

We have not changed much in the area of survival. Human greed has not been changed much for centuries and let history be told, whether in total truth or with partial biasness, that our forebearers have merely altered their way of being selfish and that technological knowhow has been used to further exploit in the most uncanny of ways.

There is no doubt that we would eventually be living in space if our existing problems cannot be eradicated in time. It may well be we cannot sort them at all. Climate and land changes have proved in reality of the impending outcome of extiction if we still live on this planet. We have almost depleted our natural resources and also at the expense of other living species in any form for the sole selfishness of just one specie, and that is us.

We need to be truthfully honest about what we and our forebearers have done and how our past and existing thinking had maketh us our own assassinators for our own sustainable survival.

Our knowledge in humanities, science & technology should continue advancing in depth and in width. But we need a source of change that directs us to genuine sustainablity. And that is to make a real conscience about who we are and what we need to do. Not with the impurity of new so-called colours that smudge; but with the eventual outcome of being totally pure as light that will shine us into ever lasting exisitence.

And that one of the several human components may well be a far simpler thought: and that is ethics of sharing, loving and to be far less menacing & hypocritical in today's fast advancing, pragmatic life of selfish materialism. We are all in a way guilty. Perhaps via the way of doing bit of good everyday and have a far more daring gut toadmit fault & make every modest good step forward; we may perhaps create a miracle that science and religion will be most happy to jot down in our human history.

It's really a collaborative effort.

Got to run off now. It's a very quick one-off draft. I want to write more. But I have to go off for now. ---- Karen Fu

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Technology as the driver for Change

[reblog from http://academicearth.org/lectures/technology-as-driver-change]

Quick thoughts: This accentuates the thought that with technology too, education will be universal for all who desire to learn. It revolutionizes the way knowledge is delivered. Currently online courses are focused on theoretical studies. However in the near future, we'd probably wouldn't require physical attendance in schools to do even physical investigations and research. It is in fact happening right now for design education and other areas of knowledge.