Design Manifesto

DYB124

Reason, Balance and Subjectivity. 

We live in a world of extreme opinions. We are convinced we know how to get to the ideal society, and that the thing that is stopping us is the other.

This makes sense at least through the lens of history.

The other is uncertainty. That mysterious new face peering into your eyes may be good, but the potential risk to your survival far exceeds the possibility of gain.

After-all, the way you are doing life has worked thus far and changing this could have dire consequences.

The problem is that we are no longer within these early times.

Gone are the times where every new thing is a risk to your survival.

We have a unique opportunity to learn and grow as people and a community.

Here in the 21st century we have a chance of connection like no other.

From the world wide web to planes to cell phones, we have more possibility and less risk than ever to communicate/learn from the other. 

So why as a culture, do we seem more divided than ever?

It may be easy to just say that it’s what we are wired to do, which may have merit, but this does seem quite shallow and pessimistic when considered.

What I consider to be a great contributor to this division, inspired by thinkers like Isaiah Berlin, is the modern way of viewing thought and rationality.

Along with the enlightenment, three concepts made a massive rising that directly lead to the modern world we know today. These were maths, science, and rationality.

Maths and Science have the following features that seem to be a given.

1- There is a single correct answer

2- There is a clear method to get to this answer

3- The answer will fit neatly and cohesively into a picture that corresponds with previous answers

These are true for maths and science, but were and are assumed to be true when it comes to rationality. This notion that 2 people, assuming they are both rational will come to the same conclusion when looking at the same information, is false when looking at the complexities of life.

The world is full of wicked problems that may not have an answer, but there are many ways to improve them for the better. This is where the division lies, as the copious amount of contradicting but valid answers may be what is stopping us from getting to a better world.

So is there 1 correct, objective answer to solve this social intolerance and ignorance? Well of course not! This is also a wicked problem that won’t be solved, at least in the foreseeable future.

But the first step to combat this “yellow corn syndrome” of ideas, is to acknowledge this lack of knowledge and diversity in each of us.

As the author John Green put it, “we don’t know almost everything.”

Each of us are stuck to our small life of experiences, so it’s okay to not know.

I would also say we should conduct more conversations with a diverse range of people.

There are many things we will disagree on, but we shouldn’t be afraid of this, it’s an opportunity to both test the validity of your own beliefs, but also to see the world through a new lens that you could have never experienced otherwise.

I believe creating a more colourful and diverse world will directly translate into the design space in the most positive way. More of this acceptance of people will mean designers are less limited by preconceived notions about “how it should be” and will create far more creative and inclusive designs. It also will ideally result in a deeper empathy towards the end user, with designers wanting to know the user’s beliefs, and accepting their differences on the basis of perspective rather than right or wrong. We need to realise our limited perspective, and in doing this increasing it with every new encounter.

After-all, curiosity may have killed the cat, but it’s humanities greatest asset.