The eureka moment - 零碎记录

1. How Designers Think The Design Process Demystified by Bryan Lawson >>

A. Throughout this book we shall see how many influences a designer must be open to and how many arguments there are about their relative importance in practice >>

B. Unfortunately this sort of specialisation can easily become a strait-jacket for designers, directing their mental processes towards a predefined goal. It is thus too easy for the architect to assume that the solution to a client’s problem is a new building. Often it is not! If we are not careful then design education might restrict rather than enhance the ability of the students to think creatively. >>

C. Thought is very much a matter of drills and skills. >>

D.

📷

>>

E. In a most felicitous phrase Donald Schön (1983) has described the designer as ‘having a conversation with the drawing’. >>

F. unfortunately, not necessarily how it will work. The drawing offers a reasonably accu- rate and reliable model of appearance but not necessarily of per- formance. >>

G. Even the appearance of designs can be misleadingly presented by design drawings. The drawings which a designer chooses to make whilst designing tend to be highly codified and rarely con- nect with our direct experience of the final design. >>

H. Alexander proposed a method of structuring design problems that would allow designers to see a graphical representation of the structure of non-visual problems >>

I.

📷

>>

J. there is always a temptation to put off the transition from phase 1 to phase 2. Professional designers are unlikely to succumb to this temptation since they need to earn their living, but students often do, and such a map often serves only to encourage unproductive procrastination! >>

K. The task was made more complex by the introduction of some ‘hidden’ rules governing allowed relationships between some of the blocks. >>

L. the computer was able to record and analyse their problem-solving strategy >>

M. while the scientists focused their attention on understanding the underlying rules, the architects were obsessed with achieving the desired result. Thus we might describe the scientists as having a problem-focused strategy and the architects as having a solution-focused strategy. >>

N. ***They learned about the problem through attempts to create solutions rather than through deliberate and separate study of the problem itself >>

O. ***his designers were constantly both gener- ating new goals and redefining constraints. >>

P. ***Often the problem may not even be fully understood without some acceptable solution to illustrate it. >>

Q. Thus part of the definition of a design problem is the level of detail which requires attention >>

R. There are three main ways of deal- ing with this in the design process, which we might call procrastin- ation, non-committal design and throw-away design. Each seem to be more popular with particular groups of designers. >>

S. 1 The process is endless >>

T. Some designers of large and complex systems involving long time-scales are now beginning to view design as continuous and continuing, rather than a once and for all process. >>

U. 2 There is no infallibly correct process >>

V. In fact we shall see how controlling and varying the design process is one of the most important skills a designer must develop. >>

W. 3 The process involves finding as well as solving problems >>

X. 4 Design inevitably involves subjective value judgement >>

Y. 5 Design is a prescriptive activity >>

Z. 6 Designers work in the context of a need for action >>

AA. Reasoning is considered purposive and directed towards a particular conclusion. This category is usually held to include logic, problem-solving and concept formation. When ‘imagining’, on the other hand, the individual is said to draw from his or her own experience, combining material in a relatively unstruc- tured and perhaps aimless way. Artistic and creative thought as well as daydreaming are normally considered imaginative >>

BB. It is, however, possible to identify conditions under which one would expect the normal per- son to attend more to one influence than the other. >>

CC. This ‘eureka’ moment >>

DD. The general consensus is that we may identify up to five phases in the creative process (Fig. 9.1) which we will call ‘first insight’, ‘preparation’, ‘incubation’, ‘illumination’, and ‘verification’ (Kneller 1965). >>

EE. One study of exceptionally creative scientists (Roe 1952) found that they were characteristically very intelligent, but also persistent and highly motivated, self-sufficient, confident and assertive >>

FF. The typical intelligence test question asks the subject to find a correct answer, usually through logical thought, whereas the creativity test question is more likely to have many acceptable answers. >>

GG. ***highly creative people may not be easiest to get on with, and are not generally bothered by this >>

HH. The product designer Richard Seymour considers good design results from ‘the unexpectedly relevant solution not wackiness parading as originality’ (Lawson 1994a). The famous architect, Robert Venturi has said, for a designer, ‘it is better to be good than to be original’ (Lawson 1994a). Hertzberger, Seymour and Venturi all seem to be cautioning us against the recent trend to value the purely original-looking design without testing it to see if it really can fulfil the demands placed on it. >>

II. good designers tend to be at ease with the lack of resolution of their ideas for most of the design process. Things often only come together late on towards the end of the process. Those who prefer a more ordered and certain world may find themselves uncomfortable in the creative three-dimensional design fields. >>

JJ. One of the paradoxes of creativity is that, in order to think originally, we must familiarise ourselves with the ideas of others . . . These ideas can then form a springboard from which the creator’s ideas can be launched. >>

KK. they are most creative when the problem is imposed upon them from outside >>