Undoing the Toxic Dogmatism of Digital Design An Essay by Lisa Angela lisa-angela-fftv.medium.com Design educators and industry leaders have never reached a consensus about what comprises a “good enough” foundational education for digital design. We do not properly retire methods (or ways of conducting them) that have been shown to be ineffective. Design team seniority levels are meaningless. We’ve collectively lost the safety (and subsequently the desire) to explore and fail. We afford well-known design leaders too much power to dictate how design is discussed and conducted. We have no ethical standards. Inclusive design and accessibility are afterthoughts — both in design education and in practice. Design Discourse is in a State of Arrested DevelopmentWaking up from the dream of UXSermon for WIAD Bristol 2021On Design Thinking ethicsuxsoftware
Chopped and disfigured The details of a building cannot be made alive when they are made from modular parts If the builder wants to build the room from modular four-foot panels, he must change the size of the rooms, and change their shape, to fit his panels. In such a building system, it is impossible for a person to create a plan which reflects the larger subtleties of site or plan. Each plan will always be chopped and disfigured to make it fit the building details. To make the building live, its patterns must be generated on the site, so that each one takes its own shape according to its context. Christopher Alexander, The Timeless Way of Building What's suitable for each unique condition modularity