After reading the article “Design and Science” in the Journal of Design and Science published by the MIT Media Press, I’m fascinated with the intersection point between these two fields and I wanted to share some excerpts from the article.
[Après avoir lu l’article « Design and Science » dans le Journal du même nom et publié par le MIT Media Press, je suis fasciné par le point d’intersection entre ces deux domaines et je voulais partager quelques extraits de l’article qui m’ont marqué (en anglais).]
« Much of academia revolves around publishing research to prestigious, peer-reviewed journals. Peer review usually consists of the influential members of your field reviewing your work and deciding whether it is important and unique. This architecture often leads to a dynamic where researchers focus more on proving the value of their research to a small number of experts in their own field than on taking the high-risk of an unconventional approach. This dynamic reinforces the cliché of academics: learning more and more about less and less. It causes a hyper-specialization where people in different areas have a very difficult time collaborating–or even communicating–with people in different fields. »
« our focus is on a way of thinking and doing rather than on a field of study or a particular language. I believe the key is a focus on developing a better system of design and a better theory of deployment and impact. »
« As participant designers, we focus on changing ourselves and the way we do things in order to change the world. With this new perspective, we will be able to tackle extremely important problems that don’t fit neatly into current academic systems: instead of designing other people’s systems, we will redesign our way of thinking and working and impact the world by impacting ourselves. »