All of these speakers had a great approach to creativity. David Kelly’s idea was creative in itself being that he put together the psychology of phobias and the fact that a lot of people don’t consider themselves creative, which is an underlining fear. He used the snake as a metaphor for those who shy away from anything to do with the label or creativity. But unlike a snake, whose role in ecology is important, creativity is not highly valued in the human ecology of society. There are many who don’t believe creativity is a keystone species. I have experienced those who treat the arts as something over there and it doesn’t affect them in any way. They put it in a glass cage and sometimes observe it as an eccentric activity. To really get people to open up to being creative, society would have to change its attitude about it, which is a slow process.

Dan Phillips is a smart person, with a lot of courage to forget what society wants and accepts. The psychology behind what he says is also very true and need to be implemented. I love the idea of recycling to build unique, organic houses. I avoid the suburbs because it makes me so made seeing all the waste of conformity. But many have done and said what he has before. How long has this sustainability conversation gone on? Longer than I’ve been alive there have been scientists and economist telling us we are in trouble with the state of the planet. Still there is no sign of massive change that will actually do anything. Sure, we can spend more money on a green car and bring our own bags to the grocery store to muffle guilty thoughts in our consciousness. But I don’t believe that we will change the way we need to till it is in our face and ruining our comfortable living. Not until the trash piles up in our own yard, because that is when everyone can’t ignore the problem. That is when people will realize creativity is important in solving problems.
Sir Ken Robinson also smart and knows what he is talking about. I read his book over the summer and really enjoyed it. He has the same problem as the past two; the education system is going to change very, very, very slowly. Everyone is so used to this industrialized system. We know how it works, how to get ahead, how to work the system and we know how everyone compares to each other. People love comparing themselves to others. In a new system, no one would know who is shining and who is failing behind. This is why an education revolution is scary. Change is scary to us. We fear it when we see predator spots behind a bush instead of more bush stripes. But this would be good in the sense of there would be a freedom from the standardization. People could think with movement, and there would be more people dancing Broadway performances. The education system would hopefully be driven by intrinsic motivation and not extrinsic. This would improve human happiness. Maybe it would also get rid of the standard American Dream of a wasteful house. It would get rid of the pressure to get a highly valued engineering job that is valued just because it feeds the consumption demands of the iPhone 5.

Now, Mae Jemison, knows what is up. She tells us the truth that we are not doing anything and lagging behind. I like this. TED talks are fun and cool, and you get to sit there and watch a video. After the video or talk you feel inspired and open to new thinking. Yay! Then that moment is over in 20 minutes. You either continue sitting on your butt and watch another one, or go about your day trolling on Facebook. This talk was given in 2002. My last year in high school I saw an improvement in the education there. There are now two SEPARATE and completely different “tracks” you can take. One is called VPA for visual and preforming arts and one is STEM; science, technology engineering and mathematics. I am thankful I was too far ahead to enter one of these. I wouldn’t know which one to join. Why should high schoolers have to decide? They are still trying to discover themselves. The whole point of her talk was integrating them and seven years later my high school just broke open the crack in the ground, created a massive canyon and dumped a white water river between the arts and sciences. This is what annoys me about TED talks; a whole lota talking and no walking.

Reseach & Understanding- Asking the Right Questions

After countless psychology courses that emphasized the scientific process, this article reassured me that the scientific method cannot work for all types of research.  Moreover, the fact that”the problem with the real world is that it is fundamentally unpredictable stated by (McAllister 2012) supports how some research can follow the banal 5 step scientific method process, while research that studies variables that can’t be manipulated deviate from the traditional scientific process. In my opinion, research will always be biased because the researcher will covertly or overtly affect the study by their opinion. In other words, certain kinds of research should follow the rigid standard scientific method;but unconventional research can benefit from other processes and techniques. Likewise design researchers can implement their own skills that are concerned with people’s behavior, understanding and analyzing culture, defining context, and setting focus.

In any event, the battle of science albeit  soft or hard will continue until Armageddon, but we can agree to disagree that design research can be executed in a professional and ethical way that tailor to the research study. Scientific studies benefit from the conventional 5 step research method process and this has been working so why not forge on?



The Art of Design Research (and Why It Matters). French, J. 2012.

The Science of Good Design: A Dangerous Idea. McAllister, B. 2012.

Scientific Storytelling

Scientific Storytelling using Visualization by Kwan-Liu and others was an interesting read. Never in a billion years would I have had thought that science was a tool  of storytelling. In addition, the most captivating aspect of the article was how science is used as interactively in science museums. Yes, the The Museum of Nature and Science utilizes interactive visualization, but it’s fascinating now to know that this science environment provides more of a learning atmosphere incapable of simulating in a classroom. Additionally, the hands- on activities allow the  spectators” become “spect-actors” ( the terminology of Augusto Boal). As a result, people are incorporating dexterity skills with learning which can promote cohesive learning. All in all, Scientific Storytelling was an interesting article that introduced me to scientific ways to tell a story.



Scientific Storytelling using Visualization. Kwan-Liu Ma, and others. 2012


Re-Igniting Design Thinking

Richard Buchanan makes a key point about design in his paper Wicked Problems in Design Thinking;
We have seen design grow from a trade activity to a segmented profession to a field for technical research and to what now should be recognized as a new liberal art of technical culture.”

Recognizing the transformation of design to what it is now is important when pondering the true meaning of Design Thinking. With more opportunity than ever to pursue design as a career, many new, creative, and enthusiastic minds are joining the industry. Shouldn’t this mean that design is more universal and relevant to our daily lives than ever? In many ways, yes. However the application of design thinking has been channeled into a narrow field, the use of this thinking in other aspects of our lives could change the world. In the words of Tim Brown, “Design’s too important to be left to designers.”

Brown made a great example of broad use of design thinking in his talk for TED. Isambard Kingdom Brunel invented for a very technical line of work, the railroad industry. However, he allowed himself to make the impossible possible when he set out to “create the experience of floating across the countryside.” To make his vision happen, he created suspension bridges and long mountain tunnels. His ambition and use of design thinking allowed revolutionary changes to the railroad. Today, we focus a lot of energy into design pertaining to entertainment, advertising, fashion, and beautiful but trivial objects instead of more revolutionary issues.

The importance of using design thinking applies heavily to science. Because science is all about discovering what is unknown, thinking outside the box and repeating trials (much like making prototypes) are essential. Same goes for scientific media design. You must use that bold, creative thinking process while working with both the factual and artistic side of scientific media design.

Informal Cite:

Design Thinking= Design for Science


The first thoughts that comes to my mind when I hear Design Thinking are people skilled in Information Technology and business leaders collaborating to design more swift, precise technology to cater to the demands of the constantly evolving society. For me, design and thinking seem juxtapose because one cannot create anything without a thought. In other words designers first had to have the idea in order to design anything.

Design thinking according to is, “The mission of fusing design, business and social studies to come up with deeply researched, deeply understood designs and ideas — they call it “design thinking.” Tim Brown’s IDEO company started out as a conference in 1984 and invited people from three worlds- Technology, Entertainment and Design. Since then the company has broadened its scope with 2 annual world conferences.
With the three careers working in conjunction many ideas such as the portable defibrillator have emerged. As stated by  “Design brings empathy and creativity to social challenges. Empathy helps in understanding the human-centered solutions that can make a real difference in real people’s lives; creativity can defeat habits with innovative approaches to making a measurable difference.” Both Aiga and Tim Brown has captured the critical components of empathy, creativity, design and education that is the foundation of Design Thinking.


After perusing the following websites and, I formed my own definition of design thinking. My definition of design think is fearless independent thinking people form various careers that are sensitive to the silent issues that people aren’t courageous enough and/or lack the research time to attack head first. These people live by the quote, “When people are silent that is when people get hurt.” – Unknown. No, this isn’t meant to be negative in any manner. However, IDEO is aware that just the thoughts that they have grappled with or issues that they have encountered can be solved with the help of other curious, design oriented people like themselves. For instance, women for a long time in the ’60s and ’70’s adhered to the advice of their physicians that smoking cigarettes were harmless to their unborn child. Now day Design Thinkers such as endocrinologists, and pediatricians would contemplate that if the affects of smoking cause lung cancer, and depressed appetite, how could cigarette smoking in any way be healthy for pregnant women?”

In conclusion, design thinking corresponds to design for science by capturing various facets of science, its unique design and how scientific methods/ experiments, conundrums, etc, can be delineated in a practical simple way for people affected by these changes to obtain a more feasible explanation of what they were confused about. In other words design thinkers fuse to eradicate the confusion. Make sense?

Resources: Cited September 27, 2012 Designers.  Cited September 27, 2012


Design thinking

After gather some information from ted talks and whatnot I came to the consensus that design thinking is centered around asking questions and translating these questions into answers with design. To come across these answers, one ought to design with their audience or specific client.

This idea of design thinking overlaps with scientific media design in many ways, but most often in the realm of healthcare. Healthcare is at its peak… however, we are still striving to make it even better. This can be easily done if we apply design thinking. A question like, how can I give my patient a better experience without medication? is a great starting point. The answer, per design thinking, would come from patient interaction. Often times people associate negative feelings with hospitals. Thus, another question arises: why are these negative feelings omnipresent? 

From here we can even integrate other subjects, such as psychology and communications to effectively evaluate the question.

So now we have another idea behind design thinking. It’s asking questions, then answering them with design shaped by different ways of thinking i.e. scientifically, psychologically and sociologically.

Design Thinking

When researching for a way to respond to this post, I started with the basics: “What is design thinking?” Google’s definitions included:

-Design Thinking is a process for practical, creative resolution of problems or issues that looks for an improved future result.
-A set of skills, competencies or dispositions relating to the highly iterative collaborative process designers employ when conceiving, planning and producing an object or system.
– A process that endeavors to solve problems and create new possibilities, generally by relying on empathic research (studying people to try to figure out what they need) combined with creative experimentation and extensive prototyping and refinement—all aimed at the goal of producing better, more useful objects, experiences, services, and systems.
-“Design thinking” is an approach to design, commonly used in community development, service design, problem formulation and product design, typically in complex and contentious situations or to break out of a period of stagnation. The term is now most closely associated with the methods employed by the IDEO design company, working in a diverse range of fields, including health care and sustainable development in Africa and Asia. Key methods include “lo-fi prototyping”, anthropological participant observation, theatrical and filmic narrative building, and the “three spaces” method described by Tim Brown in his influential essay “Design Thinking” (Harvard Business Review, June 2008).

In short, design thinking is a process of creatively solving problems or creating unique resolutions with empathy and “anthropological participant observation”. Design thinking occurs when the designer gets to know the person or company in depth, and on a more personal level, in order to create a more meaningful resolution. Many articles I read revert back to the company “IDEO” and their new wave of design. Ideo finds the scientific design answers through personal experiences and connections with the client in order to design a more sustainable resolution.

Similar to IDEO, TED is a nonprofit which connects the worlds of technology, design and entertainment in order to spread the word of “ideas worth spreading”. The mission is “We believe passionately in the power of ideas to change attitudes, lives and ultimately, the world”. TED connects scientific technology with unique design to creatively construct a solution that is exclusive to the situation.

Design thinking is imperative to scientific media design because of the need for a new way to look at things. We discussed the use of creative design thinking when creating models in order for doctors to find operating solutions for separating Siamese twins. Without the aspect of design thinking, we would be looking at a flat chart of the bodies and basically making an educated guess as to how we should operate. When forming unique designs of the twin’s bodies, the doctor was able to see exactly where the bones, and tissues, and vessels were located and therefore more reluctant to separate with the least amount of harm. Design thinking uses empathy to create new possibilities and resolution. It takes the blandness out of science.

Works Cited
Ted: Ideas worth spreading. (2008, September). Retrieved from
Wikipedia. (2012, January). Retrieved from