#L2D4G: A Personal Manifesto of Design Ethics

#L2D4G
Learning to design for good

A personal manifesto of design ethics
Meredith Thompson
Merci, beaucoup!
I would like to extent my sincerest thanks to the following
people for their ongoing help and support during this project:
M. Barrettara, R. Bider, P. Q. Davis, W. Dickson, R. Fraquelli, J.
Franz, L. Hindle, M. Hutchinson, J. Jackson, D. Kasaboski,
G. Kallenos, L. Layman, N. Shadbolt, S. Thompson, S. Wood,
and M. Woods.
Copyright 2013 by Meredith Thompson
www.merethom.com
#L2D4G: Learning to design for good
First Edition, Paperback published 2013
Whiteshoes Press
Plymouth, United Kingdom
ISBN: 100100100
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
information storage and retrieval system without the written
permission of the author, except where permitted by law.
Designed by Meredith Thompson
Set in Quadon by Rne Bider
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
#L2D4G
A personal manifesto of design ethics
HELLO WORLD! I am a young designer.
As an activity, I believe design is any and all things done to negotiate between reality and that-which-
could-be [possibility]. Possibility refers to anything which is imagined and desired. It could as simple as
a thank you card or as lofty as an new economic system. The process of bringing either of those about is
still design. At its core, I believe design is an innately human activity that can and should be harnessed
for tremendous good. I live within the confines of a capitalist economy and choose to participate in it by
making a livelihood out of design. As it relates to my work, design is primarily concerned with visual
communication, interaction, information, and systems design. It involves bringing about the possibilities
of others. Possibilities that are motivated by a myriad of factors, which are increasingly complex and
frequently beyond my control. I fear finding myself in a situation where I am asked to use design in a
way I find unethical.
To help navigate such situations and ensure I design for good, I will keep the following at the front of my
mind during the design process on every project:
If design is a negotiation between the reality and possibility, then design ethics is the manifestation of
that-which-could-be that requires the use of our innate ability to think reflectively about the implications
of previous experiences during the negotiation process. I will reflect upon the ramificationsboth
positive and negativethat a design will have by comparing it to previous design scenarios that share
similarities with the design project in question.
To guide my decisions about positive and negative implications of my designed outcomes I will refer to
the following as my guiding poles:
I will endeavour to seek harmony between human existence and terrestrial health in all I design as
a current defining factor of being human is living on a planet whose health is linked to our ability to
survive as a species.
I will endeavour to design with and for dignity, the innate right of everyone to be valued and receive
ethical treatment. When possible, I will not design solutions that limit access to things such as the
alleviation of sufering or the beneficial extension of human ability based on ones economic power.
I will use desiremy own and othersas a source of inspiration, motivation, and to bolster my own
confidence in doing good.
I will honour these statements for even the humblest and plainest of tasks, for I believe continual steps
toward positive possibilityno matter how smallcan create significant transformation over time.
Sincerely,

Meredith Thompson
07
09
1 1
15
25
35
55
57
58
6 1
Preface
Methodonics
Ethics + Design = ?
What is design?
Guiding poles of possibility
#L2D4G Manifesto
Bibliography
Works Cited
Image Credits
Introduction
Everything you
dont know about
me (but you
really should)
While I know, quite intimately, all the reasons that
lead me to this project, you probably dont. So, let me
help you make some sense of my headspace with a
tour of my thought process to situate yourself before
we proceed into the depths of my mind.
It makes perfect sense that I became a designer.
I have created and curated at every opportunity for as long as
I can remember: arts & crafts, DIY & design. As a child I would
fold pieces of paper or doodle on anything and everything. As
an adult this transformed into a career in design, but the need
to doodle/sketch/endlessly take notes never went away. The
vast majority of my hobbies relate to making or organising. I
have a deep compulsion to solve problems, optimise systems,
and devise the best means of clearly articulating and commu-
nicating these solutions to others. What starts out as finding
the most efficient way to complete a lap of the grocery store
quickly balloons into discussing theoretical solutions to large
wicked problems currently affecting the world. Food banks
supplied solely by grocery store food waste anyone?
I rely a great deal on my intuition
1
arguably one of a design-
ers biggest tools. Personal trauma has forced me to evaluate
my own ethics and morals on an ongoing basis. I never stop
reading articles and having discussions about issues of moral
importance, in an effort to continuously develop my own mo-
rality. Of particular interest to me are the social and economic
systems that frame discourse around ethical issues. As a de-
signer, it is of the utmost importance to me that I am then able
to communicate these realisations, share my ideas with others,
and contribute to these discussions. To sum it up, I like to ex-
plore, understand, solve, make and share: especially to do good.
1 I consistently score as an INFj or Ell on Jungian-inspired personality typologies, I have this intuition thing
down!
7
The path that lead me here.
At an early age, I promised myself I would obtain as much
education as I wanted regardless of any barriers. By the time
I entered secondary school I was relatively certain I wanted to
obtain at least a masters degree. The final year of my un-
dergraduate degreethe York-Sheridan Joint Programme in
Graphic Designleft me with more questions than answers, a
strong desire to acquire more knowledge, and the realisation
that simply making beautiful things would never be enough
to fulfil me. I took a year off and worked as a designer for a
finance company, where I decided I wanted to use a masters
degree as a means of gaining a deeper understanding of how I
could use my design abilities to do good (and not evil).
Why a manifesto?
In my own design practice, I am enchanted by graphic commu-
nications (anything from imagery, to typography, to informa-
tion design), system design, and interaction design/user expe-
rience. I consider myself fortunateboth through hard work
and natural abilityto have developed skills that I consider to
be quite strong in those areas that I love most, but also feel that
I lacked grounded ethical guidance to keep my practice from
inadvertently veering into evil territory.
Inspired partly by my own ethical convictions, and partly
by Milton Glasers 12 Steps in the Road to Hell
2
, I decided to
create a manifesto that would give me some ethical guide-
lines for my practice.
Through a developing personal practice, this research will
serve as a manifesto for a contemporary understanding of
design ethics situated clearly in design and ethical politic. It
will result in a set of guidelines I can carry forward into my
fledgling practice, which will help me create ethical design.
What Ive created is undoubtedly deeply personal due to the
very nature of a manifesto, but I have attempted to ground it
in enough theory hold up to academic rigour and hopefully
even contain some takeaway or inspiration for others who read
it. At the very least, I have now formally articulated a way of
keeping the ethical at the forefront of my design practice as I
re-enter industry.
Enjoy.
2 Glaser, M. These Are Some Things I Have Learned. Address, AIGANational Design Conference, March
23, 2002. A12-question test developed by Milton Glaser to test his willingness to lie.
What you can
expect to find in
this document
This document is comprised of two movements: a
manifesto and an extended discussion of relevant
subject matter to give contextualisation.
Manifestos have a well established traditionespecially within
art and designof being the chosen mode of conveying ones
beliefs and intentions in writing. I have chosen to pair mine
with a longer background discussion of my thoughts ground-
ed in theory. Movement one contains the long-form discussion
of arriving at my manifesto through a narrative of theory.
Movement two contains the manifesto itself, a set of guidelines
to keep in mind as I re-enter practice.
9 8
Methodonics
make the
manifesto
This section has been included in place of a more
traditional methodologies or methods section.
What are methodonics?
Methods are the techniques or procedures used to gather and
analyse data related to some research question or hypothe-
sis
3
and methodology (in design) is the comparative study of
method
4
or the study of the principles, practices and proce-
dures of design... Its central concern is with how designing
both is and might be conducted
5
. They are the traditional ways
in which specific process is discussed in design research. Peter
Quinn Davis believes that there is a notion within design re-
search that rigid methodologies should always be employed
6
,
however, design practices may contain a range of methods
which do not always add up to a complete methodology. An
alternative way of approaching this area of design research
is methodonics
7
Daviss name for Mario Bunges concept of
Methodics
8
the collection of methods employed in a research
field. Not to be confused with methodology
9
.
Methodonics used in the creation of this manifesto
Theoretical and visual primary and secondary research was
undertaken to provide foundations for and expand my under-
standing of design ethics. This research served as the content
which was reflected upon and synthesised into a narrative of
theory and a personal manifesto. Finally, reflective making
was undertaken to help others gain a deeper understanding of
the narrative and manifesto.
3 Crotty, M. The Foundations of Social Science Research:meaning and Perspective inthe Research
Process. NewSouth Wales: Allen and Uwin, 1998, 3.
4 Friedman, K. Theory Construction in Design Research: Criteria: Approaches, and Methods. Design
Studies 24, no. 6 (2003): 507.
5 Cross, N. Developments inDesignMethodology. Chichester: Wiley, 1984.
6 Davis, P. Q. Tomz. Lecture, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom, Plymouth, September 12, 2013.
7 Davis, P. Q. Tomz.
8 Bunge, M. Dictionary of Philosophy. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1999, 179.
9 Bunge, Dictionary of Philosophy, 179.
1 1
What is design?
No dialogue on design would be complete without
some discussion surrounding a definition of design.
This manifesto is no exception. Lets begin!
So, what exactly doI mean by design in this context?
There isat least to some degreea consensus that design
is an innate human activity. Two influential works on the
matterone a book and one an address later published as an
essaygo so far as to share the title What is a designer?. In
1954 Alvin Lustig gave an address called What is a Designer?
to the Advertising Typographers Association of America, and
said Designers anticipate the requirements of their society and
express them before the society is completely prepared or will-
ing to accept what proves to be something they really want
10
.
Just over a decade later Norman Potter posits in his 1969 book
What is a designer? that Every human being is a designer
11

and qualifies design as work in every field that warrants pause,
and careful consideration, between the conceiving of an action
and fashioning of the means to carry it out, and an estimation
of its efects
12
.
Herbert Simons oft-cited description of design as the
transformation of existing conditions into preferred ones
13
in
his 1968 work, The Sciences of the Artificial, tends to garner
the reputation as the gold standard of definitions for design.
Building on Simons understanding, in the first chapter of his
2009 book, DesignFuturing, Tony Fry puts forward the idea that
everyone is a designer because our innate ability to prefigure
is a defining characteristic of being human
14
. In his 2012 follow
up, Becoming Humanby Design, Fry concludes that design is
indistinguishable fromhuman intelligence (based on recent
paleontological research which suggests that tool usage by
primates caused themto evolve towards greater intelligence)
15
.
One definition of design to which I amquite partial is taken from
a 2005 paper by Clive Dilnot, titled Ethics? Design?. It bears
resemblance to Simons description of design, and is described
by Dilnot as a situated process that is a sustained examination
of what is possible in the realmof the artificial and a negotiation
with that actuality to realise possibility
16
. Dilnots overall
discussion of design is incredibly nuanced and will be dealt with
at length in the following chapters, but is quite close to my own
understanding of what design is.
10 Lustig, Alvin. What Is a Designer?. In Looking Closer 3: Classic Writings on Graphic Design, edited by
Jessica Helfand Michael Beirut, Stephen Heller, and Rick Poynor, 106-08. NewYork: Allworth Press, 1999,
106. It should be noted here that this was the first address Lustig, a graphic designer by trade, gave after
losing his vision.
11 Potter, N. What is ADesigner: things, places, messages. London: Hyphen Press, 2012, 10.
13 Simon, H. The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1968, 55.
14 Fry, T, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Oxford: Berg, 2009, 28.
15 103 Rowe, A. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Reviewof Design Futuring:
Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice, by Tony Fry. Art/Design/Media Subject Centre, 24 November
2009, http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/resource-reviews/rowe-design-futuring.pdf, 5.
16 Dilnot, C. Ethics? Design? In The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2, edited by Stanley
Tigerman, 1-149. Chicago: Archeworks Press, 2005, 16-7.
Is this design?
(noun) a specification
of an object, manifested
by an agent, intended to
accomplish goals, in a
particular environment,
using a set of primitive
components, satisfying
a set of requirements,
subject to constraints;
(verb, transitive) to
create a design, in an
environment (where the
designer operates)
1 7
Though I agree with each theorist in their understandings, for
the purposes of my manifesto I will define design broadly as
any and all things which we do to move between reality and
that-which-could-be.
But not everyone whodesigns is a designer, right?
That is correct. Despite the fact Ive recognised design as an
innate human activity undertaken by all (design, the activ-
ity) and defined it in a very broad sense, I also acknowledge
that design is assumed as a livelihood by many individuals
(design, the discipline)myself included. The designation of
design, the discipline is often referred to in design theory. For
instance, Richard Buchanans 1992 paper, Wicked Problems
in Design Thinking discusses the evolution of historic no-
tions of design into our more contemporary understanding.
Buchanan states that during the twentieth century, design
evolved into a new liberal art of technological culture
17
. When
Buchanan speaks of technology, he is referring to John Deweys
understanding of the word to mean experimental thinking
18
, as
opposed to the more commonplace definition of technology as
artefact. In a line of thought that is similar to what I outlined in
the previous paragraph, Buchanan defines his understanding of
liberal arts as:
a discipline of thinking that may be shared to some
degree by [everyone] in their daily lives and is, in
turn, mastered by a few people who practice the
discipline with distinctive insight and sometimes
advance it to new areas of innovative application
19
.
From this, one can surmise that Buchanan views design as
having evolved from a trade activity or profession into a dis-
cipline of experimental thinking culture, that somebut by
no means allpractice with expertise. Norman Potter takes
a similar view, articulating that while design is an innate hu-
man ability, many [people] also earn their living by design
20
.
All this is not to say that one is more important and should
be privileged above the otheror even that only two differ-
ent designations exist within. I bring it up to clarify that this
discussion is framed from the viewpoint of someone who
practices within design the discipline and will therefore be
biased towards that understanding to at least some degree.
17 Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. DesignIssues ,VIII , no 2 (1992): 5.
18 Buchanan. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. 8.
19 Buchanan. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. 8-9.
1 8
What about diferent types of designers?
The reality of practice within the discipline of design is that
we oftenfor better or worsebreak its different tasks into
various categories. This is where more defined roles such as
product designer, spatial designer, architect, or graphics
designerthe title by which I typically refer to myselfcome
into play
21
. In reality, a designers practice rarely operates
strictly within the confines of one such category.
Buchanan calls for design to look for patterns of placements
rather than categorise design action into a series of rigid cat-
egoriesa mode of thinking he feels is inherently problemat-
ic
22
. Where categories are fixed and determinate, placements
have boundaries that can shape, constrain, and contextualise
meaning and ideas
23
; they offer a more rhizomatic conception
of design process. Buchanan gives four broad placements
which point toward certain kinds of objectivities in human
experience
24
where work by designers in each has created a
framework for human experience in contemporary culture
25
.
These placements are: symbolic and visual communications
[signs], material objects [things], activities and organised
services [actions], and complex systems/environments for
working, living, learning, and playing [thoughts]
26
. Buchanan
notes it may be tempting to classify each instance of design
into only one placement, the overlap and interconnection
of the placements is inevitable practice and often allows for
moments of innovation
27
. Buchanans placements are widely
used in the vernacular of design and design thinking theory
as normative ways of breaking down design practice, but I
still find them quite broad.
Lucy Kimbell argues for an alternative mode of discussing
design thinkingwhich I find to be more usefulin her papers,
Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1 (2011), and Rethinking
Design Thinking: Part 2 (2012). In Part 1, Kimbell argues that
design thinking as a research area is under theorised and
understudied
28
. Though she gives a broad definition for design
thinking as the ways in which designers problem solve
29
read
move current circumstances to preferred onesshe posits
that there is no singular theory of design thinking, but rather
three heterogeneous accounts can be traced to find its origins
30
.
21 Though, I increasingly prefer communications designer or visual communications designer.
26 Buchanan. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. 9-10.
28 Kimbell, L. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1. Designand Culture, 3, no 3 (2011): 301.
29 Kimbell,. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1, 285.
1 9
Kimbell ofers criticisms for current accounts of design think-
ing
31
and ultimately argues for an alternative mode of studying
design thinking which looks at practice
32
.
One is the account of design thinking as a cognitive style
33
.
This account focuses on design, the discipline and defines
designs purpose as problem solving
34
. The focus of the
expertise and activity in this account of design thinking are
the traditional roles of designers (product designer, spatial de-
signer, etc.)
35
, which aim to solve problems of an ill-structured
nature. This account is described by theorists such as Cross,
Dorst, Lawson, Schn, and Rowe and cites abductive thinking,
design ability as a form of intelligence, and reflection-in-ac-
tion as key concepts of design thinking
36
.
Another is the account of design thinking as an organisational
resource.
37
This account focuses on design by businesses and
other organisations in need of innovation and defines designs
purpose as innovation
38
. The focus of expertise and activity in
this account of design thinking can be found in any context in
which organisational problems are framed as design prob-
lems
39
. This account is described by theorists such as Bauer,
Brown, Dunne, Egan, and Martin, and cites abductive thinking,
empathy, integrative thinking, prototyping, and visualisation
as key concepts of design thinking
40
.
The final is the account of design thinking as a general theo-
ry of design
41
. This account differs vastly from the others, as
its key concept is that design has no special subject matter
of its own
42
. This account is described in Richard Buchanans
1992 paper, Wicked Problems in Design Thinking, and defines
design problems as wicked problems, and the purpose of
design as taming wicked problems
43
. Wicked problems are
social system problems which are ill-formulated, where the
information is confusing, where there are many clients and
decision makers with conflicting values, and where the rami-
fications in the whole system are thoroughly confusing
44
.
As criticisms for the three accounts, Kimbell offers the fol-
lowing ideas. First, these accounts often make a distinction
43 Kimbell,. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1, 297
44 Rittell, Horst inBuchanan, R. WickedProblems inDesignThinking. DesignIssues ,VIII , no2(1992): 15.
20
between theoretical and real world action
45
. Second, they
make generalisations about design thinking without address-
ing the diversity and historically situated legacy of design
practices
46
. Third, they rely on design theories that privilege
designers as the main actors in designing
47
. As designboth
the activity and practicemanifests itself in such diverse
ways, I agree both with Kimbells criticisms and her call for an
alternative understanding.
In that case, what is a good alternative?
As an alternative to the traditional understandings, Kim-
bell suggests dismissing the notion of a generalised de-
sign thinking, and instead focusing on situated, embodied
material practice
48
where design becomes a set of routines
that emerge in context
49
. She says we should understand
design as a situated, contingent set of practices carried by
professional designers and those who engage with designers
activities
50
and argues that this will allow us to gain more
insight on whether designs way of interacting with the world
is unique to designers or found in other disciplines
51
.
Kimbell begins the paper by gathering some understand-
ings of practice from theorists in sociology and science and
technology studies
52
. She sets up the use of practice theory in
relation to design thinking by stating that it
shift[s] the unit of analysis away from a micro
level (individuals) or a macro one (organizations or
groups and their norms) to an indeterminate level
at a nexus of minds, bodies, objects, discourses,
knowledge, structures/ processes, and agency,
which together constitute practices that are carried
by individuals
53
.
Kimbell then puts forward that most theories of practice
share two common ideas: first, that practice cannot be con-
sidered by taking any of its constituent elements in isola-
tion
54
; and second, that practices are understood to be produced
dynamically through the interplay of diverse elements in
relation to one another
55
.
52 Kimbell. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 2, 132-4.
53 Kimbell. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 2, 131.
21
Kimbell hopes to establish an understanding [of] the socio-
material world as dynamic and constituted
56
to help move
away from some of the difficulties presented in accounts of
design thinking
57
To do this, she refers to Reckowitzs ele-
ments of practice (forms of bodily activities; forms of mental
activities; things and their use; a background knowledge in
the form of understanding; know-how; states of emotion; and
motivational knowledge
58
) and emphasises four aspects of
practice theory that are relevant to design:
1. How practices are understood as (re)configurings of
the world through which the determination of bounda-
ries, properties and meanings is differentially enact-
ed
59
. With practice theory, design can be viewed as an
activity distributed across various people and arte-
facts, which together enact designing and designers.
60
2. How structures are constituted in practice (using var-
ious studies on technology, design, development, and
media)
61
. This demonstrates that structure is enacted
by users in practice
62
.
3. The attention paid to the role of objects in constitut-
ing practice
63
. Paying attention to objects allows us to
distinguish practice as more dynamic, creative, and
constructive
64
.
4. Knowledge; specifically, the notionthat it is mediatedby
interactions withpeople andarrangements inthe world
65
.
With those aspects established, Kimbell moves on to discuss
in more detail her analytical devices of design-as-practice
and designs-in-practice. Design-as-practice is a way of
thinking about the work of designing that acknowledges
that design practices are habitual, possibly rule-governed,
often routinised, conscious or unconscious, and that they are
embodied or situated
66
. Designs-in-practice foregrounds the
incomplete nature of the process and outcomes of design-
ing
67
and refers to the fact that through engagement with
a product or service over time and space, the user or stake-
holder continues to be involved in constituting what a design
is
68
. Kimbell cites three main differences in her conception of
22
design thinking
69
: it conceives design as constituted relationally
through intra-action of several elements
70
; it asks how the par-
ticular configurations design may arrive at are constructed
71
; and
finally, it can be used to discuss any designed entity
72
.
In my opinion, Kimbells analytical devices and focus on situat-
ed practice make for one of the most cogent means of looking
at design practice . It also serves to remind me that any under-
standing of design ethics must have a means of application in
a diversity of design practices.
So, what is design?
For the purposes of this manifesto, design is understood to be
any and all thingswhether an innate activity or part of a disci-
plinethat we do to move from reality to that-which-could-be.
23
Ethics + design =
what, exactly?
Well, that is the understanding I am working toward.
Now that a working definition of design has been
established, its time to incorporate ethical theory.
Lets begin with some normative ethical theory
After much exploration and review of the branches of norma-
tive ethics, casuistryor its more modern title, case-based
reasoning stands out to me as the most analogous theory
for my conception of design ethics.
A poetic article from 1995 by Albert R Jonsen titled Casuistry:
An Alternative or Complement to Principles draws some
beautiful metaphoric parallels between design and case-based
reasoning. Though the definition listed in many contemporary
dictionaries may read otherwise, casuistry is a traditional
method of interpreting and resolving moral problems. It focus-
es on the circumstances of particular cases rather than on the
application of ethical theories and principles
73
. Jonsen states
that people use case-based reasoning on a daily basis every
time they ruminate about how they ought to act or argue
about how others should act or have acted
74
.
Jonsen uses the metaphor of Matteo Riccis memory pal-
acea mental device to aid with the recollection of ideasto
help frame case-based reasoning.
75
In order to relate case-
based reasoning to traditional moral and ethical theory, he
conceives of a moral memory palace. In this palace, a moral
philosopher would be assigned the role of architect and a
casuistone who practices case-based reasoningthe role of
interior decorator
76
.
The palace, constructed of theory and principles,
is empty without the interior design, finishing, and
furniture of circumstance. These do not merely
stand around as neutral items, but are intrinsic
features of the edifice, without which interpretation
and appreciation are impossible.
77
To Jonsen, the use of case-based reasoning allows one to
move through the mental spaces of moral argument with
ease and enjoyment
78
.
Case-based reasoning has also found wide application in general
decision making, especially computerised decision making. A
1994 article by Aamodt and Plaza states that cases typically
consist of a problem, its solution, and information on howthe
solution was reached
79
. They also divide case-based reasoning
into a formalised four-step process:
73 Jonsen, A. R. Casuistry: An Alternative or Complement to Principles?. Kennedy Institute of Ethics
Journal, 5, no 3 (1995): 237.
74 Jonsen. Casuistry: An Alternative or Complement to Principles?, 237.
79 Aamodt A&E Plaza, Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and
SystemApproaches. Artificial Intelligence Communications, 7, no 1 (1994): 39-52.
Ethics (generally):
(noun) also known as
moral philosophy, is a
branch of philosophy
that involves
systematizing,
defending and
recommending
concepts of right and
wrong conduct.
27
1. Retrieve. Gather information on completed cases that
share similarities with the target problem
80
.
2. Reuse. Map the solution from the previous case to the
target problem, this may involve adapting the previous
solution to fit the new situation
81
.
3. Revise. Test the new solution and revise if necessary
82
.
4. Retain. Once a successful solution is reached, the experi-
ence is stored as a new case for future reference
83
.
Though the specific application of Aamodt & Plazas process
is for use by computers, it offers a more rigid counterpoint
to Jonsens conception and could act as a starting point for a
practice-based aspect of my understanding of design ethics.
When combined, the approaches feel congruent with many
existing design processes and practices. It also maintains a
flexibility for the development of an understanding of design
ethics, which goes along with Kimbells ideas about the diver-
sity of practice.
And on tosome more design-specific ethical theory
Beyond normative ethical theory, I set out to identify some
authors that discussed the subject as it relates to design.
Despite the prevalence of social and sustainable design
areas I believe are firmly rooted in ethical concernsvery
little theory explicitly tackles the issue of design ethics. After
some digging, I was able to find two authors whose ideas I
found useful for developing my own understanding: Charles
Burnette and Clive Dilnot.
Charles Burnette is the former Dean of the School of Architec-
ture at the University of Texas at Austin, former Director of
the Graduate Program in Industrial Design at the University
of the Arts in Philadelphia, PA, and the former Chairman of
its Industrial Design Department. In a series of independently
published papers he outlines a new theory of design think-
ing and outlines its moral and ethical implications. Burnette
relates wider moral and ethical considerations to his Theory
of Design Thinking model, which contains a series of thought
categories that comprise the design process: referential
80 Aamodt &Plaza, Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and
SystemApproaches, 39-52.
81 Aamodt &Plaza, Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System
Approaches, 39-52.
28
thought, relational thought, formative thoughts, procedural
thought, evaluative thought, and reflective thought
84
. To
return to the work of Kimbell that was previously discussed, I
regard Burnettes model as one of many possible design prac-
tices and therefore not a widely applicable design ethics. He
does, however, establish a few interesting ideas worth taking
into consideration.
Burnette first makes the distinction that morals refer to the
beliefs of an individual and ethics refer to morality put into
practice for the greater good.
85
He believes that design and de-
sign thinking can help to develop a set of morals and ethics
86

and that they should be separated from their traditional roots
in religion, tribalism, and nationalism
87
. Instead, he offers a
cogent, scientifically-founded means of explaining moral/eth-
ical behaviour:
Genes enable capacities whichdevelop through
natural experience to recognize certainrecurring
types of information; these neural agencies evolve
to aford forms of cognitionable to recognize,
process and synthesize suchinformationin
diferent situations. These evolved modes of
thought collaborate to express thought and
behavior inresponse to needs and desires that
arise fromdiferent situations. Emotions, feelings,
and preferences are applied to value thoughts and
behaviors ineachsituation, and their consequences
informthe morals and ethics that guide us as
individuals, communities, and cultures. It is this
defining, structuring, expressing, processing and
valuing structure that afords the possibility to
analyze, compare and develop what we believe and
do indiferent circumstances.
88
The grounding of ethical ability firmly in human neurobiology
echoes back key ideas of casuistry; humans, Burnette says,
are hardwired to use case-based reasoning to make moral and
ethical decisions. That is not to say our brains make us inca-
pable of acting unethically or amorally as the criteria used
when making these decisions would differ on an individual
basis. It simply recognises that the ability to make compara-
tive decisions of an ethical nature is innate within our biology.
84 Burnette, The Morals and Ethics of ATheory of Design Thinking 2.
85 Burnette, C. The Morals and Ethics of ATheory of Design Thinking accessed 2 September 2013.
http://www.academia.edu/4390557The_Morals_and_Ethics_of_ A_Theory_of_Design_Thinking, 1.
29
Burnette also makes a distinction between aesthetic judgement
and ethical judgement. He concedes that it is possible to experi-
ence aesthetic pleasure in response to an ethically determined
valuation
89
but states that the inverse is not possible because
aesthetic judgment is situation dependent, immediate, and
felt, while ethical judgment is based on knowledge acquired
over time across experiences in diferent situations
90
. This
distinction is especially important because aesthetics are often
regarded as one of designs primary concerns.
Ethics? Design?
A design educator and historian, Clive Dilnot lays out a
preliminary outline for a new practice of design ethics in his
45,000-word paper
91
, Ethics? Design?. The second in a series
published by Chicago architecture firm Archeworks, Dilnot
draws on the works of Giorgio Agamben, Alain Badiou, Gilles
Deleuze, Martin Heidegger, Gillian Rose, Elaine Scarry, Herbert
Simon, Gianni Vatimo, among others to nuance his under-
standing of the subject. His text is divided into two parts: Part
I contains an understanding of whattheoreticallyan ethics
of design might entail, and Part II offers three considerations
this ethics may manifest in practice. This discussion will fo-
cus primarily on the information covered in Part I; discussion
on Part II can be found in the next chapter.
Dilnot begins by outlining two dominant approaches to
design ethics, which he believes are inadequate. The firsta
pragmatic focusis the development of a set of professional
guidelines or principles which designers can apply at the
individual level; Dilnot argues that this approach does not
make full use of designs transformative capabilities
92
. The
second focuses on an individual designers superego or moral
compass and lauds the importance of moral/ethical values,
then encourages designers to work whilst keeping those
in mind. Dilnot criticises this approach because the lack of
concrete guidance may ultimately leave the design profes-
sion unchanged
93
. In the remainder of the text, Dilnot offers a
thirdmore adequateapproach to design ethics.
A key point that Dilnot makes is that an ethics of design cannot
be separated from ethics per se because the establishment of
91 I could have easily written a dissertation on this essay alone. That however, would not have met
the criteria I set for myself for this manifesto, so Ive done my best to recap only the ideas I found most
relevant.
92 Cokelet, B. The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2:
Ethics? Design? Reviewof The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2, edited by Stanley Tigerman.
DesignIssues, Volume 23, Number 2, summer 2007, 93.
93 Cokelet. The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2:
Ethics? Design? 93.
30
consumer capitalism over the past two centuries has created a
world where our humanness is in many ways indistinguishable
from the artificial
94
. To clarify what he means when discussing
ethics, Dilnot quotes Deleuze, stating that ethics, which is to say
a topology of immanent modes of existence replaces morality,
which always refers to transcendent values
95
. For the purpos-
es of my manifesto, I interpreted this statement to mean that
ethics is concerned with manifestations of divinity in the real
world
96
, and represents a shift away from morality (which relies
on beliefs taken from more typical notions of divinity). Dilnots
interpretation of this statement represents a shift from away
from the ideal toward the real
97
.
Dilnot also brings in Alain Badious criticismthat ethicsin the
weak sensebends to what is necessary
98
. As a counterpoint
Dilnot views ethics in the strong sense as active engagement
with the real understood as actuality
99
. Actuality to Dilnot refers
to both what we encounter as given (real) and the givens capacity
for change (possibility)
100
, and also indicates that we understand
that the real always includes possibility for negation, transfor-
mation, or reconfiguration
101
. In other words, Dilnot understands
design as the recognition of the possibility of change
102
that
94 Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 8.
95 Gilles Deleuze in Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 14.
96 I find this termto be problematic and loaded with ties to organised religion. Instead, I have come to
understand divinity as both the beauty that arises through the coalescence of science and nature to
create the real world, and also the extreme potential and resilience possessed by humans.
98 Alain Badiouin Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 15.
transformative
action
the becoming of that
which could be
possibility
the given's possibility
for change
the real
what we encounter as
given in the world
negotiation
31
opens up these possibilities through negotiation
103
.
Dilnot describes design as a situated process that is a sus-
tained examination of what is possible in the realm of the arti-
ficial [actuality] and a negotiation with that actuality to realise
possibility
104
. As such, the two primary components of a de-
sign ethics Dilnot posits are possibility and negotiation. Possi-
bility is the abstract component of design ethicsits content
105
.
It represents a transfiguration and illustrates the need to
develop ethics that encompass radical change
106
. Negotiation
to Dilnot is the concrete or immanent component of design
ethicsits form taken in making
107
. It represents configuration
and brings up questions of recognition, incommensurability,
and mediation
108
. Dilnot gives three realities of which nego-
tiation is comprised: the demands and needs of the subject,
the limits of the possible (e.g. what is socially, economically,
politically, or physically possible), and transformative action
109
.
Dilnot also brings up some important considerations about the
ethical (design) significance of negotiating possibility:
1. Negotiation is a diferent way of engaging with actuality.
110
2. Design is a process of negotiating incommensurability
to create configurations (e.g. this resolution, in this way,
responding to these circumstances)
111
.
3. One constant pole of incommensurability is the subject;
therefore, design can be described as an ethical negotiation
around the incommensurabilityof subject and object
112
. The
ethical implications here are found in howthe subject is
recognised (e.g. understood, listened to, etc.)
113
.
4. Design is an inherently relational activity; every thing has a
relationship to everything
114
.
5. Design difers fromtechnology.
115
Technology aims to elimi-
nate incommensurability (or, to seek compatibility) whereas
design welcomes incommensurability and seeks out all
conditions that must be negotiated with as part of the design
process, then uses themfor inspiration.
116
6. Design as negotiation also means design as mediation.
117

104 Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 16-17.
115 Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 32. Dilnot does not specify, but I assume in this context he is referring to
technology the artefact, and not Buchanans notion of technology.
117 Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 34-35. Mediation in this sense is what is other to representation.
32
Dilnots understanding of design ethics as a combination of
negotiation and possibility align closely with my own ideas
about the subject, and his insights into negotiation extends
my understanding greatly. As one of the most in-depth texts
explicitly relating to design ethics, it is one of the most influ-
ential to my research. Though his ideas are highly theoretical
they are grounded with a solid philosophical foundation and I
find them to have a great resonance with the understanding of
design ethics I wish to cultivate.
So, ethics + design = what?
Though not yet complete, within the context of my manifesto I
interpret the previous discussion to conceive design ethics as
a way(s) in which any/all desired futures can be brought about.
It is possibility [theoretical aspects] and negotiation [physical
aspects]. It is the physical manifestation of human ideas about
what could be that requires the use of our innate ability to
think reflectively about previous experiences whilst making
decisions. It differs from, and should not be confused with,
aesthetic judgement. It is currently incomplete.
This understandingdescribes the process of designethics, but cur-
rentlylacks poles toguide the types of possibilities that shouldbe
heldas inherentlygoodandworkedtowards. Inthe discussionthat
follows, I will attempt topindownsome guidingpoles.
33
Which
possibilities
should we
strive for?
The answer to this question lies in a common design
tactic: take the problem and turn it into a solution.
Howdoyoueven begin toanswer such a question?
One common thread encountered throughout my research
perhaps quite predictablyis industrial capitalism. Across the
board, theorists describe the ways in which industrial capital-
ism has fundamentally altered our existence. Upon reviewing
the theory collected throughout my research process, three
problematic alterations kept rising to the fore. These trans-
formations are not discrete, nor are they the definitive list of
capitalisms effects, however, they offer what I believe to be
some areas of opportunityor at the very least consideration
for ethical design. Each issue will be addressed with a brief
contextualisation followed by some possible ways design can
be used to counter the issue. They will act as the guiding poles
for that-which-should-be-regarded-as-good in my understand-
ing of design ethics at the present time.
37
A crisis of terrestrial health, or harmony?
In the centuries since the Industrial Revolution, the use of
production surpluses to expand production capacity has made
continual economic growth the status quo
118
and defining marker
of progress. This cycle of consumption and economic growth
is widely regarded as a factor of the planets impending health
crisis. This crisis and its potential solutions are frequently dis-
cussedespecially within the design industry.
Though easily dismissed as a polemicist, Tony Fry offers some
ideas about the effect humans have had on the planet worth
mentioning. In his recent trilogy containing the works Design
Futuring, Design as Politics, and Becoming Human by Design,
Fry respectively articulateswith immense convictionthat
design practice be reconceptualised in a way that is harmoni-
ous with his notion of sustain-ability
119
, that designers must
politicise themselves as change makers in order to achieve
this end
120
, and offers a contextualisation of his mandates
within fundamental questions about the nature of human-
ness
121
. Thematically speakingand of particular relevance
to this discussionthe ethical implication Fry outlines is that
design has a moral obligation to humanity and must put its
efforts towards finding a collective finitude because design is
inextricable from its ability to create potential futures for the
world
122
futures which Fry conceives of as primarily destruc-
tive
123
. As such, he believes that politics must shift their focus
and become what he calls a dictatorship of sustainment
124
.
I find Frys dictatorship to be incredibly radical, and as such I
have difficulty agreeing with it wholly. Perhaps it is his choice
of words that gives me this impression, but in my opinion
he leaves no room for what I would describe as grey areas.
For instance, his thesis appears to be that current human
life should neverunder no circumstances whatsoeverbe
privileged above sustainment. In theory, this would condemn
the existence and use of life-saving medical technology that
was borne out of a capitalist economy. I interpret this to mean,
for instance, the promotion of a ban on the production or use
118 Walker, S. Sustainable By Design: Explorations inTheory and Practice, Earthscan, London, 2006, p. 10.
119 Rowe, A. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Reviewof DesignFuturing:
Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice, by Tony Fry. Art/Design/Media Subject Centre, 24 November
2009, http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/resource-reviews/rowe-design-futuring.pdf, 1.
120 Tonkinwise, C. Against Becoming Unsustainable by Human-Centered Design: Areviewof Tony Fry
Becoming Human by Design [Berg, 2013]. Reviewof Becoming Humanby Design, by Tony Fry. 2013,
http://www.academia.edu/2985203/_Against_Becoming_Unsustainable_by_Human-Centered_Design_.
121 Tonkinwise, Against Becoming Unsustainable by Human-Centered Design: Areviewof Tony Fry
Becoming Human by Design [Berg, 2013].
122 Owens, K. Design and Politics by Tony Fry. Reviewof Designand Politics, by Tony Fry. Design
Philosophy Papers, No 2, 2011, http://www.academia.edu/827369/Design_and_Politics_by_Tony_Fry_A_
review_by_Keith_Owens, 6.
123 Owens, K. Design and Politics by Tony Fry. Reviewof Designand Politics, by Tony Fry. Design
Philosophy Papers, No 2, 2011, http://www.academia.edu/827369/Design_and_Politics_by_Tony_Fry_A_
review_by_Keith_Owens, 6.
124 Tonkinwise, Against Becoming Unsustainable by Human-Centered Design: Areviewof Tony Fry
Becoming Human by Design [Berg, 2013].
39

of medications produced in factories powered by conventional
means. I cannot bring myself to agree with such an extreme
position, and think that so-called Dictatorship of Sustainment
may have the unintended consequence of subjecting people to
humiliation or stripping them of their humanity.
I make mention of Frys work to bring up the idea that humans
and the planet should not be privileged above one-another;
they should exist in balance. As such, the first pole I would like
to establish for that-which-should-be-regarded-as-good in my
understanding of design ethics is harmony between human
existence and terrestrial health. I feel that this pole is quite
self-explanatorysustainability is very much of our zeitgeist
and as extensive discussion and ideas about how to incorpo-
rate this pole into design practice are already in existence, I do
not wish to belabour my discussion of it at this time
125
.
125 In January 2013 I wrote a detailed paper outlining some methods designers could employ to further
sustainability in their practice. For further information or to gain access contact the author.
40
A hierarchy of human value, or dignity?
The second problematic alteration of industrial capitalism was
brought to my attention in Part II of Dilnots Ethics? Design?
during his discussion of dignity and design in relation to
the public sphere
126
. Dilnot points out that capitalism and its
trappings (mindless consumption, valuing greed, the desire
for endless economic growth, etc.) reduce the agency or social
worth of individuals to their economic power
127
. In perhaps one
of the most poignant passages in the book, Dilnot articulates
the ramifications of this system
128
:
If we are to consider the politics of the subject
todayespecially in urban politics in the USA, and
globally with respect to the poor (urban and rural)
then what we are most concerned with is creating
the conditions, materially and ideologically, for
the reverse of victim-hoodthat is for creating
subjectivity. We know from our earlier discussions
that the Holocaust could only happen once The
Jew as a category of person has been stripped of all
personhood. As we saw in the Berlin project, material
deprivation, public humiliation and petty cruelty are
integral part of that process [sic]which is why they
precede genocide. But this is also why class-interests
in politics have a vested interest in supporting both
humiliation and deprivation in however small ways
voter registration processes in Florida let us say, or
cut-backs to funding for infrastructure for public
education. The point about these processes is that
they are erosive of personhood with respect to whom
they are applied. In so far as they succeed (again in
even small ways) as subject into a victim and the
politics of this, to repeat, is that in so doing one has
created a person to whom anything can be done, for
the victimand children know this from playground
bullyingis one for whom in contradiction to how we
like to think about it, there can be no pity. The aim of
all ethical-politics thenhas to be to reverse the logic
of the victim. One reverses this logic by re-creating
the victim as a subject with power, and one gives
power (the term is literal) by endowing the victim/
subject with value as a subject.
129
128 After many attempts to summarise his words in an equally compelling manner, Ive decided to just
include themas an extended quotation to preserve their gravitas and poetry.
43

The notion that capitalism is ravaging our planet in an envi-
ronmental sense is often articulated, but in this passage, Dilnot
articulates a very different type of consequenceone that
strips away personhood. As a result, he explains that ethical
design calls for design that undoes harm and restores human
dignity
130
. This is the foundation for the second pole I would
like to establish for that-which-should-be-regarded-as-good in
my understanding of design ethics: dignity, the innate right of
everyone to be valued and receive ethical treatment. The ob-
vious means for employing dignity in the design practice is to
create design that actively challenges this problem, but some
more nuanced ideas are expanded upon in Part II of Dilnots
Ethics?, Design?.
Dilnot titles his first section of Part II Compassion, or the Arti-
fact: Sentient Perception and the Interior Structure of the Arti-
fact
131
to establish a direct link between artefacts and compas-
sion . He states that all ethics begins with compassion
132
, but
that in the past century we have been unable to make compas-
sion political
133
. To tie compassion to design, Dilnot examines
the designers ability to relieve the pain of others and heavily
references the final chapter of Elaine Scarrys, The Body In
Pain
134
. As it relates to ethics, Dilnot states that designers re-
lieve suffering not just with empathy to those in pain, but also
through a translation (akin to the translation of poetry from one
language to another) of their perceptions and understandings
of that pain into an artefact which works to alleviate it.
135
Dilnot
gives Harry Becks 1933 London Underground diagram
136
and
references Scarrys example of the incandescent light bulb
137
as
exemplars of this translation.
Dilnot expands the notion of pain from the sense of our bodily
capacities and capabilities to the more general sense of how
we feel alive at any momentwhich therefore relates also to
consciousness and the particularly to self-consciousness of
who we are and how we may be
138
. Though never stated so
explicitly, Dilnot is referring to the innate human longing for
possibility of what we could beor ratherdesire. He goes on
to state that design should strive not only to alleviate pain and
suffering, but also to offer an opening to happiness
139
.
139 Dilnot, Ethics? Design?, 95. What Heidegger calls, Being of Joy.
Dilnot links this back to artefacts translating them into gifts
made things are essentially anonymous gifts
140
whose produc-
tion should be addressed to a recipient
141
. He maintains that this
view of artefacts as gifts may have a lot to ofer in the confound-
ing of commodity consumption and subject-subject relations
142
.
Dilnots discussion of modesty and radical impurity has two
key takeaways for the purpose of this manifesto. First, Dilnot
dances around modesty as it relates to design. Through the
use of subheadings such as proximity and the space of being
ordinary, Dilnot constructs a notion of modesty that can be
summed up as focusing on the nearest or plainest artefacts
(those with a primary concern of serving a compassionate end)
and not on those which are opulent or borne from self-indulgent
aesthetics
143
. Second, Dilnot puts forth the concept of radical
impurity, by which he means design that hovers perpetually
between two conditions
144
. For instance, design that is between
such things as: imaginative projection and realisation; artwork
and the object made real; prototype and ubiquitous stereotype; or
inventive and everyday
145
. This once again harkens back to Dil-
nots theory that (design) ethics is a negotiation between the real
and the ideal, and therefore implicates that to design in a space of
radical impurity is to design ethically.
In summation, with this pole I wish to articulate that the full
access to things such as the alleviation of suffering, the exten-
sion of human experience, and dignity should not be directly
correlated to ones economic power.
45 44
A crisis of confidence, or desire?
This final problematic alteration of industrial capitalism is a dis-
belief in our own ability to successfully undertake and complete
transformative change. It is perhaps the most key of the three, as
the subtext of the first two requires transformation.
This issue is covered very thoroughly in Jill Franzs 2013 key-
note presentation at the DRS//Cumulus Oslo 2
nd
International
Conference for Design Education Researchers. In her address,
Franz proposes a new design pedagogy with wide application
for education at any level which regards design learning as
a force for engaging the radical self
146
. In Franzs context, a
radical self is:
one who takes responsibility for designing their own
existence, who is intensely desiring of reform and
transformation despite risk, disruption and ambiguity;
who contests intentions to control preferring to adopt
a nuanced, textured approach to life; who embraces
uncertainty because of the impetus it provides to move
beyond the world that is
147
.
Franz states that there is a general consensus (amongst the
media, government, design industry, business, etc.) that
abductive reasoning and creative problem solving must be
used to solve the wicked problems of our postnormal world
148
including, in this context, the two aforementioned problematic

alterations. However, she believes we currently lack the confi-
dence to see such transformation through, using the Ziauddin
Sardar quote, in our time it is possible to dream all dreams of
visionary futures but almost impossible to believe we have the
capability or commitment to make any of them a reality
149
to
articulate the idea poetically.
Franz explains this crisis of confidence by stating that humans
have undergone the extinction of experience
150
as capitalism
has changed transformed the relationship children have with
nature from direct exposure to an indirect and virtual experi-
ence
151
. Franz believes these indirect experiencesmediated by
technologylimit childrens opportunities to experience won-
der and surprise and for dealing with uncertainty, risk, and fail-
146 Franz, Jill. [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self. Keynote Presentation
for DRS//Cumulus Oslo 2013-2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo,
Norway, 16 May 2013.
147 Franz, [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self
148 Franz, [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self.
149 Sardar, Z. Welcome to postnormal times. Futures, 42, no. 5, (2010 quoted in Franz, [Design] Learning:
AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self. How does this relate to Dilnots notionof ethics being
the mediationbetweenthe real and ideal if our faithinour ownability to create the ideal no longer
exists?
150 Franz, [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self. The extinctionof
experience refers to a sense of disembodiment or alienationfromnature and the natural world.
151 Kellert, S. Building for Life. Washington: Island Press, 2005, 45 quoted in Franz, [Design] Learning: A
Productive Force for Engaging the Radical Self.

49
ure
152
ultimately leaving them with reduced opportunities to
develop resilience and adaptive, critical and creative responses
and to build an experiential repository for future. To Franz, this
shift changes the ways in which we define our humanness.
In this particular instance, an extinction of experience with
nature has shaken the confidence in our ability to successfully
undertake transformative change
153
. This is the backgrund for
the third pole I would like to establish for that-which-should-
be-regarded-as-good in my understanding of design ethics:
desire as a source of inspiration and motivation.
As a means of counteracting this crisis of confidence, Franz
introduces aspects of Nelson & Stoltermans 2010 work, The
Design Wayspecifically the idea of desiderata (that-which-
is-desired). Nelson and Stolterman argue that we typically
attempt to solve problems with a negotiation between that-
which-is and that-which-ought-to-be but do not include
that-which-is-desired (desiderata)
154
. Instead, they argue that
we should include desiderata and use humanitys hardwired
desireto thrive and not merely surviveto reinvigorate our
transformative action
155
. They offer the idea that desire is
the destabilizing trigger for transformational change, which
facilitates the emergence of new possibilities and realizations
of human being
156
.
The significance of this is that design can enable a positive
impulse born out of the desire to create situations, systems of
organisation, or concrete artefacts that enhance our life expe-
riences
157
. As Franz puts it, a shift to include desires as well
as needs, for all concerned, might invoke greater potential and
embodied generative capacity of design for transformational
change
158
. Franz and Nelson & Stolterman believe desiderata
could help to restore faith in our abilities to create transfor-
mation as it can help initiate a certain kind of design action,
capacity, or agency linking this human capacity to human
achievement in a highly productive way
159
.
In this way, desiderata can be can be thought as of that-
which-is-not-yet
160
and the creation of transformative change
through desiderata contains three dimensions: what we want
154 Nelson, H&E Stolterman. The DesignWay, 2
nd
Edition. London: The MIT Press, 2010, 117 quoted in
Franz, [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self.
nd
nd
Edition. London: The MIT Press, 2010, 110quoted in
nd
nd
Edition. London: The MIT Press, 2010, quoted in Franz,
[Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self.
nd
(our aesthetics); what we believe ought to be (our ethics); that
which needs to be (corresponding to reason)
161
. In relation to
design, Franz voices Nelson & Stoltermans belief that design
should intentionally direct evolution rather than allow evolu-
tion to happen as a reactive trigger to negative change
162
as it
ensures design is a grounded and purposeful activity.
161 Franz, [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical Self. The extinctionof
experience refers to a sense of disembodiment or alienationfromnature and the natural world.
nd
51 50
Harmony, dignity, and desire
Though in the previous paragraphs I used each pole as a
means of counteracting one specific alteration, they all have
applications for each of the alterations. For instance, harmony
between human existence and terrestrial health could also
have the effect of restoring childhood experiences with nature
and therefore help reduce our crisis of confidence. Or, the desire
to expand human capability can can also be a tool to use in the
creation of dignity for all. They are by no means meant to be
used only for one purpose, but wherever feels appropriate or
practical. New poles can also be added as necessary.
Works Cited
Aamodt, A., and E. Plaza. Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues,
Methodological Variations, and SystemApproaches. Artificial Intelli-
gence Communications 7, no. 1 (1994): 39-52.
Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. DesignIssues VIII, no.
2 (1992): 5-21.
Bunge, M. Dictionary of Philosophy. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1999.
Burnette, C. The Morals and Ethics of ATheory of Design Thinking.
Academia.edu. February 9, 2013. http://www.academia.edu/4390557/
The_Morals_and_Ethics_of_A_Theory_of_Design_Thinking.
Burnette, C. ATheory of Design Thinking. Academia.edu. November 1,
2009. http://www.academia.edu/209385/A_Theory_of_Design_Think-
ing.
Cokelet, B. The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2:
Ethics? Design? Reviewof The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2,
by S. Tigerman. DesignIssue 23, no. 2 (Summer 2007).
Cross, N. Developments inDesignMethodology. Chichester: Wiley, 1984.
Crotty, M. The Foundations of Social Science Research:meaning and
Perspective inthe ResearchProcess. NewSouth Wales: Allen and Uwin,
1998.
Davis, P. Q. Tomz. Lecture, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom,
Plymouth, September 12, 2013.
Dilnot, C. Ethics? Design? In The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2,
edited by S. Tigerman, 1-149. Chicago: Archeworks Press, 2005.
Franz, J. [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical
Self. Address, DRS//Cumulus Oslo 2013-2nd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers, Norway, Oslo, May 16, 2013.
Friedman, K. Theory Construction in Design Research: Criteria: Approach-
es, and Methods. DesignStudies 24, no. 6 (2003): 507-22.
Fry, T. Becoming Humanby Design. London: Berg, 2012.
Fry, T. Designas Politics. Oxford: Berg, 2011.
Fry, T. DesignFuturing: Sustainability, Ethics, and New Practice. Oxford:
Berg, 2009.
Glaser, M. These Are Some Things I Have Learned. Address, AIGANation-
al Design Conference, March 23, 2002.
Jonsen, A. R. Casuistry: An Alternative or Complement to Principles?
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 5, no. 3 (1995): 237-51.
Kellert, S. Building for Life. Washington: Island Press, 2005.
Kimbell, L. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1. Designand Culture 3, no. 3
(2011): 285-306.
Kimbell, L. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 2. Designand Culture 4, no.
2 (2012): 129-48.
Lustig, A., and R. Poynor. What Is a Designer. In Looking Closer 3: Classic
Writings onGraphic Design, edited by M. Bierut, J. Helfand, and S. Heller,
106-08. NewYork: Allworth Press, 1999.
Nelson, H., and E. Stolterman. The DesignWay: Intentional Change inan
Unpredictable World. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Massachusestts: MIT Press,
2012.
Owens, K. Design and Politics by Tony Fry. Reviewof Design and Politics,
by T. Fry. Design Philosophy Papers 2 (2011). Accessed August 2013.
http://www.academia.edu/827369/Design_and_Politics_by_Tony_Fry-
_A_review_by_Keith_Owens.
57
Potter, N. What Is a Designer: Things, Places, Messages. London:
Hyphen, 2012.
Rowe, A. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Review
of Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Art/Design/
Media Subject Centre, September 24, 2009. http://www.adm.heacademy.
ac.uk/library/files/resource-reviews/rowe-design-futuring.pdf.
Sardar, Z. Welcome to Postnormal Times. Futures 42, no. 5 (2010): 435-44.
Simon, H. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
Tonkinwise, C. Against Becoming Unsustainable by Human-Centered
Design: AReviewof Tony Fry Becoming Human by Design [Berg, 2013].
Reviewof Becoming Human by Design, by T. Fry. Accessed August 2013.
http://www.academia.edu/2985203/_Against_Becoming_Unsustaina-
ble_by_Human-Centered_Design_.
Walker, S. Sustainable by Design: Explorations inTheory and Practice
London: Earthscan, 2006.
Bibliography
Aamodt, A., and E. Plaza. Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues,
Methodological Variations, and SystemApproaches. Artificial Intelli-
gence Communications 7, no. 1 (1994): 39-52.
Barreto, Susana. Ethics for the Real World: The Impact of Globalisation on
Communication Design. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of DesignConfer-
ence - Crafting the Future, 13. Gothenburg, 2013.
Baudrillard, Jean. For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign. Trans-
lated by Charles Levin. NewYork: Telos, 1981.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Translated by Sheila Faria
Glaser. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994.
Baudrillard, Jean. The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London:
Sage, 1998.
Black, Misha. The Designer and the Client. In Looking Closer 3: Classic
Writings onGraphic Design, edited by Jessica Helfand Michael Beirut,
Stephen Heller, and Rick Poynor, 109-11. NewYork: Allworth Press, 1999.
Bretteville, Shela Levrant de. Some Aspects of Design fromthe Perspec-
tive of a Woman Designer. In Looking Closer 3: Classic Writings on
Graphic Design, edited by Jessica Helfand Michael Beirut, Stephen Heller,
and Rick Poynor, 238-45. NewYork: Allworth, 1999.
Bronwen Grey, Alan Young. Communication Design and Community:
Pedagogy and Empowerment. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of Design
Conference - Crafting the Future, 14. Gothenburg, 2013.
Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. DesignIssues VIII, no.
2 (1992): 5-21.
Buck-Coleman, Audra. Navigating Cross-Cultures, Curriculumand
Confrontation: Addressing Ethics and Stereotypes in Design Education.
Visible Language 44, no. 2 (2010): 187-208.
Bunge, M. Dictionary of Philosophy. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1999.
Burnette, C. The Morals and Ethics of ATheory of Design Thinking.
Academia.edu. February 9, 2013. http://www.academia.edu/4390557/
The_Morals_and_Ethics_of_A_Theory_of_Design_Thinking.
Burnette, C. ATheory of Design Thinking. Academia.edu. November 1,
2009. http://www.academia.edu/209385/A_Theory_of_Design_Think-
ing.
58 59
Cokelet, B. The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2:
Ethics? Design? Reviewof The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2,
by S. Tigerman. DesignIssue 23, no. 2 (Summer 2007).
Cross, N. Developments inDesignMethodology. Chichester: Wiley, 1984.
Crotty, M. The Foundations of Social Science Research:meaning and
Perspective inthe ResearchProcess. NewSouth Wales: Allen and Uwin,
1998.
Danchev, A. 100 Artists Manifestos. London: Penguin, 2011.
Darbyshire, Ralph. Activism, Art Practice and the Vulnerability of Mes-
sage. University of Plymouth, 2011.
Davis, P. Q. Tomz. Lecture, University of Plymouth, United Kingdom,
Plymouth, September 12, 2013.
Dilnot, C. Ethics? Design? In The Archeworks Papers, Volume 1, Number 2,
edited by S. Tigerman, 1-149. Chicago: Archeworks Press, 2005.
Drenttel, Willamand Julie Lasky. Reasons Not to Be Pretty: Symposiumon
Design, Social Change and the Museum. DesignObserver (2010).
Drucker, Johanna and Emily McVarish. Chapters 4 &5. Chap. 4 + 5 In
Graphic DesignHistory: ACritical Guide: Prentice Hall, 2008.
Foucault, Michel. The Political Technology of Individuals. In Technologies
of the Self. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1988.
Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Translated by A. M.
Sheirdan Smith. Abingdon: Routledge, 1989.
Franz, J. [Design] Learning: AProductive Force for Engaging the Radical
Self. Address, DRS//Cumulus Oslo 2013-2nd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers, Norway, Oslo, May 16, 2013.
Frascara, Jorge. Communication Design: Principles, Methods and Practice.
NewYork: Allworth Press, 2004.
Friedman, K. Theory Construction in Design Research: Criteria: Approach-
es, and Methods. DesignStudies 24, no. 6 (2003): 507-22.
Fry, T. Becoming Humanby Design. London: Berg, 2012.
Fry, T. Designas Politics. Oxford: Berg, 2011.
Fry, T. DesignFuturing: Sustainability, Ethics, and New Practice. Oxford:
Berg, 2009.
Garland, Ken. First Things First. In Looking Closer 3: Classic Writings on
Graphic Design, edited by Jessica Helfand Michael Beirut, Stephen Heller,
and Rick Poynor, 154-55. NewYork: Allworth Press, 1999.
Garland, Ken. Here Are Some Things We Must Do. In Looking Closer 3:
Classic Writings onGraphic Design, edited by Jessica Helfand Michael
Beirut, Stephen Heller, and Rick Poynor, 187-92. NewYork: Allworth Press,
1999.
ginger all-lower-case coons, Ricardo Laufuente, Ana Isabel Carvalho.
Bringing the Methods of Free/Libre Open Source Software to Collabora-
tive Graphic Design. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of DesignConference
- Crafting the Future, 15. Gothenburg, 2013.
Glaser, M. These Are Some Things I Have Learned. Address, AIGANation-
al Design Conference, March 23, 2002.
Grayling, A. C. What the Professor Says.. Creative Review 27, no. 2 (Febru-
ary 2007): 2.
Grey, Carol and Julian Mailns. Visualizing Research: AGuide to the Re-
search Process in Art and Design. Alsershot, England: Ashgate, 2004.
Haslem, Neal. Radical Communication Design: An Intersubjective Framing
of Collaborative Practice. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of DesignConfer-
ence - Crafting the Future, 13. Gothenburg, 2013.
Heidegger, Matin. Being and Time. Translated by John Macquarrie &Ed-
ward Robinson. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962.
Heller, Stephen. Introduction. In CitizenDesigner: Perspectives onDesign
Responsibility, edited by Veronique Vienne Stephen Heller, ix-xi. New
York, USA: Allworth Press, 2003.
Hoel, Anne-Mette; Bitnes, Kristin Schjdt; Staven-Garberg, Kjersti. Amg &
Etikk [Amg and Ethics]. Snitt magasinfor visuell kommunikasjon, no. 1
(2008): 26-27.
Jonsen, A. R. Casuistry: An Alternative or Complement to Principles?
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 5, no. 3 (1995): 237-51.
Junginger, Sabine. Design and Innovation in the Public Sector: Matters of
Design in Policy-Making and Policy Implementation1. In 10thEuropean
Academy of DesignConference - Crafting the Future. Gothenburg, 2013.
Kellert, S. Building for Life. Washington: Island Press, 2005.
Kerr, Russel. Design Can Change the World If We Change the Way We
Approach Design.. Desktop, no. 277 (2011): 2.
Kimbell, L. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1. Designand Culture 3, no. 3
(2011): 285-306.
Kimbell, L. Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 2. Designand Culture 4, no.
2 (2012): 129-48.
Lustig, A., and R. Poynor. What Is a Designer. In Looking Closer 3: Classic
Writings onGraphic Design, edited by M. Bierut, J. Helfand, and S. Heller,
106-08. NewYork: Allworth Press, 1999.
McCoy, K. Good Citizenship. In CitizenDesigner: Perspectives onDesign
Responsibility, edited by Veronique Vienne Stephen Heller. NewYork,
USA: Allworth Press, 2003.
Nelson, H., and E. Stolterman. The DesignWay: Intentional Change inan
Unpredictable World. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Massachusestts: MIT Press,
2012.
OBrien, Susie and Imre Szeman. Representation and Construction of
Social Reality. In Popular Culture: AUsers Guide: Nelson Education
Limited, 2010.
Oldham, Craig. Design Guidelines. Creative Review 29, no. 5 (2009): 60-61.
Owens, K. Design and Politics by Tony Fry. Reviewof Design and Politics,
by T. Fry. Design Philosophy Papers 2 (2011). Accessed August 2013.
http://www.academia.edu/827369/Design_and_Politics_by_Tony_Fry-
_A_review_by_Keith_Owens.
Paul A. Rodgers, Andy Tennant, Giovanni Innella, Freddie Yauner. Disrup-
tive Design Interventions as Change Agents. In 10thEuropeanAcademy
of DesignConference - Crafting the Future, 14. Gothenburg, 2013.
Potter, N. What Is a Designer: Things, Places, Messages. London: Hyphen,
2012.
Roberts, Lucienne. Good: AnIntroductionto Ethics inGraphic Design. Case
Postale, Switzerland: AVAPublishing SA, 2006.
Rowe, A. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Review
of Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and NewPractice. Art/Design/
Media Subject Centre, September 24, 2009. http://www.adm.heacademy.
ac.uk/library/files/resource-reviews/rowe-design-futuring.pdf.
Sardar, Z. Welcome to Postnormal Times. Futures 42, no. 5 (2010): 435-44.
Shea, Andrew. Designing for Social Change: Strategies for Communi-
ty-Based Graphic Design Princeton Architectural Press, 2012.
Simon, H. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
Simmons, Christopher. Just Design : Socially Conscious Design for Critical
Causes. Cincinnati, Ohio: HowBooks, 2011.
Spencer, John. First Things First Business Plan.. DesignWeek20, no. 48
(2005): 3/5.
60
Stefano Mafei, Marzia Mortati, Beatrice Villari. Making/Design Policies
Together. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of DesignConference - Crafting
the Future, 14. Gothenburg, 2013.
Teresa Franqueira, Sara Gonalves. Participatory Design for Public Ser-
vices: AFood Diary for Children. In 10thEuropeanAcademy of Design
Conference - Crafting the Future, 16. Gothenburg, 2013.
Tonkinwise, C. Against Becoming Unsustainable by Human-Centered
Design: AReviewof Tony Fry Becoming Human by Design [Berg, 2013].
Reviewof Becoming Human by Design, by T. Fry. Accessed August 2013.
http://www.academia.edu/2985203/_Against_Becoming_Unsustaina-
ble_by_Human-Centered_Design_.
Walker, S. Sustainable by Design: Explorations inTheory and Practice.
London: Earthscan, 2006.
Image Credits
Cover Image
Thompson, M. 3 February 2013, Devonport, Plymouth, United Kindgom.
An abandonded shopfront.
Page 24
Reddit User Dead_Motherfucker 31 January 2013, Barcelona, Spain.
Roof of the nave in the Baslica i Temple Expiatori de la Sagrada Famlia.
Page 31
Flickr User Nite_Owl 28 February 2007.
Braun radio designed by Dieter Rams.
Page 35
Mun, Sang., 20June 2013.
ZZX typeface and specimen poster inspired by US goverment surveil-
lance of online activities.
Page 39
Thompson, M, July 2013.
Visualised diagram of Dilnots theory.
Page 41
Shoes for H.O.P.E.
Water bottles turned into crude shoes in sub-saharan Africa.
Page 45
Thomspon, M. September 2013,
Picasso quote tattooed on a mans left shoulder.
Page 49
Ollennu, Davis. June 15, 2011. Korle Lagoon, Ghana.
Two men scavange for sellable materials in a dumping ground
technological waste imported from the global north.
Page 55
Lamb, B. Cubicle Dwellers, 2. December 2012. Society for Community
Organization, Hong Kong.
A man eats a meal alone, surrounded by his possessions in one of Hong
Kongs infamous cage apartments.
Page 61
AmazonSupply.com
Assorted Edison squirrel-cage lightbulbs.
61
Colophon
This man text of this book was set in Quadon. Quadon was designed by
Rne Bider to fill the gap between traditional serifs and the lasting trend
of using sans serif fonts for contemporary design. The result is a modern,
clear and infinitely flexible interpretation of slab serif fonts. The open
shapes and a large x-height keep the font legible in small sizes while the
short descender supports the compact heart and strength of a slab serif.
Quadon has a wide range of typographic features and alternative glyphs
to create your own and unique version of it. It comes in nine diferent
weights with matching italics. From the sensitive but sharp thinner
weights to the punchy and powerful heavy weights, Quadon is well-suit-
ed for a wide range of versatile tasks. Rne Bider generously gave me a
copy of his typeface to be used in this manifesto. Many thanks, Rne!
A small run of this book has been printed and hand bound by the author
for limited distribution, of which this is number .

#L2D4G: A Personal Manifesto of Design Ethics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

#L2D4G: A Personal Manifesto of Design Ethics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

#L2D4G

Learning to design for good

including, in this context, the two aforementioned problematic

You might also like