The deceitful nature of design

It is amazing how design as an approach has spread and is still growing in many cases, spearheaded by designers who genuinely believe in the good of design. I am devoted to the idea that design as an approach to change can lead to outcomes that no other approach can. But is all that design can do good?

I was reminded of the idea of design as a process of deception when I returned to the writings of Vilém Flusser and his book "The shape of things--a philosophy of design". I was struck by a section where Flusser elaborates on what design is. Flusser uses the notions of 'deception and trickery' as core in his definition. He says that when we design, in our attempt to "making a new form of culture possible", we create something (Flusser calls it a machine) that tricks nature. With technology and design, we can create machinery that makes the impossible possible, things that nature can't produce. However, with this ability to deceive nature comes responsibility. And this is where I found the quote that brilliantly describes the role of humans as designers.

"This is the design that is the basis of all culture: to deceive nature by means of technology, to replace what is natural with what is artificial and build a machine out of which there comes a god who is ourselves." (Flusser, p 19).

This is both a wonderful and scary description. If, by design, we humans approach a god-like state, as a consequence, we must take on god-like responsibilities. Who wants that kind of responsibility? Who wants to be a god?

And Flusser continues. He brings in the question of value. He is warning us about the loss that is a consequence of design. He writes:

"..a new perspective opened up within which one could create more and more perfect designs, escape one's circumstances more and more, live more and more artistically (beautifully). But the price we pay for this is the loss of truth and authenticity."

In this quote, it is interesting to note that to Flusser, living artistically and beautifully is not the end-all; it is not the final goal or the life we should aspire to live. Instead, he argues for 'truth' and 'authenticity.' This shift is something others have advocated, for instance, Albert Borgmann in his 'device paradigm' theory. This relationship between the two approaches becomes obvious when Fuller discusses 'value' and uses the cheap plastic pen as an example. He argues that when design replaces 'truth' and 'authenticity' with "perfectly designed artifacts," we find ourselves in a different world. When "all these artefacts become as valuable as the plastic pens, [they] become disposable gadgets." Borgmann argues for a similar understanding of what happens when we transform our surroundings into perfect devices that always give us what we need when we need it.

Flusser states that this explanation of design aims to " expose the cunning and deceptive aspects of the word design....because they are normally concealed." I find this examination of the 'deceitful' nature of design desperately needed today. The explosive growth, interest, and glorification of design have led to a situation where the expectations are exaggerated, the process is drastically simplified, and the philosophy and nature of design are neglected. This glorification and neglect will inevitably lead to severe disappointments and backlashes. Flusser's examinations and Borgmann's philosophy give us tools so that we can examine our designed world and the role of design in a more sober way.