What does my iPhone see when I'm walking and listening to music?

Shooting stills while walking and listening to music.
I don't need to look through the lens.
I trust in my iPhone.
It will see what it wants to see.

(images and color adjusted in Ps5)

Why do solvers go off brief?

The problem-statement brief changes as soon as you read it. We all see different aspects of the brief with varying degrees of attention and focus. The more complex the document the more varied the perception of it amongst the solvers. We see the things that interest us first: the things we know how to do or have done before.  These biases are difficult to avoid without following a strict critical thinking methodology. The variations of perspectives, on the other hand, can lead to deeper and more creative insights when the problem solving process is made "public"and shared.

This diagram (click to view) represents the "hidden" nature of the solving process. If you can involve the client in some of your "synthesis" steps the less disingenuous rationalization you'll need to do when it comes time to present your solutions.

The creative process is often hidden from the key stakeholders. They don't participate in the synthesis, which is a messy and protracted event that's difficult to unravel and even more difficult to share. It evades scrutiny and description and therefore never really surfaces for discussion during the final presentation stages. Instead, the primary stakeholders are subject to a dog and pony show that attempts to rationalize the final solution in light of the original brief which is in fact a "different"one for the solvers.

There is an approach to "surfacing" the synthesis as described by Jon Kolko*. He calls this a synthesis framework which involves 3 basic steps.

1. Prioritizing
2. Judging
3. Forging connections

By naming the process, making it more tangible the client can not only see how you got to your solution, they can also participate. I think it's important to emphasize that the client (the authors/owners of the problem statement, as well as the researchers, directors of a problem-finding mission) have much more knowledge about the issue at hand than the solvers. What a waste of a valuable resource if you cannot include them in your creative problem solving process.

•Kolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: The drivers of design synthesis. Design Issues, 26(1), 15-28. Retrieved from http://iefx.engineering.illinois.edu/ sites/iefx.engineering.illinois.edu/files/Kolko(10)The drivers of design synthesis.pdf

What does the larva and caterpillar want you to see?

There is nothing in a caterpillar that tells you it’s going to be a butterfly. - B.Fuller

With all due respect to Mr. Fuller I am distorting his original intention to suit my own needs.

What’s in a caterpillar that tells you it’s going to be a butterfly?

Photos: Larva by ddavid, Monarch Butterfly by William Warby

It’s just an exercise in being acutely aware of your surroundings through vision, to really look at things beyond just what they appear to be at first glance. It’s not about a prolonged staring contest, “things” don’t stare back. What they do offer is a myriad of hints to their true meaning and structure. 

You don’t draw the figure of a human body by examining the surface features alone, you draw from the inside out. The skeletal and muscle structures define the surface shape. The play of light and shadow on the surface only makes sense when you understand what’s happening on the inside. You can replicate the light and shadow that defines a surface but without knowing why the shadow bends the way it does, you’re just “reporting” on what you see rather that drawing what is really there. If your subject were to disappear but you have a  knowledge of anatomy,  you could still make relevant and deep changes to your sketch.

What does the object of your attention want you to see?

My comparison between larva and a butterfly may be a little glib, but I do believe that the way you look at your subject and the skills of perception naturally leads to a deeper appreciation of it.

( see Inge Druckrey,“teaching to see” produced by Edward Tufte, 2012)

I feel, therefore I think

"....we live in a world where we are taught from the start, that we are thinking creatures that feel. The truth is, we are feeling creatures that think..." 

                                    Jill Boyle Taylor (b.1959) neuroanatomist

In the process of my literature review on "visual thinking" I'm often distracted by trains of thought that are tangental to my main focus of inquiry. That's perfectly ok though, it just takes more time to get to the heart of the matter. I'm fascinated  (as well as overwhelmed) by the amount of material developed on cognition and the creative ideation process. How do we solve problems? What's my process, what's yours? It's not a private affair any longer -- although we still have to do deep critical thinking on our own -- the real work happens outside of our heads. The work gets done in the room, with as many relevant stakeholders as possible and practical.

The thought process is shared, it's a distributed cognition that relies on the input of others as well as any artefacts we can get our hands on:  the white boards, the sticky-notes, the idea sketches scrolled all over presentation pads.

It feels at once familiar and strange to me. This is how we used to "play" in early grade school. I think it still needs to be considered a type of "play". It may require rigorous attention to detail and process, especially when using cognitive tools to structure information and data. But aside from the brain work, we can't ignore the body work. What does the body know? Or the heart? How we feel informs what we think and do. The holistic approach to problem-solving is natural and so necessary when faced with the complexities of our time.

Somewhere between an overwhelming preponderance of evidence and your assumptions...

Visual Solutions

It would be virtually impossible to solve the following problem without using pure visual thinking. Or in this case: eye-hand coordination and applying a marker to a substrate.

the problem: (from McKim's Experiences in Visual Thinking)
"With a continuous line that does not retrace draw the pattern below"(p12)

It took a lot of trial and error ( and I even tried to cheat, but could not find the solution in the book)....
- scroll down for solution.....

Deciphering the doodle

While listening to professors talk about the essentials of a good research paper - I was drawing. I was paying attention, but still drawing. It's not a picture of anything, but it may hint at my own process .... note the pillar-like object middle right. I think that would be my main research question. Judging by the "weight" of the structure above it, I may need to make it a little more robust!

Distributed cognition, or thinking outloud.

tacit knowledge +visual thinking + the "hunch" + reframing + emotional intelligence

 = thinking outloud