撰文 (羅馬尼亞)米哈伊·納丁翻譯 高巖

當(dāng)今世界，知識(shí)正在變得越來(lái)越運(yùn)算化。以前與知識(shí)的獲取、交流及批評(píng)的方式與方法都漸漸淡出，取而代之的是由數(shù)字化手段實(shí)現(xiàn)的信息探尋、知識(shí)分配與價(jià)值評(píng)估。帕斯卡（Pascal）、萊布尼茲（Leibniz）和皮爾斯（Peirce）為此變化，搭建了多項(xiàng)必要的概念結(jié)構(gòu)。在學(xué)習(xí)知識(shí)的動(dòng)機(jī)、獲取知識(shí)的渠道及分享知識(shí)的意愿等問(wèn)題上，他們提出許多相關(guān)的問(wèn)題；換句話來(lái)講，他們給出了認(rèn)知方面的定義。更近的，布爾（Boole）①、維納（Wiener）[1]和凡·諾依曼（von Neumann）提供了所需的科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)，并最終由阿塔那索夫（Atanasoff）、 祖薩（Zuse）、 ?？颂兀‥ckert）與 莫奇萊（Mauchly） 制造出機(jī)器③。電腦圖像、可視化、桌面出版、CAD、多媒體、虛擬現(xiàn)實(shí)、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)、萬(wàn)維網(wǎng)，已經(jīng)成為了我們生活的一部分，還有更多的知識(shí)也將來(lái)到我們身邊。在這一進(jìn)程中，科學(xué)也開(kāi)始變得趨向運(yùn)算化：最耳熟能詳?shù)谋闶俏锢?、生物、化學(xué)的轉(zhuǎn)變；工程領(lǐng)域，在材料應(yīng)用、機(jī)器人技術(shù)，甚至是計(jì)算機(jī)生產(chǎn)及軟件自動(dòng)生成的各個(gè)方面，都經(jīng)歷著同樣的變化。在這樣的大環(huán)境下，設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域發(fā)生了怎樣變化？

1 現(xiàn)狀

目前的普遍現(xiàn)象是——計(jì)算機(jī)和設(shè)計(jì)師僅僅是工具與使用者的關(guān)系。事實(shí)上，在設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域內(nèi)部，一直存在計(jì)算機(jī)是否能夠替代設(shè)計(jì)師的爭(zhēng)論，至少計(jì)算機(jī)已經(jīng)取代了鉛筆和馬克筆，以及枯燥的模型制作。平面設(shè)計(jì)師又一次走在最前端，他們樂(lè)于、也最容易開(kāi)拓各種新的領(lǐng)域，比如字體設(shè)計(jì)、按需出版和電子出版。他們很快就發(fā)現(xiàn)數(shù)字技術(shù)并不僅僅代表著原有功能上的先進(jìn)工具，更代表著活動(dòng)領(lǐng)域的拓寬。激光顯示器、掃描儀、手繪板，硬盤，不斷嘗試整合越來(lái)越多的網(wǎng)絡(luò)工具（瀏覽器，Applets程序，F(xiàn)rames語(yǔ)言）?？茖W(xué)抽樣、拼接、變異、超鏈接等手段方法也加入進(jìn)來(lái)，正是這樣，多媒體和網(wǎng)絡(luò)交互為印刷品增色不少。我認(rèn)為最成功的范例是傳媒設(shè)計(jì)的新應(yīng)用：虛擬設(shè)計(jì)室，也就是設(shè)計(jì)師基于已有的技術(shù)與工作方式，設(shè)計(jì)出一種新的互動(dòng)工作環(huán)境。因此運(yùn)算化成為設(shè)計(jì)工作的組織機(jī)制，并在實(shí)踐中根據(jù)對(duì)它的評(píng)估，不斷接受新的測(cè)試。但是，即使在平面設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域，根本問(wèn)題還是被回避了：我們是否認(rèn)定人類大眾是一個(gè)不會(huì)隨著科學(xué)和技術(shù)改變的群體？我們是否在“設(shè)計(jì)”我們自己的公眾，為植根社會(huì)且更具個(gè)性化的人們之間的互動(dòng)，發(fā)明各種形式和手段？我們?nèi)绾纬綄?duì)于大眾傳播的迷戀，令小眾傳播為目標(biāo)的“設(shè)計(jì)”，在內(nèi)容與表現(xiàn)手段上都能夠與大眾傳播取得平衡？我們又該如何改變固有的想法，嘗試革新性交流的手段與動(dòng)機(jī)？

技術(shù)，盡管已經(jīng)被創(chuàng)新地應(yīng)用在傳媒設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域，但仍然遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出我們已經(jīng)應(yīng)用的范疇。在其它設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域，主要是產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)和工業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)，目前的情況還不是特別明朗。傳統(tǒng)的工業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)幾乎不能提供新的就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)，需要數(shù)字整合的教育項(xiàng)目的進(jìn)程也比較緩慢?？杀氖?，教育工作者們已經(jīng)習(xí)慣了不懈地思考工業(yè)革命模型的硬性條件，這些條件并不是依靠和設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)的新思路，更多是基于對(duì)制造手段的預(yù)期要求。眾所周之，在技術(shù)上的投資，諸如軟硬件、維護(hù)、培訓(xùn)、研究等，費(fèi)用高得令人咋舌。很少有人敢于嘗試創(chuàng)業(yè)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，更不用提獲得成功的人了。大企業(yè)為了鞏固自己的強(qiáng)勢(shì)地位，逐漸吸納這樣一些人，他們能夠管理當(dāng)前基于計(jì)算機(jī)或計(jì)算機(jī)輔助設(shè)計(jì)的復(fù)雜工作環(huán)境。在很多情況下，為了保護(hù)獨(dú)立的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)，企業(yè)的設(shè)計(jì)并不公開(kāi)。那些利用計(jì)算機(jī)及軟件來(lái)開(kāi)發(fā)先進(jìn)產(chǎn)品的設(shè)計(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)，甚至不配置上網(wǎng)設(shè)備。而當(dāng)涉及到數(shù)字技術(shù)的時(shí)候，他們又不得不嘗試不同的協(xié)作設(shè)計(jì)方法，這些注定都是要避開(kāi)公眾的視線隱蔽地進(jìn)行。他們忽視了這種孤立的手段方法與其工作本身結(jié)構(gòu)之間的矛盾性。結(jié)果是他們可以嚴(yán)守設(shè)計(jì)秘密（如新車模型、新玩具、新家具等等），但每次發(fā)布時(shí)卻經(jīng)常發(fā)現(xiàn)自己已經(jīng)落后于市場(chǎng)了。

技術(shù)領(lǐng)先于設(shè)計(jì)并不僅僅表現(xiàn)在工業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域。在紡織業(yè)、時(shí)尚界、玩具商及室內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)中也非常明顯，各種形式的設(shè)計(jì)還都是手工模式為主。難以避免的后果是各種設(shè)計(jì)缺陷都被計(jì)算機(jī)輔助設(shè)計(jì)掩蓋了，結(jié)果扔給折扣市場(chǎng)顧客的都是些沒(méi)有品味的產(chǎn)品。軍事和人工智能領(lǐng)域之外，無(wú)論設(shè)計(jì)初衷是多么“高檔”的、價(jià)格多么合適的小玩具，都不能在我們的文化中得體地存在。

2 設(shè)計(jì)理論的可能性

運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)認(rèn)同工具與使用者之間的有機(jī)聯(lián)系。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的目的在于通過(guò)這種聯(lián)系轉(zhuǎn)換出更多的可能性，并通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)付諸實(shí)現(xiàn)。要達(dá)成這一目標(biāo)，“運(yùn)算”既不能像今天這樣僅僅作為一個(gè)表達(dá)的媒介，也不能僅是產(chǎn)生變體，不管這種變體成不成系統(tǒng)，因?yàn)檫\(yùn)算化已經(jīng)成為設(shè)計(jì)本身的構(gòu)成機(jī)制。設(shè)計(jì)理論是否真的可行的老問(wèn)題，再次擺在我們的面前，如果可行，會(huì)以什么樣的形式實(shí)現(xiàn)？

之前當(dāng)這個(gè)問(wèn)題還處在構(gòu)想階段的時(shí)候，理論只能是遵從實(shí)際的設(shè)計(jì)。最好的設(shè)計(jì)師，或者至少是那些將自己的想法透過(guò)文字表達(dá)出來(lái)的人，能夠?qū)⒆约旱某删秃侠砘?。也就是說(shuō)，他們僅僅是在設(shè)計(jì)被認(rèn)同或者被公眾認(rèn)可之后再對(duì)自己的工作進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)，這樣的情況大家都早已司空見(jiàn)慣了。眾所周之，設(shè)計(jì)從手工制作開(kāi)始，在進(jìn)化的過(guò)程中，設(shè)計(jì)在各類人類的嘗試中第一次獲得了公正的稱號(hào)。但是隨著手段與方法的拓展，設(shè)計(jì)又創(chuàng)造出自己的依據(jù)和概念的范疇。隨著設(shè)計(jì)評(píng)論與設(shè)計(jì)歷史的出現(xiàn)，設(shè)計(jì)理論與設(shè)計(jì)教育也一同建立起來(lái)。最初的理論必然是分析性的，通過(guò)觀察和歸納獲取新知識(shí)，這與設(shè)計(jì)普遍化進(jìn)程中派生出的演繹和推導(dǎo)相互補(bǔ)充，結(jié)果是設(shè)計(jì)理論家能夠嘗試綜合各類理論。俄羅斯構(gòu)成主義、包豪斯、美國(guó)二戰(zhàn)后的設(shè)計(jì)都是新概念領(lǐng)域的典型例子。其中有些取自形態(tài)學(xué)、結(jié)構(gòu)主義、符號(hào)學(xué)，有些甚至源于心理學(xué)、語(yǔ)言學(xué)、社會(huì)學(xué)和工程學(xué)，還有一些由功能設(shè)計(jì)派生出來(lái)。近些年，系統(tǒng)運(yùn)算式、啟發(fā)式程序甚至遺傳學(xué)都能在設(shè)計(jì)理論中有所體現(xiàn)。另外，“設(shè)計(jì)假設(shè)”同樣利用運(yùn)算化進(jìn)行建模和檢測(cè)。我自己的設(shè)計(jì)機(jī)器系統(tǒng)（Design Machine?）工作室也是這個(gè)方面的例子之一。

推論式的理論保持了結(jié)論性等式的魅力：即首先會(huì)有個(gè)設(shè)計(jì)的原因——設(shè)計(jì)項(xiàng)目，然后是設(shè)計(jì)的結(jié)果——設(shè)計(jì)衍變成可識(shí)別的物體，其特性通過(guò)商務(wù)交易和文化認(rèn)同體現(xiàn)出來(lái)。其結(jié)果是，設(shè)計(jì)必須遵循闡述“如何設(shè)計(jì)”，以及“什么才是一個(gè)好設(shè)計(jì)”的理念。它的前景似乎越來(lái)越迷茫。首先，語(yǔ)言作為我們相互理解的最佳媒介，卻不是保證人類活動(dòng)的唯一必然因素，因?yàn)槿祟惖谋拘圆⒉粏渭兪钦Z(yǔ)言的歸納與總結(jié)；其次，往往人們都認(rèn)為好的設(shè)計(jì)之所以好，是由所處文脈決定的（比如形式上的、功能上的、結(jié)構(gòu)上的等等）。顯然，好的設(shè)計(jì)理論應(yīng)該可以解釋為什么有些設(shè)計(jì)就是不好的。由于這些問(wèn)題都是借助語(yǔ)言的幫助而產(chǎn)生的，我們也認(rèn)識(shí)到設(shè)計(jì)理論其實(shí)處在學(xué)科間，是跨學(xué)科的。我們可以對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)投以各種熱情洋溢的褒義詞藻，但是它們并不會(huì)對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)理論的實(shí)踐及設(shè)計(jì)本身有太大幫助。盡管如此，我們并不否認(rèn)設(shè)計(jì)對(duì)于語(yǔ)言的依賴。人類工程學(xué)、功能學(xué)、心理學(xué)、社會(huì)學(xué)與經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)各種概念，也開(kāi)始影響與設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)的問(wèn)題和設(shè)計(jì)教育的課程設(shè)置。設(shè)計(jì)師經(jīng)常向潛在客戶陳述人類工程、文化或者符號(hào)學(xué)等方面的內(nèi)容，而不是設(shè)計(jì)本身。之后，設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐又開(kāi)始在更傾向于保護(hù)書(shū)面內(nèi)容的社會(huì)中，對(duì)建筑產(chǎn)品權(quán)益進(jìn)行保護(hù)，而不再是含糊不清的視覺(jué)傳達(dá)，因此，律師的語(yǔ)言也被借用到設(shè)計(jì)理論中來(lái)。

3 設(shè)計(jì)知識(shí)庫(kù)

運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)已經(jīng)告別了進(jìn)退兩難的境地，像其他運(yùn)算化知識(shí)一樣，融入到人類務(wù)實(shí)的生存狀態(tài)中。我們都知道運(yùn)算物理學(xué)（Computational Physics）既是理論，也是實(shí)踐。作為理論，運(yùn)算物理學(xué)從宇宙起源開(kāi)始提出各種假設(shè)；作為實(shí)踐，通過(guò)模擬各種假設(shè)來(lái)驗(yàn)證其真實(shí)性，并最終轉(zhuǎn)化為各類探索宇宙的工具。模擬能夠?yàn)槲覀冄芯坑钪嫣峁└黝愋轮R(shí)，同時(shí)也能幫助我們認(rèn)識(shí)自身活動(dòng)中的知識(shí)，這個(gè)過(guò)程中并不需要考慮我們是否是物理學(xué)家或者其它領(lǐng)域的專家（生物學(xué)、化學(xué)、哲學(xué)、藝術(shù)）。這些知識(shí)在實(shí)際工作中都能夠?yàn)槲覀冮_(kāi)拓思路提供前攝性（一種更主動(dòng)面對(duì)未來(lái)變化的態(tài)度，往往通過(guò)自身主動(dòng)的變化導(dǎo)致變化，而不是等待預(yù)料之外的變化而不知所措）的幫助，很容易讓我們聯(lián)想到在外太空開(kāi)展的植物、動(dòng)物，食物甚至是藝術(shù)的實(shí)驗(yàn)。運(yùn)算工程學(xué)（Computational Engineering）讓設(shè)計(jì)師整合了新材料與許多有趣的事物，為未來(lái)創(chuàng)造出更多的可能性：從分子或原子出發(fā)進(jìn)行假設(shè)以構(gòu)建新結(jié)構(gòu)，并在其它自然資源加工處理之前，進(jìn)行運(yùn)算化測(cè)試。運(yùn)算遺傳學(xué)（Computational Genetics）這項(xiàng)實(shí)踐活動(dòng)的中心，就是為人類謀求更多的福祉。

運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的主要意圖是想借助超越主觀的外力驅(qū)動(dòng)設(shè)計(jì)，這些外力讓設(shè)計(jì)在需求性評(píng)估、可能性評(píng)估、和體現(xiàn)人類特性的方式評(píng)估中變得可能且必要。這些評(píng)估都以數(shù)據(jù)的形式進(jìn)行，更準(zhǔn)確地講是非常復(fù)雜的數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)。其他設(shè)計(jì)理論的本質(zhì)是被動(dòng)反應(yīng)，因此經(jīng)常是投機(jī)性的；而運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)理論基于大量的數(shù)據(jù)，本質(zhì)是前攝性的。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)具有不可避免的局限性，一方面指在需要同時(shí)兼顧質(zhì)量和數(shù)量的前提下，設(shè)計(jì)人員本身有限的搜集和組織數(shù)據(jù)的能力；另一方面指我們處理數(shù)據(jù)的高端運(yùn)算化程序的能力非常有限。像其它運(yùn)算化理論一樣，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)同時(shí)也是一種實(shí)踐，是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不同于我們?nèi)粘；顒?dòng)形式在更廣義的環(huán)境下進(jìn)行的精確設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)驗(yàn)。他的成敗取決于測(cè)試的結(jié)果，核心是關(guān)注人類最重要的資產(chǎn)——知識(shí)。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)需要配備一個(gè)相應(yīng)的知識(shí)庫(kù)，這將超越目前所有設(shè)計(jì)博物館、收藏館及各類書(shū)籍、文章關(guān)于設(shè)計(jì)的一切內(nèi)容。此外，這個(gè)知識(shí)庫(kù)需要以今天人類全球化生存為依據(jù)，設(shè)置導(dǎo)航、搜索、檢索的功能。我們需要從更廣義的文化角度來(lái)審視人造物，連同它的規(guī)劃及孕育它的設(shè)計(jì)。這個(gè)知識(shí)庫(kù)還應(yīng)該包含涉及視覺(jué)表達(dá)、運(yùn)動(dòng)、色彩、人體工程學(xué)，及其整合他信息傳達(dá)手段（聲音、材質(zhì)、氣味等）的運(yùn)算化表達(dá)知識(shí)（Computational Expressed Knowledge）。實(shí)現(xiàn)這些目標(biāo)任務(wù)艱巨，但又無(wú)法逃避。不幸的是，大多數(shù)被我們看做是“歷史學(xué)?！钡牟┪镳^和收藏館，就好比一個(gè)垃圾場(chǎng)，并沒(méi)有收集設(shè)計(jì)真正所需的知識(shí)庫(kù)。

設(shè)計(jì)知識(shí)庫(kù)的典型例子之一，是已經(jīng)在設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域里廣泛應(yīng)用的計(jì)算機(jī)程序。事實(shí)上，一個(gè)CAD程序、字體設(shè)計(jì)程序、多媒體編輯程序，或者網(wǎng)絡(luò)瀏覽器都是高度抽象的理論表達(dá)。在這些程序里，我們需要設(shè)定幾何關(guān)系、材質(zhì)特性、調(diào)節(jié)光線，完成動(dòng)作、角度的設(shè)置，建立圖片與聲音文件的聯(lián)系，整合文字內(nèi)容和其它設(shè)計(jì)因素。當(dāng)然這些工作只通過(guò)一個(gè)程序是完成不了的，但是至少可以建立起設(shè)計(jì)的一致性，或者令我們能夠更好的理解設(shè)計(jì)。基于這些“理論”的設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐，才是真正對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)任務(wù)的研究，并通過(guò)人造物（即設(shè)計(jì)的物質(zhì)對(duì)象）數(shù)字化后的性能表現(xiàn)來(lái)評(píng)價(jià)設(shè)計(jì)。得益于成功的設(shè)計(jì)經(jīng)驗(yàn)，一些較為成功的程序版本可以變得越來(lái)越好。在我寫下這些話的時(shí)候，Netscape? 3.0正式發(fā)布；這次它吸納了遠(yuǎn)程電話會(huì)議技術(shù)，這點(diǎn)讓我接下去的話變得不言自明了。在設(shè)計(jì)假設(shè)不斷延續(xù)的進(jìn)程中，有一些設(shè)計(jì)理論被證明做了不恰當(dāng)?shù)募僭O(shè)而逐漸消失。就在兩年前，電話會(huì)議技術(shù)，這項(xiàng)傳媒設(shè)計(jì)的主流創(chuàng)意，還擁有數(shù)十億美元的潛在市場(chǎng)；但今天，它已經(jīng)成為一項(xiàng)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的瀏覽器功能。

我想對(duì)于視“使用程序”為設(shè)計(jì)活動(dòng)說(shuō)得更清楚一些： Macromedia Director?、Phontographer?、Alias?、Vellum?，或用于桌面出版的程序（Quarkexpress?、Pagemaker?），還有材質(zhì)設(shè)計(jì)軟件、珠寶設(shè)計(jì)軟件等，這些都是我們能夠在商店購(gòu)買到的軟件，然后應(yīng)用在不同的工作中。但相對(duì)于鉛筆、畫筆、美工刀、木材或金屬、膠水等，這些設(shè)計(jì)師原來(lái)的常用工具，程序就是他們?cè)?jīng)擁護(hù)和發(fā)明（比如電話會(huì)議）的理論精華。顯然程序并都不能窮盡設(shè)計(jì)的各個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)，但卻可以表述和整合與興趣、多媒體、字體設(shè)計(jì)、CAD、出版物設(shè)計(jì)或在線廣告相關(guān)的設(shè)計(jì)活動(dòng)。編寫程序的大多是由程序員、心理學(xué)家、設(shè)計(jì)師等組成的大型團(tuán)隊(duì)，他們需要綜合各類物理學(xué)、數(shù)學(xué)、美學(xué)、符號(hào)學(xué)及人體工程學(xué)等知識(shí)。事實(shí)上，任何一個(gè)程序都是一次理論假設(shè)，再利用程序來(lái)檢驗(yàn)假設(shè)。程序生成的最終產(chǎn)品能夠與應(yīng)用運(yùn)算化工程創(chuàng)造出的新材料，或運(yùn)算化遺傳學(xué)研制出的新醫(yī)藥相媲美。

4 計(jì)算機(jī)并不僅僅是工具

事實(shí)上，新材料、新醫(yī)藥、新基因的創(chuàng)造都可以被理解成“設(shè)計(jì)”。我之所以用這個(gè)標(biāo)題，意在表達(dá)在運(yùn)算化時(shí)代下，設(shè)計(jì)變?yōu)橐粋€(gè)涉獵范圍更廣的詞。如果我們不能理解運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的必要性，我們可以繼續(xù)形而上學(xué)地認(rèn)為計(jì)算機(jī)僅僅是一種工具。我們可以繼續(xù)對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)的誕生進(jìn)行詩(shī)意的描述，即設(shè)計(jì)源于設(shè)計(jì)師的大腦，就像神話中金星維納斯誕生于土星朱庇特頭顱中一樣。毋庸置疑，程序的致命弱點(diǎn)是無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)人類直覺(jué)所能實(shí)現(xiàn)的，這并不是因?yàn)樗鼈儧](méi)有直覺(jué)（它們也不必有），而是因?yàn)樵O(shè)計(jì)師只是在簡(jiǎn)單機(jī)械地使用，而非創(chuàng)造性地使用它們。

我并不回避這個(gè)問(wèn)題：缺少了計(jì)算機(jī)，設(shè)計(jì)的許多方面仍然可以很好地展現(xiàn)出來(lái)。這些方面并不屬于運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的陣營(yíng)，畢竟運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)并不能替代設(shè)計(jì)，而只是在新務(wù)實(shí)的環(huán)境下延續(xù)設(shè)計(jì)、拓寬設(shè)計(jì)。設(shè)計(jì)目前面對(duì)的最大挑戰(zhàn)在于運(yùn)算化形式下缺少新的設(shè)計(jì)知識(shí)，造成千篇一律的解決方案。哈伯望遠(yuǎn)鏡的設(shè)計(jì)和它后期的修理，可以在仍有缺陷的狀態(tài)下就被發(fā)射出去，開(kāi)始它圍繞地球的旅行。這依賴了運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)模型（主要涉及虛擬現(xiàn)實(shí)的方法和手段），它能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)那些致命的設(shè)計(jì)錯(cuò)誤，也可以生成包括完成特定任務(wù)的工具設(shè)計(jì)在內(nèi)的、對(duì)其進(jìn)行優(yōu)化改進(jìn)的程序步驟。這就是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)不僅引入建模、渲染、動(dòng)畫，還需要模擬（包括虛擬現(xiàn)實(shí)）的原因。這僅僅是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)成果，但足以讓我們想象，利用綜合運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)完成的數(shù)字化模型，比起簡(jiǎn)單的塑料模型、木質(zhì)模型或是3D模型，意義大得多，更何況它仍在不斷向前發(fā)展。在溝通層面上來(lái)看，實(shí)物模型在設(shè)計(jì)表達(dá)的即時(shí)性上有出色的表現(xiàn)，但是它的生產(chǎn)過(guò)程，同把實(shí)際建筑縮減到一個(gè)模型一樣，貧乏可憐。迅速發(fā)展的原型理念遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)比其他模型手段更先進(jìn)。無(wú)論是利用CNC工具，還是簡(jiǎn)單的立體印刷技術(shù)，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)都能讓設(shè)計(jì)師對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)進(jìn)行有效的評(píng)估，而這一點(diǎn)在機(jī)械制造廠房是不可能達(dá)到的。盡管有些設(shè)計(jì)師和建筑師仍然雇用好的木匠來(lái)完成模型，然而設(shè)計(jì)與工具已經(jīng)由網(wǎng)絡(luò)連接起來(lái)，我們可以利用虛擬現(xiàn)實(shí)或物理3D模型完成遠(yuǎn)程原型設(shè)計(jì)。

5 什么是原型（Prototype）？

為了更好地闡述設(shè)計(jì)的應(yīng)用，我們需從一個(gè)基本概念談起。設(shè)計(jì)在很多場(chǎng)合下，其實(shí)并不是為了制作真正的東西，而是先設(shè)計(jì)原型，再轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)檎嬲漠a(chǎn)品，比如報(bào)紙、自行車，或是一個(gè)新的時(shí)尚路線。以前，生產(chǎn)線很長(zhǎng)，設(shè)計(jì)線就相應(yīng)的很長(zhǎng)。但現(xiàn)在情況已經(jīng)不同了，我們生活在一個(gè)日新月異的時(shí)代，更強(qiáng)調(diào)“就趁現(xiàn)在”或是“即時(shí)市場(chǎng)”。從最初的設(shè)計(jì)理念到運(yùn)輸、發(fā)行，時(shí)間大大縮短了。設(shè)計(jì)與生產(chǎn)相互獨(dú)立。過(guò)程簡(jiǎn)化會(huì)帶來(lái)一些風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。

在設(shè)計(jì)階段之后的快速原型制造，也成為運(yùn)算化的組成部分。在這方面，平面設(shè)計(jì)師又一次走在了前端，他們最先利用數(shù)字技術(shù)的“快速原型制造”進(jìn)行打樣和印前測(cè)試。各地服務(wù)部門都可以遠(yuǎn)程執(zhí)行從排版設(shè)計(jì)、校色到印前設(shè)計(jì)的工作，使設(shè)計(jì)師從“藝術(shù)家”走向了客戶端。近些年，已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)了紡織原型的“虛擬織機(jī)”，為產(chǎn)品開(kāi)發(fā)組建的快速原型制造服務(wù)部門也相繼成立。圣地亞哥超級(jí)計(jì)算機(jī)中心對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)遠(yuǎn)程原型制造提供了相應(yīng)的技術(shù)支持。

當(dāng)然，相對(duì)于傳達(dá)設(shè)計(jì)和材質(zhì)設(shè)計(jì)的打樣階段，工業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)中的3D原型技術(shù)要復(fù)雜得多。比如，要驅(qū)動(dòng)激光打印機(jī)，需要生成“后腳本”（Postscript）文件，但是我們往往不知道該如何做好驅(qū)動(dòng)快速原型制造設(shè)備的.STL文件（該類型的文件會(huì)把模型表面轉(zhuǎn)變成為三角面網(wǎng)），為構(gòu)建3D模型服務(wù)。快速成型技術(shù)最初是作為數(shù)控機(jī)床切割消減的程序，就好比雕塑家處理大理石或者木材中多余的部分一樣。另外一個(gè)應(yīng)用是立體打印技術(shù)（適當(dāng)光照下液態(tài)感光），與消減性技術(shù)不同，它是一種添加性的裝置，分為選擇性燒結(jié)（利用激光束融合熱塑性粉末）和霧滴性沉積（在薄陶瓷層或金屬粉末上添加粘合劑）兩種。我們也可以將添加技術(shù)和消減技術(shù)相結(jié)合，就好像熔融沉積模型（融化熱塑性材料在由設(shè)計(jì)的形式進(jìn)行“打印”）和層壓實(shí)體制造（通過(guò)層層成型然后壓合得到層壓物體）。

顯然，設(shè)計(jì)師并不需要是熱塑性融合或立體打印技術(shù)的專家。他們了解計(jì)算機(jī)輔助設(shè)計(jì)及快速原型制造技術(shù)的原因是，設(shè)計(jì)表達(dá)與加工制造（計(jì)算機(jī)輔助制造）的關(guān)系越來(lái)越緊密。而且，設(shè)計(jì)師也必須認(rèn)識(shí)到正是由于這項(xiàng)技術(shù)的出現(xiàn)，設(shè)計(jì)任務(wù)已經(jīng)由最初的從已有形式中選取，轉(zhuǎn)向了發(fā)明新的形式，設(shè)計(jì)新分子、新基因、新材料，甚至是和人互動(dòng)的新形式。事實(shí)上，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的背景下，設(shè)計(jì)需要完全融合審美需求與功能要求，形式不再跟隨功能，而是成為功能。為了達(dá)成這個(gè)目的，設(shè)計(jì)師不再僅僅作為訂單和美學(xué)的代理人，不再把以前的那些“臟活”留給工程師去做。

我還想提一下“理想化”這個(gè)詞，主要考慮到很多設(shè)計(jì)師還保有懷舊情結(jié)。我要強(qiáng)調(diào)的是，實(shí)際上理想的運(yùn)算化模型，是各種特征都可以通過(guò)可變參數(shù)模擬出來(lái)。有人把這看成是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的缺點(diǎn)，但我卻反而覺(jué)得這真是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的強(qiáng)項(xiàng)。過(guò)去，模型只能展示出在選定材料前提下的有限的形式特點(diǎn)；但運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)卻能夠體現(xiàn)多種可能合適材料的形式可能性，讓設(shè)計(jì)師超越固有的限制。那些對(duì)數(shù)字化表述持懷疑態(tài)度的人，其實(shí)是沒(méi)有認(rèn)識(shí)到人類活動(dòng)的主體，是處在認(rèn)知的理想領(lǐng)域之中，而不是僅僅滿足需求的層面，后者會(huì)限制某些新技能的培訓(xùn)（體現(xiàn)在仍然使用昔日的機(jī)器和工具上）。

6 設(shè)計(jì)與希冀

作為創(chuàng)意主體的人類，最大的強(qiáng)項(xiàng)并不是對(duì)外在世界和自然變化的反應(yīng)，而是希冀（對(duì)未來(lái)變化的希望并為此做出行動(dòng)，譯者注）。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的本質(zhì)就是希冀，即前攝性。換句話說(shuō)，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)強(qiáng)調(diào)，由未來(lái)決定系統(tǒng)現(xiàn)有狀態(tài)的事實(shí)，定義的概念領(lǐng)域。這可能這聽(tīng)起來(lái)難以讓人相信，讓我們的思緒轉(zhuǎn)向不是預(yù)言，就是技術(shù)。但是仔細(xì)想一下，我們就會(huì)意識(shí)到如果沒(méi)有希冀的因素，那設(shè)計(jì)只能是一種被動(dòng)跟隨的游戲，一種對(duì)變化的消極反應(yīng)，而失去了作為變化中介的角色。昨天那個(gè)決定性的口號(hào)——設(shè)計(jì)是一個(gè)解決問(wèn)題的過(guò)程——依然縈繞于耳，以致我們難以確定是否已經(jīng)真正實(shí)現(xiàn)了它，這簡(jiǎn)直就是一場(chǎng)游戲。形成鮮明對(duì)比的是不斷的再包裝（一系列基于同種元素只是風(fēng)格不同的咖啡機(jī)、烤箱、汽車、收音機(jī)和計(jì)算機(jī)），運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)需要且支持發(fā)明創(chuàng)造。在環(huán)保意識(shí)日益加強(qiáng)的今天，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)挑戰(zhàn)了一次性解決所有問(wèn)題的設(shè)計(jì)策略。通過(guò)問(wèn)題生成，運(yùn)算化重新定位了在當(dāng)今環(huán)境和瞬息萬(wàn)變的社會(huì)生活中的個(gè)人。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)平等對(duì)待個(gè)體與所處的環(huán)境文脈，并將最后終結(jié)大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)的時(shí)代，讓人類進(jìn)入一個(gè)提供個(gè)性定制化的解決方案的新時(shí)代。為了更好地解釋這個(gè)問(wèn)題，我需要再回到之前關(guān)于“實(shí)用(pragmatic)”的討論中。

實(shí)用的大環(huán)境是對(duì)工作中某些特定的“力”、開(kāi)發(fā)的能源和社會(huì)的政治結(jié)構(gòu)的響應(yīng)。史前獵人和強(qiáng)盜的設(shè)計(jì)需求、期望與農(nóng)業(yè)和畜牧業(yè)時(shí)期的人肯定大不相同。即使在今天，因?yàn)樵O(shè)計(jì)定義了工匠和工廠勞工所處的環(huán)境和工作，他們同設(shè)計(jì)的關(guān)聯(lián)，必定不同于教師、物理學(xué)家、科學(xué)家和藝術(shù)家那樣。工業(yè)革命引起了許多同設(shè)計(jì)相關(guān)的問(wèn)題，把世界變分成了許多不相關(guān)的板塊。想想家里各種電器，或者辦公室和工廠的各種設(shè)施設(shè)備，各自構(gòu)成了圍繞個(gè)體的“世界”本身，有自己的生活法則。信息時(shí)代帶來(lái)的是世界一體化，把之前斷裂的“板塊”連成一個(gè)復(fù)雜而高效整體。設(shè)計(jì)只有考慮了人在各類不同環(huán)境下的差異，整合各種任務(wù)，才能更好地解決能源消耗、環(huán)境問(wèn)題，更好地實(shí)現(xiàn)人與人的互動(dòng)。

運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)也相應(yīng)地為此構(gòu)建出理論框架，并透過(guò)實(shí)踐達(dá)成上述目標(biāo)。顯然，一體化帶來(lái)了信息繁雜的問(wèn)題。越來(lái)越多的按鈕和按鍵，無(wú)論設(shè)計(jì)得多么優(yōu)雅，我們還是很難掌握機(jī)器復(fù)雜的使用方法。因此，設(shè)計(jì)師應(yīng)該通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)，更好地控制復(fù)雜性。如今的情況就是，每個(gè)機(jī)器都只能發(fā)揮20%的作用。設(shè)計(jì)僅僅停留在玩味復(fù)雜的形式，并不能充分利用現(xiàn)有的技術(shù)有效地幫助用戶解決問(wèn)題。

7 設(shè)計(jì)與廣泛存在的運(yùn)算化

20世紀(jì)早期，電力的飛速發(fā)展與網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)的普及，使得運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)不斷推動(dòng)全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的進(jìn)步。電力、電話與電視構(gòu)成了世界的底層結(jié)構(gòu)。同樣，數(shù)百萬(wàn)人已經(jīng)通過(guò)各種事物，從網(wǎng)絡(luò)數(shù)字互動(dòng)及先進(jìn)的運(yùn)算一體化中獲益。運(yùn)算化在電話、無(wú)線通訊、手表、家用電器、汽車卡車、飛機(jī)、自動(dòng)柜員機(jī)、娛樂(lè)和教育等方面都有體現(xiàn)。與運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)機(jī)密相關(guān)的數(shù)字化技術(shù)的各種應(yīng)用，還都只是在起步階段。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)應(yīng)該積極承擔(dān)起加快進(jìn)程的作用。一兩個(gè)設(shè)計(jì)師決定用不用計(jì)算機(jī)進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)無(wú)關(guān)緊要，普遍的變化并不以小范圍的異議為轉(zhuǎn)移。昨日許多設(shè)計(jì)師還在宣稱抵制桌面出版程序，然而現(xiàn)在，盡管有些程序還是以前的狀態(tài)，甚至有些顯示出較大的缺點(diǎn)，但是一個(gè)眾所周知的事實(shí)是，現(xiàn)實(shí)中沒(méi)有程序使用技能的設(shè)計(jì)師在設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域中，已經(jīng)很難找到工作了。工作需要以及全球經(jīng)濟(jì)特點(diǎn)，都顯示出如果我們能夠認(rèn)識(shí)到現(xiàn)在的實(shí)情，就會(huì)有更多的選擇、更多的可能性。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的前景相當(dāng)樂(lè)觀。

在我們正在經(jīng)歷根本性變化的環(huán)境下，設(shè)計(jì)的新任務(wù)，源自人類務(wù)實(shí)的認(rèn)知感，設(shè)計(jì)教育也會(huì)受到影響。因此設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)踐與設(shè)計(jì)教育都需要做到前攝性，不能僅僅作為技術(shù)進(jìn)步的反映，就是說(shuō)要將運(yùn)算化或其它形式的信息處理媒介，都變成設(shè)計(jì)的一個(gè)有機(jī)組成部分。簡(jiǎn)言之，在工作室或大學(xué)課程設(shè)計(jì)中，書(shū)籍、海報(bào)、宣傳冊(cè)、汽車、烤箱、椅子、臺(tái)燈都可以作為設(shè)計(jì)的課題。相反，只知道如何設(shè)計(jì)這些產(chǎn)品，并不代表設(shè)計(jì)師有足夠的應(yīng)對(duì)新問(wèn)題的能力。僅僅利用計(jì)算機(jī)來(lái)美化設(shè)計(jì)，把它當(dāng)作傳統(tǒng)表現(xiàn)工具一樣使用，必然效果不大、不盡人意。在設(shè)計(jì)新產(chǎn)品時(shí)，電腦必須創(chuàng)造性地整合到設(shè)計(jì)的過(guò)程中。為此，整個(gè)計(jì)算機(jī)工業(yè)雖然一直竭盡所能在做，但卻一直沒(méi)有找到行之有效的辦法。計(jì)算機(jī)行業(yè)的人，最多只能想道要在設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域達(dá)成這個(gè)目標(biāo)，必須有更快的芯片、更大的儲(chǔ)存容量及更好的壓縮方案，僅此而已。因此，無(wú)所不在的計(jì)算機(jī)革命進(jìn)程中，運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)將推動(dòng)設(shè)計(jì)師成為計(jì)算機(jī)領(lǐng)域的合作伙伴。

功能主義的思想仍然回響在運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)項(xiàng)目中。拋開(kāi)辦公桌上笨重的設(shè)備，遠(yuǎn)離人人變成打字員的苦惱，運(yùn)算化的普及，提出了與各類無(wú)形的數(shù)字設(shè)備互動(dòng)的新觀點(diǎn)。運(yùn)算化取代了對(duì)更好界面的迷戀，通過(guò)計(jì)算機(jī)的集成能力，在提供實(shí)現(xiàn)人類公平和任務(wù)合理的設(shè)備與工具方面，可以更好地表現(xiàn)。和任務(wù)脫離的計(jì)算機(jī)應(yīng)該引起我們額外的關(guān)注，因?yàn)橹挥兄匦潞腿蝿?wù)的目的聯(lián)系，數(shù)字化技術(shù)才能充分實(shí)現(xiàn)我們的意愿。運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的主要目的就是讓信息處理集成能力，成為人類能力和思想的有效補(bǔ)充。要有電燈泡，并不需要知道電廠如何工作，也不需要了解如何處理變壓器；要使用洗衣機(jī)也不用考慮那些集成運(yùn)算；要獲得天氣預(yù)報(bào)、旅行援助和游覽信息，也是如此。新產(chǎn)品、新汽車、錄像機(jī)、家具的設(shè)計(jì)都應(yīng)該了解用戶的需求，醫(yī)療設(shè)備應(yīng)該同時(shí)為護(hù)士和病人所有，甚至各種智能工具，也應(yīng)該所有人都可以操作的。運(yùn)算化就應(yīng)該像運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋一樣，穿在誰(shuí)的腳上都能很舒服。我們應(yīng)該信手拈來(lái)直接使用，不需要什么過(guò)多的培訓(xùn)或者教材。其接口使用界面的設(shè)計(jì)是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的關(guān)鍵，這點(diǎn)應(yīng)該是顯而易見(jiàn)的，界面設(shè)計(jì)一定是運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的重要組成方面。而界面設(shè)計(jì)同設(shè)計(jì)本身一樣，是無(wú)形的，與設(shè)計(jì)的對(duì)象和信息形成有機(jī)的整體。在技術(shù)飛速更新?lián)Q代的今天，目標(biāo)決定了設(shè)計(jì)的主要任務(wù)。

8 設(shè)計(jì)研究：變化的動(dòng)力

隨著運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的出現(xiàn)，設(shè)計(jì)邁入了一個(gè)劃時(shí)代的新世紀(jì)。作為建立人類活動(dòng)新務(wù)實(shí)大環(huán)境的參與者，設(shè)計(jì)革新可能進(jìn)一步分化我們的工作。因此，權(quán)利開(kāi)始下放，等級(jí)結(jié)構(gòu)也逐漸消失。設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域內(nèi)早就開(kāi)始了這樣的變化，雖然沒(méi)有我們想象中的那么順利，但已逐漸顯現(xiàn)出一些效果。還有更多的變革即將到來(lái)，也許過(guò)程會(huì)更費(fèi)力，但會(huì)影響到整個(gè)行業(yè)，因?yàn)檫^(guò)程中需要尋求更高效的水準(zhǔn)，以維持和給養(yǎng)全球經(jīng)濟(jì)。我們所處的時(shí)代，變化的速度與創(chuàng)新的速度持平，設(shè)計(jì)師不得不走到最前沿。這也正是為什么延緩的策略，可以在變化緩慢的社會(huì)里生存，但今天必然不能奏效。那些不能適應(yīng)快速變化的手段和方法將最終被淘汰。壞消息是，當(dāng)今的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境下，設(shè)計(jì)領(lǐng)域的破產(chǎn)率空前的高；好消息是，越來(lái)越多的革新派設(shè)計(jì)師，開(kāi)始以各種形式運(yùn)用運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)，在激烈的市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中找到解決之道，成為進(jìn)程中的標(biāo)兵。昨天還是格林威治一個(gè)普通的小商店，今天就可以利用新媒體、新材料、新交互形式提供各式的服務(wù)。名片和辦公用品的設(shè)計(jì)師，某天被那些酒店大堂、公共汽車站和火車站里的投幣機(jī)取代，也不會(huì)讓人大跌眼鏡。新設(shè)計(jì)將越發(fā)關(guān)注人類的心智。網(wǎng)站可能不是個(gè)人能擁有的最高目標(biāo)，但是如果站在人類正在空前的彼此鏈接、互動(dòng)合作的層面上，網(wǎng)站要遠(yuǎn)比那些高級(jí)汽車、燈具或者明信片上為文盲閱讀的白癡般的文字，更有意義。

隨著運(yùn)算化設(shè)計(jì)的到來(lái)，設(shè)計(jì)終于可以破天荒地確立屬于自身的研發(fā)領(lǐng)域，不再需要等待其他學(xué)科的發(fā)展和需求。運(yùn)算化讓設(shè)計(jì)研發(fā)本身變成一股新變化的力量。

Knowledge is becoming increasingly computational. Previous means and methods for the acquisition, communication, and criticism of knowledge are being replaced by inquiry,dissemination, and evaluation carried out by digital means. Pascal, Leibniz, and Peirce, among others, prepared the conceptual framework for this fundamental change. They asked questions regarding our motivation to know, our way of acquiring knowledge, and our desire to share it. In other words, they defined the cognitive horizon. Closer to our time, Boole, Wiener,and von Neumann provided the scientific foundations. Finally, Atanasoff, Zuse, Eckert and Mauchly (among others) built the machines.The rest is already part of our lives: computer graphics, visualization, desktop publishing, CAD,multimedia, virtual reality, Internet, World Wide Web with more to come. In the process, sciences became computational: physics, biology, chemistry,to name the best known. Many engineering endeavors took the same turn with the synthesis of materials, robotics, even the production of computers, and the automatic generation of software. What happened to design in this context of fundamental change?

A Snapshot of the Current Situation

As things stand, computers and design are merely an association of tools and users. Indeed,within the design community, the discussion still goes on whether the computer will ever replace the designer, or if it will at least replace the pencil and the marker, not to mention the tedious process of model building. Graphic designers are very much ahead of the rest, plowing happily in the new territories of typeface design, print on demand,and electronic publishing. They discovered very quickly that digital technology means not only better tools for old functions, but also a broadening of the scope of their activity. The laser writer, the scanner, the plotter, the compact disk, and more recently network tools (browsers, applets, frames)were integrated in a new practical effort. So were the methods and means of science sampling,splicing, mutations, hyperlinking. As a result,printed paper is complemented by multimedia and Internet-based communication. Exemplary of the effort I am referring to is also the new practice of communication design: the virtual design office. Indeed, in this case designers designed their own new context of interaction based on the technologies and the methods they work with. Thus the computational becomes constitutive of the work, and is tested as the work itself is subjected to evaluation. But even in graphic design, fundamental issues are still avoided: Do we address a generic human being, who has remained the same as science and technology have changed? Or do we "design"our own public, i.e., invent forms and means for more individualized, and still socially rooted, forms of human interactions? How do we transcend the dominant obsession with mass communication(broadcasting) and make narrowcasting a design goal equally significant in respect to contents and expressive means? Do we improve on what we inherited or do we participate in the renewal of the motivations and means of communication?

Technology, even as it is creatively applied in communication design, is still ahead of us. In other design activities, and primarily in what is called product or industrial design, the situation to date is less promising. While the old-fashioned industrial design practically stopped generating employment opportunities, educational programs are slow in acknowledging the need for integrating the digital.The educators involved still think in the solid terms of the model of the Industrial Revolution, terms that are based on formal expectations of crafting but not on the need for new design thinking. As we know, the investment in technology hardware,software, maintenance, training, research of new avenues is prohibitively high. Few have dared to take the risks of entrepreneurship, and even fewer have succeeded. Big companies consolidated their controlling positions, and literally sucked in everyone able to manage the complexity of computer-based or computer-aided design.In many cases, instead of making design more transparent, they insulated themselves under the very convincing argument of protecting intellectual property instead of disseminating it. It is not unusual that advanced product design teams using advanced computers and sophisticated software do not even have access to the Internet. While those involved in digital technology attempt to produce viable methods of cooperative design work, such teams are predicated to a monastic type of activity.More often than not they do not even notice the contradiction between the means used and the methods and structures of work. Consequently,they maintain the secrecy (of new car models, new toys, new furniture, etc.), but are always late on the market.

Technological lead over design considerations is radical not only in the area of industrial design. It is also manifest in textile, fashion, toy, and interior design, all forms of design still close to the paradigm of craftsmanship. Consequently, monstrosities of all kinds, conceived with the aid of some computer programs, spill over to the consumer in the supermarkets of discounted bad taste.No matter how "noble" the intention of making affordable every gadget that until now was in the exclusive realm of the military and the intelligence communities, it only rarely justifies their presence in our culture.

About the Possibility of Design Theory

Computational design acknowledges the association between tools and users. However,its goal is to turn this into an association of new possibilities, which should become realities through design. To achieve this goal, computation cannot be only, as it is today, a medium of representation and unsystematic, or even systematic, variations. It has to become constitutive of design. This brings to the forefront the older question of whether design theory is possible, and if yes, which form it can take.

In the past, to the extent it was formulated,theory has followed the practice of design. The best designers, or at least those able to articulate their thoughts in writing, rationalized their achievements;that is, they discussed what they did and how only after their design was acknowledged or received public acclaim. This situation should not surprise anyone. Design evolves, as we all know, from the crafts and in this evolution, it first has to acquire legitimacy among many other human endeavors.But as it develops its means and methods, it also produces its justification and conceptual horizon.With the emergence of design criticism and design history, obviously in connection with the establishment of design education, the possibility of theory is established. Such a theory had to be analytical at the beginning. In time, induction acquisition of knowledge through observation was complemented by deduction derivation of new knowledge from design generalizations.As a result, design theoreticians were able to venture into synthesis. The example of the Russian Constructivists, or of the Bauhaus, or of American design after World War II belong to the domain of new concepts. Some were adopted from morphology, structuralism, semiotics, and even from psychology, linguistics, sociology, and engineering. Others were derived from within, the best example being functionalist design. In recent years, algorithmic thinking, heuristic procedures,and even genetics found their way in the theory of design. Moreover, design hypotheses were computationally modeled and tested. My own Design Machine? can be mentioned as an example in this direction.

Theories attached to discursive reasoning remain captive to the deterministic equation: there is a cause, i.e., design work, and there is a result,i.e., designs that become identifiable objects traded or culturally recognized for their characteristics.So it ought to follow that a theory should explain how people design and what good design is. Here things get murky. First of all, because language as we know it might be the best medium for our reciprocal understanding, but not necessarily for handling human activities that by their nature are not reducible to language. Second, because the romantic assumption within discursive reasoning is that good design "good" being defined in a given context (formal, functional, structural, etc.) is also successful. Obviously, a good design theory should explain why sometimes this is not the case. As this kind of questioning in and with the help of language is established, we have learned that design theory is inter- and transdisciplinary. These are good words to use in applying for a grant, but not necessarily helpful in practicing design theory, or in designing.Nevertheless, the result of this understanding explains the import of specialized language in design. Ergonomic, functional, psychological,sociological, and economic concepts invade the dialogue on design issues and the curriculum of design education. Designers speak to future clients more about ergonomic, cultural, or symbolic aspects than about design itself. More recently, the language of lawyers is being added to the wholesale package of design theory, since the practice of design also means protecting its products in a society inclined to protect the written, but not necessarily the more ambiguous visual expression.

A Design Knowledge Base

Computational design escapes this Catch-22 situation. It is, like any other form of computational knowledge, anchored in the pragmatics of human existence. As we know, computational physics is at the same time theory and practice. As theory, it produces hypotheses regarding the beginning of the universe, for example. As practice, it simulates them in order to test the validity of the premise,and it eventually transforms them into new tools for the investigation of the universe. Simulations serve further to derive new knowledge regarding our inquiry of the universe. They also help us to understand the meaning of this knowledge for our own activity, regardless of whether we are physicists or professional involved in other fields (biology,chemistry, philosophy, art). Such knowledge is proactive, in the sense of opening new avenues for practical endeavors. Think about the many experiments with plants, animals, food or even with art performed in outer space. Computational engineering synthesized new materials some very interesting for designers and as a result also opened new avenues towards the future. It starts from hypotheses at the molecular or atomic level. Its results are the new structures modeled and tested in computational form before any other natural resources are processed. Computational genetics is a practical activity having at its center human wellbeing.

Computational design means, then, design activity driven by the forces that make design possible and necessary in the first place: assessment of needs, assessment of possibilities, assessment of means as they embody human characteristics. The assessment takes the form of data, in particular,complex databases. But while any other design theory is by its nature reactive, based on opinion,and thus often speculative, a computational design theory is based on processed data and is by its nature proactive. Its limits are the limits of our ability to collect and meaningfully organize data regarding quantity as well as quality, and our ability to design effective computational procedures for their processing. Like any other computational theory it is at the same time practice, more precisely design practice in the broader context of extremely differentiated forms of human activity,such as those we experience today. It is subject to confirmation by test, and it is, first of all, centered on knowledge, the most important asset human beings have. Accordingly, it requires that we establish a design knowledge base that extends beyond the poor, or even less than poor, design museums and collections, books and articles about design. Furthermore, it requires that we design procedures for navigation, search, and retrieval in such a knowledge base, evidently conceived at the global level of human existence today. Artifacts,along with the plans and designs from which they were derived, need to be seen together from a broad cultural perspective. Such a knowledge base should also contain computationally expressed knowledge regarding visual representation, movement, color,ergonomy, the integration of other means of communication (sound, texture, smell, etc.). All these objectives are a tall order, but unavoidable.Unfortunately, the majority of our design museums and collections, the places where we look at design as a "school of the past", resemble a junkyard more than a knowledge base for design.

As examples of what belongs in our design knowledge base, as it started to become a reality, are the computer programs that the design community uses. Indeed, a CAD program, or one for the production of a new font, a multimedia composer,or a net browser is already a theoretic expression of high abstraction. Within such a program, we describe geometry, material characteristics, optics;we describe movement, perspective, associations of images and sounds, ways to integrate text, and many other components of design. Not all of them are captured together in such programs, of course, but at least those about which a design consensus has been established. Or those we understand better.The practice of design based on such "theories"is, then, the research of actual design assignments.And the evaluation of the design is the performance of the artifact digitally conceived. In successive versions, benefiting from the experience of design such programs improve. As I write these lines,Netscape? 3.0 is being announced; it will integrate teleconferencing, which makes my next statement self-explanatory. In the succession of design hypotheses, some disappear because the theory they advance proved inappropriate. Only two years ago,teleconferencing, a major communication design idea, was a potential multibillion dollar market.In our days, it is becoming a standard browser function.

Let me make the idea of design as program more clear: The Macromedia Director?, or the Phontographer?, or Alias?, or Vellum?,or those programs used for desktop publishing(Quarkexpress?, Pagemaker?), for textile design,for jewelry, etc., are programs we can buy in stores and use for particular jobs. But as opposed to the pencil, brush, exakto knife, wood or metal type, composer stick, etc. that designers used in the past, such programs are condensed theories of the activity they support or invent (as was the case of teleconferencing). None describes design completely. They describe and synthesize design activities related to our interest and need for multimedia, font design, or for CAD, for publication design or for on-line advertisement.Those who authored such programs, quite often large teams of programmers, psychologists,designers, etc. integrate in them knowledge of physics, mathematics, aesthetics, semiotics, of ergonomy, etc. In fact, each such program is a theoretic hypothesis. Those using them test this hypothesis. The products that are finally generated are comparable to the products that result after computational engineering is applied for creating new materials, or computational genetics for creating new medicines.

Computers Are NOT Only Tools

In fact, new materials, new medicines, and new genes are designed. I use this term to suggest that design is becoming a very broad endeavor in the age of computation. If we do not understand the necessity of computational design, we only continue the metaphysical talk about how computers are only tools. Or we continue the poetic description of how design originates, like Venus from the head of Jupiter, in the head of designers. Or how intuition explains what indeed some programs still cannot achieve, not because they do not have intuition(which they don't have to have), rather because in using them, we are not yet as comfortable with them as to use them creatively.

Let us face it: many aspects of design can be carried out perfectly without any use of computers. Such aspects are not really the object of computational design. After all, computational design does not replace design, it continues and broadens design in a new pragmatic context. The real challenging aspects of design in our times are exactly in the realm where without the new design knowledge in its computational form, we could not come to viable solutions. Consider the design of the Hubble telescope, and consider further its fixing, after it was launched in a defective state and started its journey around the earth. It was in a computational design model, involving means and methods of virtual reality, that the design error that almost rendered the telescope useless was diagnosed and procedures for improvement,including design of tools appropriate to the task at hand, generated. This is why computational design integrates modeling, rendering, animation, but also simulation (including virtual reality). That this level is only timidly reached should not prevent us from understanding that the digital model resulting from a comprehensive computational design work is infinitely more telling than the Styrofoam, or wood,or polymer 3D artifacts that so many continue to idealize. As conversational pieces, models convey a beautiful quality of immediateness. However, for the production of the real objects, they are as poor as any reduction of the real to a model. Moreover,the emerging rapid prototyping is far ahead of any other modeling endeavor. Whether driving CNC tools or even performing modest stereolithography,computational design allows a designer to reach a level of evaluation that is not possible in the mechanicas shop. Instead of hiring a good carpenter, as some designers and architects still do,we can perform, even today, remote prototyping either in the form of virtual reality or in physical 3D.Design and tools can be connected via networks.

What Is a Prototype?

In order to clarify the design implications, let us start with a conceptual framework. To design is not to make the "real" thing, but the prototype of what will become, for example, a newspaper, a bicycle, a new fashion line. In previous times, when production cycles were long, design cycles were also relatively long. This situation has changed. We live in a day-and-age described by "just-in-time"or "time-to-market." From concept to shipment and distribution, time has been reduced by many orders of magnitude. The design process and the fabrication process are interdependent. With the risk of some simplification, generic diagrams give an idea of the process.

Rapid prototyping everything following the design phase as a computational component,deserves at least some words of explanation. First of all, graphic designers were again in the forefront since they started "rapid prototyping" by using digital technology for proofing and pre-press evaluation. Service bureaus all over the world perform, remotely, everything from typesetting to color correction and pre-press functions all that it takes for a design to make it from the "artist" to the client. In recent years, textile prototyping on "virtual looms" became possible and rapid prototyping service bureaus for product development started opening, too. The San Diego Supercomputer Center supports remote prototyping on the Internet.

Sure, prototyping in 3D, for industrial design purposes, is a more complex enterprise than proofing for communication design, of for textile design. We know how to generate good postscript files to drive laser printers, for example. But we are far less good in generating the so-called .STL files that drive RP devices. Such files employ a surface representation defined by triangles and serve in the fabrication of 3D models. RP technology started as a subtractive process a numerically controlled (NC)machine chiseled away, pretty much like a sculptor does working on marble or wood, what was not necessary. Today it offers additive mechanisms in the form of stereolithography (liquid photopolymers solidify under the appropriate light), selective sintering (the fusing together of thermoplastic powder by using a laser beam),droplet deposition (laying down of an adhesive liquid over a thin layer of ceramic or metal powder).We even have a combination of additive and subtractive processes, such as in fused deposition modeling (the melting of a thermoplastic material and its further "printing" in the designed form) and laminated object manufacturing (a laminated object is processed from layers of paper).

Obviously, designers do not have to be experts in thermoplastic fusion or in stereolithography.But they need to think in terms of computer-aided design (CAD) and rapid prototyping (RP), because the connection between representation (in design)and actual fabrication (through computer-aided manufacturing CAM) is getting tighter. Moreover,they need to realize that due to such technology,design tasks shift from the traditional expectation of giving form, of Gestalt, to inventing new forms,some as exotic as the design of new molecules,new genes, new materials, new forms of human interaction. Indeed, in the computational design context, aesthetic considerations and functional characteristics need to fuse. In order to accomplish this goal, designers can no longer restrict themselves to being agents of order and beauty, leaving the"dirty job", as to how things work, to engineers.

Having mentioned the word idealize in reference to the nostalgic view some designers still have, I need to confirm that, in effect, the digital model is in the realm of the ideal, where characteristics are simulated and can be optimized by varying many parameters. Some see here the shortcoming of computational design, although it is its strength. In the past, models could only display characteristics of available materials.Computational design models make the question of appropriateness of materials possible. They challenge the designer to go beyond what is available. Those who feel insecure about the ideal nature of the digital representation fail to realize that the majority of human activity is in the ideal domain of the cognitive, not in the necessary, but somehow limiting training of skills (quite often on machines and tools of yesteryear).

Design and Anticipation

The strength of the human being, as a creative entity, is in anticipating, not in reacting to the outside world and its natural changes.Computational design is by its nature anticipatory,proactive. In other words, it addresses a conceptual realm defined by the fact that the current state of a system depends on its future. At first, the thought sounds dubious. It brings to mind predestination,or teleology. But once we consider the idea, we understand that without the planning element,which is anticipation, design remains a catch-up game, a form of reaction to change, instead of being an agent of change. Design as problem solving, the slogan of a deterministic past so close to us that we are not sure whether we have overcome it, was such a game. In contrast to continuing the line of a practice of re-packaging (all the series of coffee machines, toasters, cars, radios, and computers,based on the same components but stylized differently), computational design involves and supports invention. It challenges the once-andfor-all solution, especially in view of an increased ecological awareness. It generates problems as it takes an active role in repositioning the individual in our environment and in an extremely dynamic social life. It does justice to the individual and to the particular context of existence as it brings mass production to an end and facilitates customized solutions. To explain this component, I need to briefly revisit previous pragmatic contexts.

Pragmatic contexts correspond to specific forces at work, energy sources tapped, social and political structures. The prehistoric hunters and foragers had design needs and expectations very different from those of the humans involved in agriculture and animal husbandry. Craftsmen and factory laborers, even in our day, relate differently to design as it defines their living environment and their work than do teachers, physicians, scientists,artists. The Industrial Revolution posed many design problems. It also broke the world into many unrelated pieces. Think of all the appliances in one's home, or of the many tools in our offices and factories. Each makes up a world in itself,with its own rules for performing appropriately.The information age brings about the possibility of integration. Issues of energy consumption,environment, and better human interaction, issues of cultural diversity can be better addressed if we design with the aim of integrating human tasks without ignoring the differences among people living under different conditions.

Computational design should accordingly constitute the conceptual framework for such a task and become the practice of accomplishing it. Evidently, as integration takes place, we have problems in dealing with complexity. More buttons and more keys, no matter how elegantly designed, do not help in our command of the new complex machines. Accordingly, designers need to work on giving through design a better control of complexity. Otherwise, each wonderful new machine will only be used to 20 percent of its actual capacity which is the situation today. Design stuck on formal considerations does not effectively help users get the most out of what is technically possible today.

Design and Ubiquitous Computing

The expansion of computation through networking, which contributes to the dynamics of the global economy, and through ever increasing performance parallels the deployment of electricity as it took place earlier in the 20th century. Electricity, telephony, and television form an integral part of the underlying structure in many parts of the world. Similarly, millions of people already benefit from digital interaction through networks and from the progressive integration of computation in human transactions of all kinds. Computation is integrated in the telephone, in many services associated with wireless communication, in wristwatches, in home appliances, in trucks and automobiles, in airplanes,in automatic teller machines, in entertainment and edutainment. Compared to the state of computation, the creative use of digital technology is only at its beginning. Computational design should assume the goal of actively speeding up the process. It is irrelevant whether one or another designer decides not to use the computer. The dynamics of the process is such that the broader change does not depend upon such decisions.Many designers resisted the change announced by the desktop publishing programs of yesterday.As primitive as some of these programs were, and some failed in the meanwhile, they opened a new horizon and led to a reality expressed in the simple fact that those who do not master such a program cannot find a job in the design industry. Forces at work, characteristic of the global economy, define further directions which, if acknowledged and properly understood, allow for more variety and the unfolding of more possibilities. The underlying dimension of computational design is optimism.

The new tasks of design in the context of the fundamental change we are experiencing result from the recognition of the new fundamental pragmatic condition of the human being. The tasks of design education cannot be less affected by this condition.Therefore, to practice design and design education proactively, not merely in reaction to technological developments, means to make the medium of computation, and any other information processing medium, part of design. In short: not that books,posters, brochures, or cars, toasters, chairs, and lamps are invalid design subjects, in the studio or in college education. Rather, knowing only how to design such items does not prepare a designer for those qualitatively new problems we are facing. To use the computer for design cosmetics,doing what traditional tools can do just as well, is unproductive and unsatisfying. The computer has to be creatively integrated in the design process, in the new products designed. This is something the computer industry does not know how to do but is trying desperately to achieve. Those who work in the computer industry know that faster chips, more storage capacity, and better compression schemes are only means to a goal that is fundamentally in the realm of design. Accordingly, computational design will make designers become partners in the ubiquitous computing revolution.

The functionalist thought is echoed in the ubiquitous computing design program. Instead of the bulky machine on everyoneas desk, and instead of turning each user into a typist, ubiquitous computing offers the perspective of natural interaction with many "invisible" digital devices.It replaces the obsession with better interfaces,as a hope for better user performance, through integration of computer capabilities in appliances and tools that do justice to the human being and to the task at hand. A computer isolated from the task at hand requires excessive attention. Once reconnected to the purpose, digital technology enhances our ability to fulfill the purpose. The integration of information processing capabilities in ways that complement people's abilities and their ways of thinking is a major goal of computational design. In order to benefit from the electric bulb,one does not have to learn how a power plant works, even less how to operate a high voltage transformer. The same should be the case for people using active maps to obtain weather reports,travel assistance, or tourist information. Or for those using the new washing machine that integrates fuzzy logic computing. New products cars, VCRs,furniture that "learn" the behavior of the user,hospital equipment that assists the nurse as well as the patient, intelligent tools of all kind, should not require a college degree to operate. Computation should fit us as comfortably as a pair of sneakers.And we should be able to use it when necessary without having to study volumes of printed matter or to go through extensive training. That interface design is a major aspect of computational design should be obvious. Less obvious is the fact that the best interface design, like design itself, is invisible,i.e., integrated in the object or message designed.These are goals that define design tasks in a context of fast technological renewal.

Design Research: a Force for Change

With the advent of computational design,design enters a new phase of its remarkable history. As a participant in the establishing of a new pragmatic framework for human activity,design innovation makes possible distributed work.Accordingly, it contributes to decentralization,and to the disappearance of hierarchic structures.Within the design community such changes already take place, not always as smoothly as we would hope for, but definitely with the effect of a higher sense of responsibility. Much more will take place,and probably even more painful changes will affect the profession as it seeks its justification in a society determined to achieve levels of efficiency high enough for the sustenance of the global economy.As we reach the time when the rate of change equals that of innovation, designers are forced into the forefront. This is why procrastination, a survival tactic in times of less fast change, will not do. This is also why means and methods not adapted to these fast cycles of change fail. The bad news is that in the competitive context of today's world,the bankruptcy rate in design is higher than ever.The good news is that more and more innovative designers, definitely aware of computational design or practicing it in some form or another, make their way in the competitive market of innovation and become icons in the process. Where yesterday in Greenwich Village were the gadget shops, today design shops offer a variety of services based on new media, new materials, new forms of human interaction. By no accident are the designers of business cards and stationery replaced by coinoperated machines placed in hotel lobbies, bus depots, and train stations. New design addresses our minds more and more. Maybe a Website for an individual is not the highest goal one can have,but to think in terms of human interconnectedness and cooperative effort is of a higher order than to stylize cars, lamps, or to produce idiotic messages on postcards for illiterates.

With the advent of computational design,design finally defines its own domain of research and development. As a result, instead of waiting for other disciplines to define its agenda or scope of inquiry, computational design makes design research a force of change.

注釋：

Note:

①Boole, George. (1815-1864) conceived of a logical calculus in An Investigation of the Laws of Thought on which are founded the Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities (London, 1854).

②von Neumann, John, the legendary mathematician, was also instrumental in the paradigm of sequential computing. He was aware of the ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Calculator) built by J. P. Eckert and John Mauchly) and in 1945 wrote the famous First Draft of a Report to the EDVAC (Electronic Delay Storage Automatic Computer).

③Regarding the Design Machine (a research project carried out in 1985-1988).

④Regarding Anticipation.

⑤Nadin Mihai. Mind Anticipation and Chaos (German-English parallel text, from the series Milestones in Thought and Research)[M]. Stuttgart/Zürich: Belser Verlag,1991. Develops a cognitive model based on chaos and anticipation.

Reference:

[1]Wiener Norbert. Cybernetics[M]. Cambridge MA: MIT Press,1948.

[2]Nadin, Mihai, Marcos Novak. MIND A Design Machine, in Intelligent CAD Systems, Vol. 1[M].Ten Hagen, T. Tomiyama,Eds.. Berlin/New York: Springer Verlag,1987.

[3]Rosen Robert. Anticipatory Systems: Philosophical,Mathematical & Methodological Foundations[M]. Oxford/New York: Pergamon Press,1985.