ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

UNIVERSITY
Art vs Design
First of all, we have to separate out what type of design we’re talking about.in the case of
graphic design, illustration, and branding maybe design is somewhat “art,” but if we’re talking
about more functional design—such as digital product design or industrial design—we need to
go a lot deeper, and it becomes clear:

“Design is not art. Design has to function.”

“Art is meant to provoke thought and emotions, but it doesn’t solve problems.”

Design is focused on achieving solutions with measurable results, whereas art is more
concerned with expressing ideas that may have more than one meaning.

“Artists primarily work off instinct, whereas designers employ a methodical, data-driven
process.”

Great design is part science, part process, and part a practical set of solutions with a dash of
aesthetics thrown in. Going beyond the surface, a designer inevitably discovers that great

design is more about delivering solutions to problems.

In many cases, design outcomes may have an artistic appearance for the need of visual
appealing. The role that art is playing here is “applied arts” — the application of arts to make
products aesthetically pleasing. This does not change the purpose of design as aesthetic need
could be a purpose of design. In this case, the aesthetic expression is addressing people’s need
instead of an individual expression.

the design elements used are line, scale, color, repetition, texture, balance, hierarchy, contrast.

In my view this picture is the pure example of design from art

Design vs science
Science: study and focuses on the natural world through controlled experiment, classification,
analysis with values objectivity, rationality, neutrality, and a concern for truth

Design: focuses on the artificial world through modelling, pattern-formation, synthesis with the
values practicality, ingenuity, empathy, and a concern for appropriateness

Scientists: problem-focused, analysis

Designers: solution-focused, synthesis

The essential difference between designer and scientist is that while the scientists focused their
attention on discovering the rule, the designers were obsessed with achieving the desired
result. The scientists adopted a generally problem-focused strategy and the designers a
solution-focused strategy…These experiments suggest that scientist’s problem-solve by
analysis, whereas designer’s problem-solve by synthesis.

In my view this picture shows design from science.

The design elements used are line, color, texture, form, and

The design principles used are balance, unity, contrast, repetition.

Design vs engineering
Engineering: solve problems between parts and parts in the artificial world

Design: solve problems between human and the artificial world

Before design became a profession in industry, engineers were doing the design job which was
so-called “engineering design”. Then engineering and design split because the need of design
increased and the scope expanded, especially as design becoming human-centered. Now,
engineering and design are working side by side with different focuses: engineering solve
problems between parts and parts in the artificial world; design solve problems between
human and the artificial world.

There is a huge difference between “engineering” and “design thinking”. It comes down to that
engineers are problem-oriented, a design thinker is need oriented. That’s a fundamental
another approach. For an engineer the problem is obvious, As you can see in the image below,
it is even not mentioned at all!

Design thinking does not focus on the (technical) problem but focuses on the user of a yet to be
invented solution that meets his needs optimally. As you can see below, a central verb is
empathizing.

The conceptual distinction between design thinking and engineering makes us clear why some
technical solutions don’t work at all, or are actually simply not used. We should be happy that
there is a solution, but we are not: the solution works, but is highly irritating. There is a
satisfying solution, but it is badly designed. The thinking behind has been problem-oriented, not
user oriented.

Examples of brilliant engineering but bad design:

 A wheelchair

 Governmental websites

 Electrical supplies for electronic equipment

 Boarding aircrafts

 Crossing streets safely for the blind

 Ticket systems for public transport

 Supply of stores

 Microwaves and other devices that you cannot operate without studying the manual.

existing but poorly designed solutions are low-hanging fruit for new ideas that really generate
value. They are opportunities easy to spot as riggers for a creative thinking effort.

design from engineering

Design vs philosophical theories
A philosophical understanding of design.

Philosophy of design is the study of definitions of design, and the assumptions, foundations,
and implications of design. The field, which is mostly a sub-discipline of aesthetics, is defined by
an interest in a set of problems, or an interest in central or foundational concerns in design. In
addition to these central problems for design as a whole, many philosophers of design consider
these problems as they apply to particular disciplines (e.g., philosophy of art). Although most
practitioners are philosophers of aesthetics (i.e., aestheticians), several prominent designers
and artists have contributed to the field.

I tried a lot to find a design picture from philosophical theories but I can’t.