week 4: reading reflection

As a Computer Science major, optimization and logic are two things that we are constantly trained to hammer into our brains. We are conditioned to increase efficiency at the cost of understandability (why do something in 4 lines of code when you can do it in one?). Needless to say, Donald Norman’s take on technology and devices felt like a breath of fresh air. I especially liked his criticisms of conventional engineering, wherein the center of all design and development is logic. I agree with his stance that humans do not function inherently with logic and instead are unpredictable and experimental. I especially like this line of thinking because it brings to the forefront the question – is there any way we can even define basic human logic? There are so many factors at play in the way humans function, in this case, some of the most important being neurodivergence and disability. The way neurodivergent or disabled individuals navigate life is so drastically different than the way we do, their fundamental understanding of logic will be very different than ours. So when an engineer is asked about his design and his answer is logic, is he pompous to assume the way he functions is fundamental logic?

I also like his emphasis on being able to explore a device, a concept I feel is much lost in this day and age. With the initial advent of technology, with it being all clunky and whatnot, emphasis was placed to showcase not only how it worked, but the various ways one could interact with it. These days, it is assumed that everyone knows how to use a touchscreen or share via Bluetooth, so more emphasis is placed on how seamless it is. This assumption that everybody knows how to use these devices, and more importantly, how not to break these devices, makes them inaccessible to the general public.

Leave a Reply