Publication detail
Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?
VERKERKE, G. VAN DER HOUWEN, E. BROEKHUIS, A. BURŠA, J. CATAPANO, G. MCCULLAGH, P. MOTTAGHY, K. NIEDERER, P. REILLY, R. ROGALEWICZ, V. SEGERS, P. VERDONSCHOT, N.
Czech title
Věda versus konstruování; srovnatelné, kontrastní nebo podporující
English title
Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?
Type
journal article in Web of Science
Language
en
Original abstract
Science and design are two completely separated areas of expertise with their own specialists. Science analyses the existing world to create new knowledge, design uses existing knowledge to create a new world. This tunnel-vision mentality and narrow-minded approach is dangerous for problem solving, where a broad view on potential solutions is required to realise a high-quality answer on the defined problem. We state that design benefits from scientific methods, resulting in a more effective design process and in better products, while science benefits from a design approach, resulting in more efficient and effective results. Our philosophy is illustrated using examples from the field of biomedical engineering. Both methods can benefit tremendously from each other. By applying scientific methods, superior choices will be made in the design process. With design, more accurate, effective and efficient science will be performed.
Czech abstract
Věda a konstrukční návrh jsou dvě zcela odlišné oblasti vyžadující specialisty s odlišnými zkušenostmi. Věda analyzuje existující realitu, aby dosáhla nových poznatků, konstruktér využívá existujících pozbnatků k vytváření nové reality.Tento úzký pohled je nebezpečný při řešení problémů, kde je zapotřebí komplexní přístup k možným řešením, aby bylo nalezené řešení co nejkvalitnější. V článku se uvádí, jak může konstruktér profitovat z vědeckých metod, aby dosáhl efektivnějšího návrhu a lepšího produktu, ale rovněž jak může věda profitovat z konstruktérskéhop přístupu. Uvedeny jsou příklady z oblasti biomedicínského inženýárství.
English abstract
Science and design are two completely separated areas of expertise with their own specialists. Science analyses the existing world to create new knowledge, design uses existing knowledge to create a new world. This tunnel-vision mentality and narrow-minded approach is dangerous for problem solving, where a broad view on potential solutions is required to realise a high-quality answer on the defined problem. We state that design benefits from scientific methods, resulting in a more effective design process and in better products, while science benefits from a design approach, resulting in more efficient and effective results. Our philosophy is illustrated using examples from the field of biomedical engineering. Both methods can benefit tremendously from each other. By applying scientific methods, superior choices will be made in the design process. With design, more accurate, effective and efficient science will be performed.
Keywords in Czech
Inženýrské vzdělávání; specializace; multidisciplinárnost; metodický návrh;
Keywords in English
Engineering education; Specialisation; Multidisciplinarity; methodical design;
RIV year
2013
Released
15.05.2013
Publisher
Elsevier BV
ISSN
1751-6161
Volume
41
Number
7
Pages from–to
1516–1527
Pages count
12
BIBTEX
@article{BUT104237,
author="Gijsbertus J {Verkerke} and Eduard B {van der Houwen} and Anton A {Broekhuis} and Jiří {Burša} and Gerardo {Catapano} and Paul {McCullagh} and Khosrow {Mottaghy} and Peter {Niederer} and Richard {Reilly} and Vladimír {Rogalewicz} and patrick {Segers} and Nico {Verdonschot},
title="Science versus design; comparable, contrastive or conducive?",
year="2013",
volume="41",
number="7",
month="May",
pages="1516--1527",
publisher="Elsevier BV",
issn="1751-6161"
}