1) pp. 127 How does a simple tool become a design bottleneck? pp. 128-129 The j-tool only has 6 parts; why is it "deceptively simple" in terms of material infrastructure? pp. 129-130 what about other kinds of infrastructure? How does this illustrate the "contingent" aspects of design?
2) pp. 131-132 Compare scientific laws, technically-derived design codes, and government regulated design codes. How could one avoid "epistemological relativism" here?
3) pp. 133-135 Use Ed's solar panel design problem to illustrate (a) the contrast between vernacular and formal object worlds, (b) the claim that "a code is a historical statement," and (c) the construction of codes in terms of a feedback loop.
4) pp. 136-137 In what way can costs be thought of an part of the design ecology? Create a flow chart of the decision options discussed on page 138 (draw on blackboard). What is meant by "a lot of philosophy?" Does this interjection work to create decision closure?
5) pp. 141 What is meant by the "Cartesian" character of formal firm organization? What is the relation between the formal firm organization and the formal ("perceived") functional structure of the artifact? pp. 142-143 What is missing from these descriptions?
6) pp. 143 Despite the attempts to use a CPM chart to designate a linear flow, feedback will still be present. Use the example of Tom's junction box purchase to illustrate (draw flowchart on blackboard).
7) pp. 145 why did Sergio consider the expense of contracting with QB for external evaluation of the design options? p. 145-148 How else does he legitimate his structuring of the design task? What separates the construction of the physical artifact from these managerial decisions?
8) pp. 184-185 How does Tom's activity at Solaray described in this passage refute the assertion that "science controls the design process?" pp. 186-187 refute the claim that the market controls design.
9) pp. 187-188 refute the claim that "trade-offs" or other more structured instrumental methods (CPM, etc) control the design.
10) pp. 193 Given the complexity of the software time described (e.g. 512 detectors sampled at .001 Hz repeated over 1,000,000 iterations) how does Mark manage to "appropriate" the program? Why use that term? pp. 194 How does this compare to Arnie's appropriation on image composition?
11) pp. 197 How does Bucciarelli answer the question "can there be better designs?"