It blows my mind that people can write like this! It is so full of giant concepts (as in the universe, science, existence) that you can’t just throw around. You really have to know what you’re saying, and this is one of the reasons I find writing so intimidating!
This man must have been amazingly smart, sure of himself and unafraid to put himself under the scrutiny of any number of scientists, poets, religious leaders, critics of literature…critics in general. I wonder whether his views caused major upsets? I enjoyed this version of the Lord’s Prayer because it addresses existence, the cosmos, and what we experience in our lives. It seems to acknowledge and respect the idea of god through stating, in awe, questions without question marks.
I certainly hope that visual approaches the design are not outdated, since in some ways I’ve only just begun with design. Wouldn’t a visual approach to design just act as a tool for Terry while in his design process, to be called upon when needed for conveying a particular idea to someone? I guess he wasn’t arguing that he wouldn’t use it at all, but what would he be doing in its place? Surely he can’t verbally explain his ideas of a multi-dimensional contemporary design problem that well! I was confused just reading his first entry.
I see the visual approach as a human approach. Maybe I’m a little ignorant as to what he suggests instead, and I’m wondering if Terry’s a robot. With this, I would argue that what Terry describes as ‘multi-dimensional, contemporary design problems’ need as much ‘human’ interaction as possible to explore perspectives and relationships. If a visual approach aids in this process, then why not use as needed?