To see and not to unsee...
Perception is conditioned by knowledge and experience as the article says, an undebatable fact that we can all relate to... in my opinion, perception is as conditioned by these as it is by language if not even more, due to language’s influence over knowledge and experience assimilation.
The perceptual set may be subjective from person to person, but its relationship to cognition is like the dilemma about what came first, whether the egg or the hen... and although for me the answer is always the egg, this might not be accurate to the next person in line, as we don’t see things as they are, but as we are... and we are what we speak.
I think that even though this is not mentioned in the article, this relationship is hinted at by the author through his comparative example between Picasso and Backhaus... He mentions Picasso painting things as he thinks them, while Backhaus tends to trust his eyes more than his brain in his approach to art. If we part from the fact that artists learn how to perceive light and shadow as they are before any painting techniques, we can clearly see that both artists’ perceptual sets are different, based on the fact that they speak different languages due to art being just another form of expression (abstractionism vs. realism).
In the same line, I’m not sure if I entirely agree with the “...once we know how things are made, we’re unable to enjoy them or even create them spontaneously anymore...” statement, in regards to enjoyment I agree with the author as I revel with even more admiration, marvel, and sense of curiosity once I have a more in-depth perspective of how are things done, and therefore more appreciation.
For me, this is intimately related to the dilemma around Design Vs. Taste... and clearly supports the thesis that they’re the same, but only from the ignorant’s perspective
There is personal taste, then there’s knowledge, and finally we have sophistication (fingerspitzengefühl), acquired taste or better yet explained, knowledge applied to personal taste in the pursuit of balance and self identity (craftsmanship). This... intuition (finger-tip feeling) is developed by applying knowledge through training in order to acquire experience, where theory often stands in the way of practice... until it becomes actual practice and designers stop thinking consciously about theory and achieve mastery
Thinking of design as a cartesian map... where the X axis goes from ugly to beautiful, and the Y axis ranges between broken and functional... It might not be the ideal representation for design in general, but it works best for UI design. Within this “map”, there’s a growing path for designers from the middle to the second quadrant area, meaning designers should prioritize functionality over anything else, and with experience they migrate from functional design to really amazing designs in the first quadrant (detailed attention, polishing what you have - trained taste).
Defining design as only aesthetics would make life easier for everyone, but it would be a shallow and superficial act, as functionality would be the most important factor to take into account to rate design as such... how well something works is the only obvious criteria of good design, as you just have to use a product to know if it works well. A lot of good designs are ugly, and while pretty and broken feels phony, ugly and broken is just garbage.
Again… assertive communication, meaning language conditions perception… designers need to communicate accurately through a proper use of language in order to make users see what they see, as once seen you can't unsee.