belief that making design more scientific would produce a better world
— The Design Methods Movement: From Optimism to Darwinism
main authors: Bruce Archer, John Chris Jones, Christopher Alexander, Horst Ritte
"physics" vs "biology" approach (as stated by the authors):
physics has forces, biology has interactions (possible relation to Smalltalk)
physics is best for simple systems, biology for complex ones (also Smalltalk)
physics is not historical - the same physical cause->effect will happen in the same circumstances, always; in biology the evolutionary past has to be taken into account
the whole "physics vs biology" point seems wrong to me, biology is physics, it feels more like the authors comparing simple physical model, of for example friction on plane, to a complex physical interactions in a multi-cellular organism
they are also trying to state that "every organism is different" which is true, but they are still governed by physical laws
criticism of Design Methods Movement gave birth to participatory design, user-centered design, and design thinking; on the other hand "scientific" approach led to design science by Buckminster Fuller