Sousanis discusses several dimensions in his text, and at this point, we arrive at the fifth dimension. These frames illustrate that from the same mind that creates dimensions, it also limits them by our habits (111). Advocating for “plasticity,” we need to lessen our habitual tendencies or learn flexibility. What I am struggling to grasp is then why Sousanis chooses to illustrate/write a graphical book. What do we need to re-learn or be more flexible on in order to comprehend more opportunities than a book for composition? At what point do we stop forming habits?
On pages 54-55, Sousanis outlines Decartes’ and Plato’s mistrust of visuals due to its dependence on perception. As logical positivism became the reigning ziegeist of the time, visual thinking was not the only thing that lost its credibility–rhetoric, in large part, was dismissed as well.
What are the parallels between discrediting visual thinking and rhetorical thought?
A humanistic approach to product design, usability testing, and artifact development allows designers to explain and improve the rhetorical aspects of generative knowledge design. Although Internet users experience complex cultural, geographical, and spatial networked relationships, these experiences go unnoticed and misunderstood. As Drucker discusses in Graphesis, with a humanistic perspective, the designer can ask: “How can we create fragmented and correlated points of view that connect one mode of analysis and display to another in a way that makes their connections legible?” (189). [LW]