디자인의 본질은 조형이며 이를 통해 다양한 목적을 달성한다. 이러한 목적의 진술이 디자인의 존재방식이다. 그리고 존재방식은 디자인방법의 차이로 구분되며 또 실체화된다. 따라서 디자인방법은 목적을 분석하는데서 출발되어야 하며 존재방식이 다양한 만큼 방법의 수 또한 무한하다.
현재의 디자인방법은 모더니즘과 실증과학에 바탕을 두고 있는 이른바 과학적 방법을 따르고 있다. 합리적 절차에 의해 보편의 가치를 추구하는 과학적 디자인방법은 창조적이며 개별적인 인간을 추상화된 전형으로서 자연 법칙에 충실한 물리적 대상으로 간주할 뿐 아니라, 다양하게 전개되어 있는 디자인의 존재방식을 하나의 방법과 절차로서 보편화 한다. 따라서 사회적 변혁에 따라 끊임없이 생성-소멸되는 디자인의 존재방식에 대응하기에 적절한 방법이라 할 수 없다. 특히, 정보통신 네트워크와 가상공간이 인간의 의식이 실재하는 기본적 공간이 되고, 사물을 지각하고 이해하는 방식에 근본적인 변화를 가져오게 된 디지털미디어시대의 제반 특성을 효과적으로 수용하고 새롭게 부각된 다양한 가치를 구현하기에는 한계가 있다.
현재의 디자인방법은 또한 경직된 학문적 체계, 이론과 실제 사이의 유기적 연관성 부재, 그리고 인접 학문의 이론과 방법에 지나치게 의존한다는 문제를 안고 있다. 이는 방법론과 방법의 구분에 엄중하지 않기 때문이며 근본적으로는 디자인이 다원의 가치를 지향한다는 사실에 소홀했기 때문이라 할 수 있다.
다원의 가치를 구현하기 위해서는 방법적 정형을 깨뜨려야 한다. 그리고 디자이너가 모든 방법을 선택하고 절차를 주도해야 한다. 과학적 디자인방법의 보편성으로부터 자유로워야 하며 심미를 과학의 대척점에 두어서는 안 된다. 과학은 방법이고 심미는 가치이기 때문이다. 심미라는 가치는 전통적인 그리기 방법과 과학적 방법을 포함한 다양한 방법으로 구현할 수 있으며, 이는 사용성의 제고에서도 다를 바 없다. 요컨대, 각각의 의미와 가치가 분명한 다양한 지향과 그에 합당한 방법을 모색하는 일이 새로운 시대의 디자인이 해결해야 할 과제인 것이다. 디자인의 본질은 이러한 다원적 지향과 가치를 조형행위로서 구현한다는데 있다. 기능적이며 간결한 형태와 탐미적이며 장식적인 형태, 그리고 과학적 방법에 의한 기능적 형태 모두가 조형행위로 구현된 가치인 것이다. 그러한 행위 사이에는 우열 또는 고하의 관계가 성립될 수 없다. 따라서 다원주의는 디자인방법의 ‘절대적이면서 또한 보편적’인 지향이 된다.
이와 같은 다원적 가치를 디자인방법으로 구체화하기 위해서는 제품의 분류가 전제되어야 한다. 먼저 조형의 목적에 따라 스타일링과 디자인을 분별해야 한다. 이는 심미적 피상성을, 사용성을 중심으로 한 전통적 디자인에서 분리하여 독립된 디자인방법으로서의 의미와 가치를 부여하는데 의미가 있다. 디자인의 대중적 인식이 ‘심미’에 있음을 감안한다면 양자의 분리는 디자인방법의 다양성 확보의 개념적 출발점이라 할 수 있다.
두 번째 분류의 기준은 디자인의 존재방식으로서, 특히 다양한 존재방식의 방법적 외연과 체계를 밝혀냄으로써 ‘디자인방법학’으로서의 기초를 다지고 이론적 모형 내지 방법적 전형을 제시한다는 학문적 의미를 갖는다.
세 번째, 제품수명주기에 의한 분류는 존재방식에 따른 디자인방법에 비해서 비교적 구체적 조건과 방법을 상정하고 있다. 존재방식과 스타일링이 외재적 영향에 의한 것이라면 제품수명주기는 제품에 내재된 특성, 즉 제품의 사회적 진화, 기술의사회적 의미, 생산과 소비의 관계 등을 모두 포괄하는 방법적 분별이기 때문이다.
아무리 훌륭한 방법이라 하더라도 하나의 규범적인 방법으로 모든 제품을 디자인할 수 없다. 합리적 디자인방법이란 디자인의 목표를 달성하기 위해 만들어진 전략적 규칙에 지나지 않는다. 따라서 방법이란 그 인지적 유용성이 디자인의 목표와 상충되지 않을 때에만 비로소 그 의미와 가치를 평가할 수 있다. 디자인은 다원의 가치를 구현할 수 있는 모든 방법을 포괄해야만 한다는 것이다.

The accurate definition of concept is more important than anything else in the debate on design. As a matter of fact, the value of research result is often diluted, because the concept is otherwise defined in many researches on design. Thus, it is naturally required to debate the reason why design in placed in the life of human being and the ontological origin that informs the place where it should be placed. The debate on the what design is can be expanded in 2 ways. They are to clarify the original nature of design and the method to explain the way how design exists in this society. The former can be ontological definition and the latter can be constructive definition based on epistemology. The ontological definition of design is a question on what invariable concept is, namely, invariable concept that transcends the existing type of design which is entangled with epochal paradigm, social change and interests of individual or group. It is a way to clarify the relation between existence and matters by exposing the identity and universality of diverse existing types through formal quest on them as well as to expose the nature of design by discussing thoroughly the common order that works on the relation.
The existing type of design is diversely spread, ranging from simple plan to social description. The equivocal concept and diverse definitions meant by term, design are originated from this existing type, because social entities respectively reflected their interest. Thus, the existing type and definition of design inevitably vary, depending on the age and region. For this reason, existing type cannot be the statement that expresses the nature of design.
The nature of design is form giving. The objective of form giving is not limited to pursue esthetic property. Diverse objectives are attained by the act of form giving. The representation of this objective is the existing type of design. Further, existing type is divided and substantiated by the difference in design methods. Thus, design methods should start from analyzing objective. As existing types are diverse, the number of methods is infinite.
The current design methods follow modernism and so-called scientific method which is based on logical positivism. Pursuing the universal value by rational procedure, scientific design method regards human being as physical object that is loyal to the law of nature. Thus, design based on this method have problems, that is, the problem of inclination that the result may be inhuman and the problem that universalizes diversely spread existing types of design into one method and procedure. This is because it is impossible to properly cope with existing types of design that incessantly generates and extinguishes, depending on the social change.
Design is a representative science of practical act. To express more exactly, the science of design is the science attached to the act of design, the professional technology. Thus, the change related to human life will alter the attributes and environment of products, which shall necessarily lead to design methods. In spite of the revolutionary social change in this age which is called digital media, the scientific design methods in the age of industry still persists. When matters are replaced and restored to digital code and knowledge is changed to encoded information, information communication network and virtual space is being fixed as the basic space where the consciousness of human being actually exists. That is, the virtual space provided by Internet has brought a radical change in the method to perceive and understand matters. It is said that this dynamic change is not accommodated in the design method. In other words, it is said that renovation is not accommodated as design methods.
The current design methods have many problems besides the point that scientific method is pursued and social renovation is not accommodated. First of all, it can be pointed out that there is no organic relation between theory and practice and dependence on the adjacent sciences is excessive. As a result, the act of design loses its own meaning and value, because the difference in method and procedure that should deservedly exist between design method and the area of other sciences is lost. Second, keeping the learning system which is more rigid than necessary, design method becomes restriction in producing the creative design products. Third, there is a problem of theoretical system that the division between method and methodology is ambiguous and there is no direct causal relation which should be noticed between them. This result may be caused, because the general methodology and individual methodology as well as learning system and methodological procedure are not stratified. This is because methodology and methods are not strictly divided and methodology is not debated at all.
Furthermore, the current design is too conservative. Making obstacles such as complicated qualification, difficult theory and meaningless inflation in academic background, it narrows the course to be a designer. That is, the intention is to construct borderline between educated conservative elite design and design on the market filled with anarchistic property. As a result, like modernistic art, while the propensity of elite accelerates the high grade of design, the street is filled with crude objects, banal symbol and cheap taste in the name of design. The design in the trend of conversative elite compels perverted value system by discriminating the taste of human being. However, design exists in diverse shapes and in one name between both extremes of our society. All of them are meaningful and valuable to somebody.
It can be said that all of the above mentioned problems in design methods are derived from rigid thought and method. Thus, the aim of design that can solve such problem and accommodate overall social renovation of new age lies in pluralism. It is required to break all stereotypes of methods to enhance the plural values. Further, designer should select and initiate all methods. As design is similar to poem, it is not necessary to consider the level of readers. This is because readers find poet that they want and indulge in the poem. Namely, they select and consume poem which fits their intellectual level and emotional propensity, so-called lifestyle. Social or universal evaluation of value is meaningless to them. The analysis and synthesis of parts or logics and procedure of evaluation are also absolutely useless. Differently from prose, the logical representation, poem is a peculiar method of representation that expresses the illogical imagination transcending logics by using metaphor and symbol as well as irony and paradox. Through this process, it is possible to reach the creative recognition which may be complex and multilateral to reality. Namely, it is an art where cause and result, entirety and part, objective and means are organically related in mutually circulatory and dependent way.
The design methods in new age should be such art. It should be new art that put human being at the center, art that does not divided public and art that is free of frame. The variety of design is a value that is not embodied by diverse design methods or procedures, but that can be acquired only by the existence of diverse designers. It is not realized by using particular method, namely, design for consumers, but it intends to recognize and encourage the variety of designers. As the value of poem is created by poet, designer should be at the center of design methods.
The design methods in new age should be free from the absoluteness of science. Further, esthetics should not be placed at the antipodes of science, because science is method and esthetics is value. The value of esthetics can be embodied by diverse methods which include the traditional painting method and scientific method. This is all the same in the enhancement of usability. Thus, the task that should be solved by design of new age is to seek diverse aims which have clear meaning and value respectively and the methods appropriate to such purpose.
The nature of design lies in embodying such plural aims and values as form giving act. Functional and concise act, esthetic and decorative act and functional act by scientific method- all of them are values embodied by model act. No superior and inferior or high and low relation can be established between such acts. Thus, pluralism becomes the absolute and universal inclination of design methods.
It is required to classify products first so as to embody such plural value into design methods. This research intends to construct design methods by adopting 3 classifications which are deemed to have broad width of application and large meaning in science. First, dividing design and styling, it is required to clarify their respective property in method and especially, to re-examine the human meaning and value of the latter.
The objective of form giving becomes the most rudimentary standard to classify products. Divided into esthetic property and usability, they are respectively named as styling and design. Namely, separating the work to give form around esthetic superficiality from the category of traditional design to enhance functionality, it is to endow the meaning and value as independent design methods. Considering that the popular recognition of design lies in esthetics, it is reverse trend, separating design pursuing functionality from design that mainly deals with beauty only. Anyway, the separation of both parties is the conceptual starting point of ensuring diversity in design methods.
Styling follows ‘the system of mark and symbol.’ It creates sensory forms and expresses inspiration or complex message through formal factors and symbol. Since the voluntary and restrictive property of language is also exposed in the styling as it is, the course of form giving is not different from using language at all. Further, it is not different from plastic art in that it is a work to manipulate or interpret the symbolic meaning of peculiar code contained in any type.
The second standard of classification is the existing type of design. The objective to be realized through design, namely, existing type and methods abolish, reproduce or newly create their existence by mutual influence. Design methods reflect universal idea of the contemporary age and includes the individual peculiarity and fortuitous character. Permitting all means possible to solve problem, the second best substitutes the absolute good. Since all possible alternatives can be methods, it does not pursue truth. Selecting one alternative among them follows efficiency and taste instead of logics and procedure of science. Thus, science, art, inevitability and fortuity are just all alternatives in the category of method. In this sense, design methods are inevitably connected to the genetic definition or intentional definition, that is, the existing type, in any way.
Constructing design methods as per existing type of design has the meaning of science to present theoretic model or method prototype. Especially, it has meaning of science that hardens the fundamental of design method or meta-design method by clarifying method circumference and system in the existing type as vernacular, added function, decoration and style. For instance, vernacular design infers the causal relation between usability and aesthetic symbolism through transformation or clarifies the meaning of the optimum solution with the limit of algorithm in the type property of heuristic and professional system.
Third, classification by Product Life Cycle supposes relatively specific conditions and methods in comparison with design methods as per existing type. This is because while existing type and styling is affected externally, life cycle of products is embedded property of the product. In other words, it is discernment of methods which includes social evolution of products, social meaning of technology, relation between production and consumption, etc. Though the stages are largely divided into 4 or 5 stages, the method system is flexible with broad width of application considering that it contains number of countless cases.
Since the objective of classifying is to predict the ultimately reasonable design method, it belongs to meta-methods conceptually. The objective of meta-methods is to cluster products that can be solved by same design methods, because all products cannot be actually designed in the different design methods. Thus, it is more efficient in larger group as long as the standard of classification is clear. With styling and design, the existing type of design mentioned above, products life cycle is the method to construct design method, namely, the effective standard to discern products.
No matter how excellent a normative method may be, it cannot design all products. The rational design method is nothing but strategic rule made to achieve the goal of design. Thus, the rationality of one method can be evaluated only when its cognitive utility does not conflict with the goal of design. Design method should include all methods to embody the plural values.