Conceptual impression surrounding this post have yet to be substantiated, corroborated confirmed or woven into a larger argument, context or network. Objective: To generate links between scientific discovery, design awareness and consciousness.
* * *
agency: action or intervention, especially such as to produce a particular effect.
Design consciousness describes a particular type of human intelligence based upon certain generally understood evolutionary characteristics. In a nutshell, the concept of intelligence might be considered taking the form of opinion, facts, knowledge, understanding and wisdom.
- Q&A - What Is Intelligence? by Annika Weder 10.05.2020 Published in Fundamentals October 2020
I believe that human intelligence is a collective enterprise of accumulative thoughts, feelings, events and experiences. Fundamentally opinionated, and at times relevantly important, intelligence is a collective effort to expand consciousness by means of nurturing a growing awareness within the multidimensional realms of spacetime.
At first this process appears to be a linear one and at times it is. However full, such is not the case. Cognitive thoughts and feelings are fundamental to design and the design process and when merged encourage both conceptual and linear patterns (maps) towards "observing" the world, i.e. reality.
Opinion is challenged/squared by knowledge. Fact is challenged/squared by understanding. Fact and opinion are challenged/squared by wisdom.
Not as mystifying as it may sound, we tend to interpret internal and external impressions from a subjective POV. We likewise tend to perceive the concept of intelligence from a similar perspective - which is that of an observer.
observer: spectator, onlooker, viewer, witness, eyewitness, blogger, reporter monitor.
* * *
" .... Hofstadter explored the question of how through self-reference and formal rules, systems can acquire meaning despite being made of "meaningless" elements. And how the psychological self emerges from abstract feedback loops of self-referent symbolic representations, recursively reflecting upon itself in a reverberating circuit - a cybernetic loop."
New England Complex Systems Institute
" Generally, scientific theories do not describe the properties of the observer because the subject of inquiry, that which is being described, is the observed rather than the observer.
The field of complex systems is interested in relationships. The observer and system are in a relationship. Thus, we are interested in developing a more precise notion of an observer, and the basic act of observation or measurement. The observer will then be in our theories. This work also connects with the problem of understanding how people sense and describe what they sense, which is part of the problem of understanding brain and mind.
An observer is a system which, through interactions, retains a representation of another system (the observed system) within it."
To observe is to design. To design is to KNOW that you are the observer and not just believe it. Design and the design process attempts to guide, foster and harbor the concept of a design consciousness however, it is only as efficient as the observer is willing and/or capable of resonating to it.
* * *
Toward a Theory of Design Consciousness: Semiotics, Cognition, and the Physics of Observation
Design consciousness may be conceptualized as a specialized form of human intelligence that emerges from both evolutionary imperatives and symbolic cognition. Within this framework, intelligence can be delineated into five overlapping modalities: opinion, fact, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. These stages form a cognitive continuum, moving from subjective conjecture toward integrative insight, each with increasing degrees of abstraction, generalization, and contextual integration (Bloom, 1956; Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986).
Human intelligence, particularly as it manifests in creative and design-oriented contexts, is inherently collective and accumulative. It is shaped by a web of intersubjective interactions, affective states, embodied experiences, and cultural-historical events. In line with Vygotskian sociocultural theory (Vygotsky, 1978), intelligence here is not merely an individual trait but a socially mediated process of meaning-making that unfolds across time and space. This expansive awareness—a "design consciousness"—can be understood as a higher-order form of cognition, wherein perception, affect, and symbolization coalesce to form intentional interventions in the world.
From a semiotic standpoint, this consciousness operates through the manipulation and interpretation of signs—visual, spatial, linguistic, and material. Design is thus a semiotic act par excellence, a way of encoding and decoding meaning in physical and symbolic form (Eco, 1976; Krippendorff, 2006). It is not only the product (a chair, a building, a user interface) that carries meaning, but the process itself—the gestures, decisions, and iterations through which meaning is constructed and refined. These processes occur not in isolation but within semiotic systems or "sign ecologies" (Stables & Semetsky, 2015), structured by the interpretant's (the observer's) cognitive filters and cultural frameworks.
The process of intelligence-building, and by extension design, initially appears to follow a linear trajectory—problem identification, ideation, prototyping, refinement. Yet this is an oversimplification. As argued by Donald Schön (1983), reflective practice in design is recursive and dialectical, not strictly sequential. Cognition in design is shaped by a dynamic interplay between intuition and analysis, emotion and logic. The resulting cognitive maps are both conceptual and spatial, integrating sensory impressions with higher-order abstraction (Norman, 2013).
This recursive loop—between the subjective observer and the external world—resonates with the foundational principles of quantum physics, particularly the role of the observer in the collapse of the wave function (Wheeler, 1983). In this context, the observer is not a passive recipient of information but an active participant in shaping what is observed. To observe, therefore, is a design act: it implies choice, attention, interpretation, and intention. This parallels Niels Bohr’s assertion that “the observer is not only necessary to describe phenomena but defines them through the act of measurement” (Bohr, 1958).
Thus, to observe is to design—to impose structure, extract pattern, and instill meaning. The design process becomes a performative act of knowledge production. Yet, crucially, this process only actualizes when the observer is consciously aware of their participatory role. It is not enough to believe one is designing; one must know they are doing so with agency and responsibility.
Design consciousness, then, is the resonance between mind and material, between cognitive structures and symbolic environments. It is the capacity to recognize oneself as an agent in a system of interrelated signs, experiences, and potentialities. The efficacy of this consciousness depends not solely on technical skill or aesthetic intuition but on the observer’s depth of engagement with the world—across sensory, emotional, and intellectual registers.
References:
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Longmans, Green.
Bohr, N. (1958). Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. John Wiley & Sons.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind Over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer. Free Press.
Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Indiana University Press.
Krippendorff, K. (2006). The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation for Design. CRC Press.
Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books. Stables, K., & Semetsky, I. (2015). Pedagogical Semiosis: Toward the Secondness of Learning. Sense Publishers.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Wheeler, J. A. (1983). Law Without Law. In J. A. Wheeler & W. H. Zurek (Eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton University Press.
* * *
Examples of intelligence in quantum flux (A and B)
A = opinion overlapping feelings of knowledge and understanding, and where understanding becomes conflicted by opinion. Knowledge is somewhat conflicted with understanding. Knowledge agrees with opinion yet is challenged by facts and understanding and where facts seem to be in conflict with both knowledge and understanding.
B = There is little conflict amongst most feelings, yet opinion seems to annoy any feeling of understanding.
conflicted: disputed, dissention, friction, strife, antagonistic, contentious, tangled, clash.
Note: You might analyze how intelligently you responded to a certain situation or circumstance by determining how you felt at that time and place. Create a map of your own awareness in regards to facts, opinion, understanding and knowledge of the circumstances. Refer and determine how wise and appropriate were your feelings in response to the situation. Evaluate your own presence in reference to the decisions you made and determine what needs to be changed, if a similar situation presents itself in the future.
Emotions can be similarly categorized in a more visceral manner and like intelligence, overlap and change rapidly in spacetime. Emotions harbor a more complex network of feelings especially in reference to its binary relationship to intelligence.
thought: suggestion, proposal proposition, idea, plan, brainstorm. Thinking alone describes the design function. It is ingrained into the DNA of human consciousness.
Design consciousness: always changing, symbolic in content and context, felt at times and on occasion understood.
There are signs (de-signs) surrounding and inviting you to prove upon this simple truth to yourself - you are the observer and creator of your own reality.
* * *
Intelligence, Emotion, and the Design of Consciousness: A Semiotic and Multidisciplinary Inquiry
1. Intelligence as a Networked Phenomenon
Intelligence can be most effectively conceptualized not as a singular faculty or quantifiable trait, but as a dynamic and recursive network of mental operations (Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1991). Within cognitive psychology and systems theory, intelligence encompasses an intricate matrix of neural patterns, semiotic processing, and symbolic encoding (Peirce, 1931–1958; Donald, 2001). These patterns are not isolated; they function in conjunction with emotion, forming a shared architecture—both neurological and phenomenological—that sustains what we broadly refer to as consciousness (Damasio, 1999; Barrett, 2017).
This networked intelligence operates through mechanisms of observation, pattern recognition, and symbolization. From a semiotic standpoint, observation initiates the production and interpretation of signs (Peirce, 1931–1958). As observation becomes recursive—observing itself observing—it gives rise to self-awareness and a meta-cognitive layer that undergirds conscious experience (Dennett, 1991).
2. The Design Function of Thought
Thought, when approached as a design function, can be understood through the lens of design theory and embodied cognition (Norman, 2013; Varela et al., 1991). The act of thinking is not merely analytical or computational; it is generative and projective. It suggests, proposes, envisions, and simulates potentialities—functions parallel to ideation in the design process.
Thus, thought is not passive; it is performative. It configures reality by selecting, structuring, and assigning meaning to phenomena (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). In this sense, thinking is inseparable from designing—both are embedded in our evolutionary architecture, reflecting the deep integration of cognitive and affective systems (Johnson, 2007).
3. Design Impressions and Archetypal Perception
Design impressions are primarily affective-semantic—they are felt before they are known, known before they are named (Barrett, 2017). These impressions resist verbalization because they arise from a pre-linguistic stratum of consciousness, what Carl Jung would identify as archetypal (Jung, 1969). Archetypes are not merely symbolic images, but structuring forces that shape perception itself.
Here, semiotics intersects with phenomenology: the lived experience of design precedes the linguistic coding of that experience (Peirce, 1931–1958; Varela et al., 1991). We do not simply see a design; we feel its intention, its resonance, its affordances (Norman, 2013).
4. The Symbolic Dynamics of Design Consciousness
Design consciousness is not static but fluid, symbolic, and contextually modulated. It is perpetually evolving, shaped by both internal states (emotion, memory, intention) and external stimuli (cultural signs, environmental patterns) (Barrett, 2017; Johnson, 2007). Symbols act as both carriers of meaning and containers of emotion. In this symbolic ecology, signs are not inert markers but semiotic vectors (Peirce, 1931–1958).
From a psychological perspective, design consciousness aligns with affective realism—the notion that our emotional states color and even construct what we perceive as real (Barrett, 2017). Hence, design consciousness is always a fusion—emotional, mental, semiotic. It is not only how we organize the world but also how the world organizes us (Varela et al., 1991; Dennett, 1991).
5. Feeling as Semiotic Field
Each feeling can be seen as a self-contained symbolic matrix—a unique semiotic field that carries its own perceptual grammar (Barrett, 2017). Feelings are not homogenous; they possess qualitative distinctions, temporal rhythms, and cognitive profiles (Damasio, 1999). Psychologically, this aligns with affective neuroscience, where emotions are shown to activate distinct neural circuits, each associated with particular forms of awareness and memory (Barrett, 2017).
Metaphorically and analogically, feelings are interpreted through signs, rituals, language, and gesture (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). The metaphor becomes a design tool—a means of mapping the ineffable onto the intelligible (Johnson, 2007). Through metaphor, the architecture of feeling becomes accessible to reflection and articulation.
6. Observer-Design and Quantum Consciousness
From the standpoint of physics, particularly quantum theory, the notion that "you are the observer and creator of your own reality" finds an intriguing, though controversial, echo (Wheeler & Zurek, 1983). In quantum mechanics, the observer effect posits that the act of observation influences the outcome of a physical system. While this principle is often misappropriated in popular metaphysics, it nonetheless resonates with the idea that consciousness is not merely receptive but participatory (Dennett, 1991).
Design, then, becomes not only a cognitive function but a cosmological act—a way of collapsing potentiality into form. We do not just observe reality; we design it into coherence, into meaning, into experience (Varela et al., 1991).
Conclusion
In summary, the synthesis of intelligence, emotion, and design suggests a view of consciousness as a semiotic ecology—a living system of symbols, impressions, and affective resonances (Peirce, 1931–1958; Barrett, 2017). Through recursive observation, metaphorical projection, and symbolic organization, we co-create the reality we inhabit. To feel, to think, to design—these are not disparate acts but integrated modes of engaging with the world, each reinforcing the other in the dynamic evolution of self-awareness (Johnson, 2007; Damasio, 1999; Varela et al., 1991).
Reference List
Barrett, L. F. (2017). How emotions are made: The secret life of the brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Harcourt Brace.
Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Little, Brown.
Donald, M. (2001). A mind so rare: The evolution of human consciousness. W. W. Norton.
Jung, C. G. (1969). The archetypes and the collective unconscious (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.; 2nd ed.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1959)
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Mark Johnson (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. University of Chicago Press.
Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things (Rev. & expanded ed.). Basic Books.
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–8, C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss, & A. W. Burks, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press.
Wheeler, J. A., & Zurek, W. H. (Eds.). (1983). Quantum theory and measurement. Princeton University Press.
The author generated this text in part with GPT-3, OpenAI’s large-scale language-generation model. Upon generating draft language, the author reviewed, edited, and revised the language to their own liking and takes ultimate responsibility for the content of this publication.
* * *
"To believe is to accept another's truth.
To know is your own creation."
Anonymous
Edited: 05.09.2023, 05.14.2023, 06.24.2023, 07.02.2023, 07.03.2025
Find your truth. Know your mind. Follow your heart. Love eternal will not be denied. Discernment is an integral part of self-mastery. You may share this post on a non-commercial basis, author and URL to be included. Please note ... posts are continually being edited. All rights reserved Copyright © 2023 C.G. Garant.
