Review: "Being Wrong" by Kathryn Schulz

I received the book Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error by Kathryn Schulz this summer and, although I began reading it shortly after, I just finished the book. Schulz goes into the concept of error in much depth and really clarifies our current ideology and relationship with Error (capital "E" for the concept). Although not every example and description is applicable to my interests, I pinpointed several good points that carries over to product design and engineering processes:

• It is our nature to "theorize" about our world
• Product design is involved in developing that relationship between us and things/our environment.
• It is okay to say "I don't know;" in fact, it might be the best thing one can do to really learn and listen.
• "To err is human:" this is a permanent marriage; learn to live with mistakes.

Schulz presents several compelling and insightful remarks on how we "err"and why we "err." She states that "our beliefs often seem to us not so much constructed as reflected, as if our minds were simply mirrors in which the truth of the world passively appeared" (Schulz 99) -- called "naive realism." That statement resonated with me as I drew a parallel with our beliefs on the "right" way to operate X-product, and, if a designer is not aware of her tendency to do so, she will not gather the necessary information and feedback needed to create a winning piece, able to be used by a wide population/audience. Quoting Rollo May, she writes that our -- I interject, "the designer's" -- commitment to an idea is "'healthiest when it is not without doubt, but in spite of doubt [over the quality of our design]'" (Schulz 179). As quasi-rational people, in whom reason is combined with ego, hope, loyalty, etc, Schulz reveals that we [the designers] can be disillusioned by "the sunk costs" (Schulz 195) of our ideas and belief in a product.

After reading this book and some of Donald Norman's The Design of Everyday Things, I have seen several parallels between the two. For example, Schulz's point on "quasi-rational" made me think of Norman's recollection of using a prototype keyboard. When Norman suggested a change as he was constantly making the same error between two keys, "the designer's first response was: 'Why did you make that error? Didn't you read the manual?" (Norman 35). Based on Norman's principle of feedback and Schulz's insight on our stubborn commitments to our ideas, the designer's response is not surprising but also not appropriate for trying to develop the best product.

Norman also discusses Error in the relationship between "us" and "things;" in his book, he stresses that it is important to understand that error is not always the user's fault -- it most likely is the product, or rather the designer for developing it. Schulz even quotes from his book DOET: "the error correction [process] seems to start at the lowest possible level and slowly works its way higher" (Schulz 211). In other words, it rarely concludes to ourselves that we made an incorrect assumption, developed a less-than-helpful tool, have someone else' car, we are plain wrong. Norman describes the designer's role best, by writing that "of course, people do make errors" but "designers should take special pains to make errors as cost-free as possible" (Norman 35).

Overall, I found Schulz's "Being Wrong" enjoyable to read. She includes numerous real-life examples from a variety of areas that demonstrate not just how wrong we can be but also why we should not fear how wrong we are. In conjunction with similar principles in Norman's book, she succeeds in enhancing our perspective of Error and our humanistic connection to it. And, personally, I agree with her that "embracing our fallibility is simply a way of paying homage to... 'the permanent possibility of someone having a better idea'" (Schulz 339).