Reflective design also highlights beauty as part of the equation in design (76). But how does beauty provide a different interpretation, and can it be practical rather than just for aesthetic purposes in technology? Moreover, is it possible for the aspect of ‘beauty’ in reflective design help resolve technological issues?

On page 76, technological fluency is defined as “the capability to understand, use, and assess technology beyond its rote application.” How can different perspectives help address the flaws of technology that are observed in its common application?

To what extent is the original interpretation of the work lost in order to construct new interpretations? Also, is it possible that in this pursuit, the author’s perspective and intent in the text is compromised?