The Simon–Kroes model of technical artifacts and the distinction between science and design

There is a long tradition of arguing that design and science are importantly different. One such argument is that the separation of science and design is an implication that can be drawn from the Simon–Kroes model of the nature of technical artifacts. This paper argues that the Simon–Kroes model does not imply a radical separation between science and design: if we accept the Simon–Kroes model of the nature of technical artifacts and their production, then we must also accept that all the sciences also produce technical artifacts, and in importantly similar ways. Moreover, the placing of both science and design in a naturalist framework reinforces this conclusion and opens up new vistas for synergetic cross-disciplinary discussion of design and methodology.

► Simon(–Kroes)'s argument that design produces intentional artifacts but science does not is wrong.
► No natural/artificial distinction supports distinguishing the sciences of design and science.
► Simon himself indicates a general problem-solving capacity that covers design and science.
► The strategic cognitive conception of science used here promises to also extend to design.