From Anthony Dunne’s first two chapters, I get that speculative design can widen the way think of a certain thing by coming up with alternatives. But what I don’t quite get is how to validate speculative design. The space of alternatives must be much larger than that of what already exists or is going to happen. How can we validate a certain piece of alternative presents the value speculative design promises?
In Human-Computer Interaction (especially the non-design subfields), it seems that for anything visionary to be accepted by the community it needs to set a strong case for its future existence as well as some sorts of validation to prove ‘it works’. There are very few exceptions. The very first one I can think of is Hiroshi Ishii’s work where his approach is to overwhelm doubts with coolness. Yet there is still no systematic way to conduct research that expands the ‘cone’ to the plausible and possible.