Where 1+1=!
In a recent class focused on guiding nature experiences for Forest Bathing, one segment particularly intrigued me: the intentionality behind the choice of word during the activity. The goal is to minimise the mental effort involved in reasoning and planning, allowing participants to be fully immersed in the present moment with nature.
The guidelines for word choice emphasised avoiding:
This reminds me of an interview with Jonathan Ive, where he was asked to review the design challenge of a lunchbox and to share his approach to the creative brief.
Jonathan Ive’s Interview
‘If we are thinking about a lunchbox, we have to be really careful not to think about the word “box,” which already gives you a bunch of ideas that could be quite narrow. Because you will think of a box as being square, like a cube. So, we are quite careful with the words we use, because this could determine the path you go down.’ — Johnathan Ive
I suppose this notion also applies to AI prompts, which can somewhat predetermine the creative output when using generative AI. This is not ideal for those seeking a more ‘out of the box’ ideas.

left : MJ Prompt — Lunch box. Right: MJ Prompt — Something to carry a packed meal
Both scenarios bring a similar philosophy: the importance of word selection to avoid predetermining outcomes, experiences or constraining creativity.
This has led me to question how to design creative briefs that foster open-ended playfulness by avoiding words that might predetermine the outcome. I believe that the guidelines from Forest Bathing provide a good starting point.