Questions that Shape Us: Reflections from Recent MIT Media Lab Talk
Recently, I found myself back at the MIT Media Lab, hosted by the inimitable Professor Hiroshi Ishii, to talk about the hybrid paths we take in life. It was a surreal moment — coming full circle after leaving the Lab in 2008 and embarking on a journey that spanned arts, technology, venture capital, and beyond. But this wasn’t just about looking back. The Q&A session that followed reminded me of why I do this: the questions. They’re often more transformative than the answers.
Here’s what resonated most deeply, with a few thoughts added along the way:
On Being a “Hybrid” in the Real World
A student asked me about navigating the world without a traditional credential in any single discipline. Here’s what I said: credentials open doors, but they’re not enough. Being a maker is what makes people listen. When I left MIT and entered design, people doubted me. When I went to Silicon Valley, they doubted me again. This is a recurring theme in my life: being underestimated — and then over-delivering through persistence.
I shared a story about the Japanese sculptor Igarashi Takenobu. He taught me that careers are built either as towering, narrow peaks (the Western way) or as broader, slower hills (the Eastern way). Both paths have their virtues, but I’ve always aimed for the latter — like Mount Fuji. It’s a philosophy of resilience, built on breadth and balance.
On Sharing Ideas (Even with Enemies)
Another student asked how to protect one’s ideas from misuse. It’s a tough one. Marvin Minsky, one of the most brilliant minds I’ve known, once told me: “The whole point of having an idea is to give it away.” If you don’t, you risk stagnation, clutching your ideas too tightly — like Gollum with the One Ring. Sharing, paradoxically, frees you to create anew.
Does it come with risks? Of course. But the alternative — hoarding ideas — leads nowhere. If you’re a maker, you’ll have more ideas. That’s your superpower.
On Technology and Creativity
In our fast-paced digital world, are we losing the slow, messy process of creativity? An MIT alum wasworried about this, and I could feel their concern. But here’s my take: tools don’t kill creativity; they amplify it. Take aluminum sculpture. Sculpting by hand is one thing, but using a water jet cutter opens new possibilities. Nobody wants to mill aluminum by hand. Belieeeeeve meeeee ;-).
Creativity is about time to think, not time wasted on unnecessary friction. Technology — AI included — is a tool to buy back that time. But it’s not a substitute for creativity itself. You still have to think. You still have to make. Tools don’t define creativity; humans do.
On Breaking Free from “Safe Spaces”
An MIT researcher asked how to break out of the comfortable bubbles of creative institutions. My answer? Capital. Creativity needs operationalization. Having access to resources — money, time, collaboration — turns ideas into impact. It’s why I respect those who deploy real products. They’re not lone geniuses; they’re teams, working together to make something real.
On AI and the Future of Design
The most poignant moment came from a question about AI’s impact on design and creativity. My advice? Get closer to it. Don’t just use the tools; understand them. Learn their fibers, their quirks. Be a maker, not just a user. The future belongs to those who don’t fear the medium but master it.
Closing Thoughts
As the session wound down, I was reminded of the Professor Hiroshi Ishii’s core ethos: “Catch me if you can.” It’s not about outrunning others but about continually outdoing ourselves — innovating, questioning, and creating.
Hiroshi reminded us that the mission of the Media Lab, and perhaps of any institution, is not to stand still. It’s to move faster, think bigger, and inspire others to do the same.
So, here’s to the next big question. May it be as transformative as the last.
If this sparked a thought — or a question — feel free to share. After all, that’s how the best conversations begin. —JM
