A few particular lines from Elridge’s ‘UNDERSTANDING ART’, after explaining the problem of “overdetermination” which says
-” We need not worry over which is the single, governing, decisive, occurrent reason in his private mind for his (complex) action, for there is none”[1]… seems to create an interesting discussion.

The key words which strike me are “for there is none”. This could be true.
Now assume there is no single “decisive” reason which can not be interpreted, according to the above theory. Let’s say an interaction designer, instead of an artist, has to design affordances for his/her system, for example may be an emergency door. The designer wants the door’s sign to be interpreted as something quick and efficient for safety exit. However, the user might interpret the door’s sign in other different ways such as wonderful piece of wood, mismatching color with the walls, etc and interpreting the significance of door’s efficiency in emergency situations.

So my question how can interaction designers communicate to users the primary interpretation, as in this example efficiency of the door in emergency over others, they want their users to interpret?

I’m curious to hear from you all.

[1](Pg. 134 last two lines if you have access to the reading)