After multiple decades in the College of Engineering, the Industrial Design program at Brigham Young University has been transferred back to the College of Fine Arts into the recently re-formed Department of Design where it will be redefined and repurposed. The time spent in the engineering environment was cause for serious but rewarding reflection. One outcome was clarity in how ID defined itself (in relation to engineering and technology disciplines) in an effort to thrive. This paper will present two models of how disciplines (especially industrial design) can view themselves: The “subset” model, which is often limiting and driven by a particular disciplinary culture; and the “overlap” model based on the appeals of rhetoric – LOGOS, ETHOS, and PATHOS. This model creates a middle space with fewer disciplinary boundaries and identifies ID as one of the disciplines engaged in giving RELEVANCE to the outputs of Engineering and Science.