Design research is an ill-defined field of inquiry. While countless efforts have been made to maintain a sense of generality in this field, researchers and practitioners grapple with fundamental questions about its nature. Some of these questions lead to the point where there is no consensus on the theories, methods, or standards needed to undertake an exemplary research practice. To address this issue, the essay at hand presents what I believe to be one of the major blind spots of design research. Further, it discusses how uncovering this blind spot may reveal an ontological opening. My intention here is not to plead for a general and all-encompassing definition of design research. Instead, it is to acknowledge how its specificities can illuminate new ways of comprehending it. To that end, the essay takes the form of four sections. First, I demarcate the field of design research where the present discussion takes place. Second, I analyze some of the most salient matters of debate in that field, referring specifically to issues concerning methodological and epistemological deficiencies. Third, I illustrate these deficiencies with an analogy, describing how they could become strengths. Finally, I turn to the analogy to pinpoint the blind spot and explain how it could propel the development of novel ways of performing design research.