On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:50 PM, Ken Friedman wrote:
> I’d welcome a fully developed paper that states all elements of your theory in an explicit form with a few working examples to show how to generate theory in situated practice and showing how to judge between and among theoretical propositions.
I guess you would. My paper has a title, "Issues, Assumptions, and Components in A Theory of Design Thinking" It is about what it says it is about. It is neither a theory or a complete demonstration. It is an introduction of sorts to a work in progress - elements in a theory in the act of being built.
I am not interested in a theory of how to generate a theory in situated practice although that would be quite useful. I am trying to elaborate a simple operational model suitable for use in purposeful thought or design thinking on any subject by any individual, group, or company using any medium appropriate to their tasks. It is intended as a general theory, a common ground, that can be used to structure research, facilitate practice, or build learning experiences.
I appreciate you taking your time to read the paper, and for your comments. However, I doubt that you and I will find our respective interpretations of whatever is before us satisfying. You define and judge things and place an authoritative interpretation on them, I try to see how they might inform, broaden, or assist the effort at hand, adapting and satisficing as I go.
A good example of how we reason differently is the 7 component issue you dwell on in your comments. You cite some references. I use seven distinctions because that number of them has a pragmatically successful history in conveying the scope of a subject and has the demonstrated capacity to fit the problems I am addressing. They work with the information I deal with, work well with problem solving teams, in content analysis, communication at different levels, etc. as I have demonstrated in many different applications only some of which are documented. I am not comfortable with the authority you seek to impose just as you are not comfortable with an approach that is not your own. Still, you're OK most of the time.
Or so I believe,
Chuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|