Hi dear colleagues,
Probably many of you have read about the cognitive, affective, and motoric
components of activity. Most of the scientists in the field of activity
theory see activity structure in this way. Nobody rejects the role of
feelings in the structure of activity. And nobody puts thinking versus
feeling versus acting. They are conceptualized as parts of the building
blocks of human activity, even the smallest elements. The major reason that
thinking reseaves more attention is that it is easier to study. It is
easier to explicate. And, it is also true that the Western civilization is
interested predominantly in thinking -- simply because it proved to be
highly productive in the history of these people.
Western Civilization is not just Positivism. Why design researchers see
only positivism?
Why design researchers forget about Humboldt, Herder, Gadamer, Diltey;
Husserl, Heidegger; Sartre, Foucault, Derida; and so forth. Today it is
fashionable to criticize Western Civilization, publish personal
misinterpretations of great thinkers, and make a resume as a researcher. I
am astonished that design researchers waste their time criticizing
positivism instead of exploring the opportunities provided by several other
Western schools of thought, most of them several centuries old. They do not
need to be reinvented. All they need is to be rediscovered by the majority
of "revolutionaries." And you shall see that being and feeling are not taby
zones in the Western schools of thought. They are even the core thematics
of several Western philosophical movements. Unfortunately, it is easier to
read and criticize positivist texts than engage with Sartre.
Regards,
Lubomir
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|