Sid Newton's post on "Design Inquiry versus Scientific Inquiry" raises an
important series of questions. Many of them can be clarified through
attention to definitions. I'm going to offer some definitions in the hope
of clearing these up. The post also raises different questions that I won't
attempt to answer.
Attention to definitions and a clear understanding of what the word
"science" means will immediately render several issues embedded in Sid's
post clear.
This past week, I've been in Milan at the Design (plus) Research
conference. It was a marvelous meeting. The papers are all published in
excellent proceedings, and I'd recommend it to anyone concerned with design
research in general. (Query the conference organizer, Dr. Silvia Pizzocaro,
<[log in to unmask]>.)
One of the issues that came up frequently was the question of the ways in
which design may or may not be a science, and the ways in which design
research might or might not be a form or scientific research.
What was equally visible was the fact that different people, depending on
their backgrounds, and even more on their cultures use the word science in
different ways.
What is science? At its heart, science simply involves a systematic way of
knowing things. There are many kinds of science. Natural science as a
general domain of science is only one of the many domains. Other domains
include social science, engineering, even the liberal arts and humanities.
One may also speak of the science of history, the science of theology and
the science of literature. Some of these areas of science involve important
distinctions. The science of literature, for example, involves organizing
knowledge about literature, where creating literature is a practice or an
art. The science of theology involves the disciplines of theology, while
worship or pastoral care are practices.
The 1913 edition of Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (ARTFL: 1287)
defines science in nearly all of its meanings:
"Science, n. [F., fr. L. scientia, fr. sciens, -entis, p.pr. of scire to
know. Cf. Conscience, Conscious, Nice.] 1. Knowledge; knowledge of
principles and causes; ascertained truth of facts. 'If we conceive God's
science, before the creation, to be extended to all and every part of the
world, seeing everything as it is, . . . his science or sight from all
eternity lays no necessity on anything to come to pass.' Hammond.
'Shakespeare's deep and accurate science in mental philosophy.' Coleridge.
2. Accumulated and established knowledge, which has been systematized and
formulated with reference to the discovery of general truths or the
operation of general laws; knowledge classified and made available in work,
life, or the search for truth; comprehensive, profound, or philosophical
knowledge. 'All this new science that men lere [teach].' Chaucer. 'Science
is . . . a complement of cognitions, having, in point of form, the
character of logical perfection, and in point of matter, the character of
real truth.' Sir W. Hamilton. 3. Especially, such knowledge when it relates
to the physical world and its phenomena, the nature, constitution, and
forces of matter, the qualities and function of living tissues, etc.; --
called also natural science, and physical science. 'Voltaire hardly left a
single corner of the field entirely unexplored in science, poetry, history,
philosophy.' J. Morley. 4. Any branch or departament of systematized
knowledge considered as a distinct field of investigation or object of
study; as, the science of astronomy, of chemistry, or of mind. 'The
ancients reckoned seven sciences, namely, grammar, rhetoric, logic,
arithmetic, music, geometry, and astronomy; -- the first three being
included in the Trivium, the remaining four in the Quadrivium. Good sense,
which only is the gift of Heaven, and though no science, fairly worth the
seven.' Pope. 5. Art, skill, or expertness, regarded as the result of
knowledge of laws and principles. 'His science, coolness, and great
strength.' G. A. Lawrence. . . . Science is applied or pure. Applied
science is a knowledge of facts, events, or phenomena, as explained,
accounted for, or produced, by means of powers, causes, or laws. Pure
science is the knowledge of these powers, causes, or laws, considered
apart, or as pure from all applications. Both these terms have a similar
and special signification when applied to the science of quantity; as, the
applied and pure mathematics. Exact science is knowledge so systematized
that prediction and verification, by measurement, experiment, observation,
etc., are possible. The mathematical and physical sciences are called the
exact sciences. Comparative sciences, Inductive sciences. See under
Comparative, and Inductive. Syn. -- Literature; art; knowledge. -- Science,
Literature, Art. Science is literally knowledge, but more usually denotes a
systematic and orderly arrangement of knowledge. In a more distinctive
sense, science embraces those branches of knowledge of which the
subject-matter is either ultimate principles, or facts as explained by
principles or laws thus arranged in natural order. The term literature
sometimes denotes all compositions not embraced under science, but usually
confined to the belles-lettres. [See Literature.] 'Art is that which
depends on practice and skill in performance. In science, scimus ut
sciamus; in art, scimus ut producamus. And, therefore, science and art may
be said to be investigations of truth; but one, science, inquires for the
sake of knowledge; the other, art, for the sake of production; and hence
science is more concerned with the higher truths, art with the lower; and
science never is engaged, as art is, in productive application. And the
most perfect state of science, therefore, will be the most high and
accurate inquiry; the perfection of art will be the most apt and efficient
system of rules; art always throwing itself into the form of rules.'
Karslake. Science (Page: 1287) Science, v. t. To cause to become versed in
science; to make skilled; to instruct. [R.] Francis." (ARTFL Webster's
1913: 761)
The more recent Webster's defines science in shorter scope, but the
meanings are the same:
"Def science noun Pronunciation: 'sI-&n(t)s Etymology: Middle English, from
Middle French, from Latin scientia, from scient-, sciens having knowledge,
from present participle of scire to know; probably akin to Sanskrit chyati
he cuts off, Latin scindere to split -- more at SHED Date: 14th century 1 :
the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or
misunderstanding 2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object
of study <the science of theology> b : something (as a sport or technique)
that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <have it down to
a science> 3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths
or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through
scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge
concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE 4 : a
system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws <culinary
science> 5 capitalized : CHRISTIAN SCIENCE." (Britannica Webster's 1999:
unpaged)
This is comparable with Webster's (1990) and Webster's (1993).
Wordsmyth (1999: unpaged) gives a broad definition of science, and offers
specific examples of several sciences:
"Def science Part of speech: noun Syllables: sci-ence Pronunciation: sai
Ens Definition: 1. systematic observation and testing of natural phenomena
in a search for general laws and conclusive evidence. Synonyms: physical
science, natural science Definition: 2. a particular branch of this
activity, such as physics or biology. Definition: 3. any disciplined,
systematized area of study . . ."
While Cambridge (1999: unpaged) emphasizes the natural sciences, it also
allows the larger definitions. Cambridge (1999: unpaged) also points to the
disputes concerning the interpretation of scientific method and the claims
to unique validity made by some (but hardly all) scientists.
Scientific method is different for different sciences. In some cases, what
would be termed scientific method for a discipline known as a science would
simply be labeled scholarship when the same discipline is elsewhere termed
a study, a field, a discipline, or a form of scholarly inquiry.
In Milan, Nigel Cross (2000) distinguished among several concepts that
relate design to science. These include scientific design, design science
and science of design. He also noted that Schon's approach to design
rejected what he saw as the positivist paradigm implicit in Herbert Simon's
approach to design science in favor of a constructivist approach (Cross
2000: 45).
In contrast to Simon's approach, one might well consider Fuller's approach
to design science. Fuller (1964, 1965, 1969, 1971, 1981) offers an account
of design science that is hardly positivist. While some forms of research
connected to design yield to positive, experimental science (f.ex.
materials science, load testing, etc.), much of Fuller's approach was
profoundly poetic.
It is also worth noting that neither Schon nor Argyris (Schon 1983, 1990;
Argyris 1993; Argyris, Putnam and Smith 1985; Argyris and Schon 1992, 1995)
oppose science. Both are social scientists. What they oppose is a narrow
positivism unsuited to systematic inquiry into human behavior.
Sid, Terry Love, Bryan Byrn, Tony Dunne, and John Wood have addressed
substantive issues that deserve thought and comment. I may return on these.
For now, I will merely suggest that we ought to consider carefully how we
define such terms as science or scholarship before stating a position for
or against.
-- Ken Friedman
References
ARTFL Webster's. 1913. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (G & C.
Merriam Co., 1913, edited by Noah Porter). ARTFL (Project for American and
French Research on the Treasury of the French Language). Chicago: Divisions
of the Humanities, University of Chicago. URL:
<http://humanities.uchicago.edu/forms_unrest/webster.form.html>. Date
accessed: 1999 November 21.
Argyris, Chris. 1993. Knowledge for Action
Argyris, Chris, Robert Putnam and Diana McLain Smith. 1985. Action Science.
New York: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Argyris, Chris and Donald A. Schon. 1992. Theory in Practice : Increasing
Professional Effectiveness (Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series).
New York: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Argyris, Chris and Donald A. Schon. 1995. Organizational Learning. London:
Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co.
Britannica Webster's. 1999. Encyclopedia Britannica Online.
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica,
Inc. URL: <http://search.eb.com/>. Date accessed: 1999 November 21.
Cambridge. 1999. Cambridge dictionaries online. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press. URL:
<http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/elt/dictionary/>. Date accessed: 1999 November 21.
Cross, Nigel. 2000. "Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus
design science." In Design plus Research. Proceedings of the Politecnico di
Milano conference. Silvia Pizzocaro, Amilton Arrudo, and Dijon De Moraes,
editors. Milan: The Ph.D. Program in Industrial Design, Politecnico di
Milano, 43-48.
Fuller, Buckminster. 1964. World Design Science Decade 1965-1975. Phase I
(1964) Document 2: The Design Initiative. Carbondale, Illinois: World
Resource Inventory, Southern Illinois University.
Fuller, Buckminster. 1965. World Design Science Decade 1965-1975. Phase I
(1965) Document 3: Comprehensive Thinking. Carbondale, Illinois: World
Resource Inventory, Southern Illinois University.
Fuller, Buckminster. 1967. World Design Science Decade 1965-1975. Document
5: Comprehensive Design Strategy. Carbondale, Illinois: World Resource
Inventory, Southern Illinois University.
Fuller, Buckminster. 1969. Utopia or oblivion: the prospects for humanity.
New York: Bantam Books.
Fuller, R. Buckminster. 1981. Critical path. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Merriam-Webster, Inc. 1990. Webster's ninth new collegiate dictionary.
Springfield, Massachusetts.
Merriam-Webster, Inc. 1993. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Tenth
edition. Springfield, Massachusetts.
Schon, Donald A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner : How Professionals
Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
Schon, Donald A. 1990. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. New York:
Jossey-Bass Inc, Publishers.
Wordsmyth. 1999. Wordsmyth. The educational dictionary. Wordsmyth
collaboratory. Robert Parks, ed. ARTFL (Project for American and French
Research on the Treasury of the French Language). Chicago: Divisions of the
Humanities, University of Chicago. URL: <http://www.wordsmyth.net/>. Date
accessed: 1999 November 21.
Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
Department of Knowledge Management
Norwegian School of Management
+47 22.98.51.07 Direct line
+47 22.98.51.11 Telefax
Home office:
+46 (46) 53.245 Telephone
+46 (46) 53.345 Telefax
email: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
