...or, to put it in different terms, I am sure that products and
parts can be defined in all the ways given in this discussion.
Is there any way to decide which are the best definitions, without a
binding to a context?
I think that for designers, it is essential to 1) see the utility of
different definitions and ways to see things, and 2) to know when to
apply which, and even 3) to be able to mediate between differing
points of view and if necessary, help others to find a common
language regardless of their differing definitions...
And in this, one approach which may in fact help to get a birds eye
perception, is the systems view.
I have recently found myself repeating in different meetings with
some group or community that often groups spend a lot of time trying
to reach consensus in matters that can actually better be managed and
dealt with in a more constructive way by embracing a diversity of
views at the same time, with each given their own space and time.
kh
At 15:56 +1100 7.3.2002, John Broadbent wrote:
>Dear Colleagues,
>
>I wonder whether it is more useful to simply look at the phenomena of
>interest to us in terms of levels in a system. This gives us the
>flexibility to bring as many levels into our field of concern as we
>wish, without getting tangled up in concerns about whether we are
>dealing with products or parts.
|