As my own research activities reveal, there is not the least idea of
consent regarding foundations. There are incoherent chunks of ideas.
(Sorry again, but telling people that design should be socially
responsible cannot be a foundation. The same keynote message could
have been presented at a medicine or at an engineering conference.)
Therefore we need room for broad debate. Room for discourse, for
trying to grasp positions of others, to find connections between
positions, etc.
If you refer to my previous message, I did not suggest that the keynote
speaker was providing the foundation, but rather providing indication
about what kind of building we should build. When you build a foundation
you should have clearly in mind what kind of building you want to
prepare the ground for. The keynote speakers was just specifying that in
the building called "design discipline" there should be space for the
socially responsible design.
Here the "scientific" format is not appropriate. For example, full
papers should have been known in advance, session chairs should have
been responsible for some synthesis process, etc.
I agree on this. If full papers where distributed before there could
have been a more informed participation to the presentation. This may be
a suggestion for the next conference (though I suspect it would add
several hours work to the organizers.
Ass Prof Nicola Morelli
Institute of Architecture and Design
Aalborg University, Denmark
Web: http://www.aod.auc.dk/staff/nmor
--
|