OK - engaging - but just a brief response for now...sorry about the
political opinions, but I see the political situation as the design
context, and I would do against my idea of design if I pretended it
does not play a role.
At 11:12 -0500 29.10.2002, Lubomir S. Popov wrote:
>Professionalization is what made Western society the way it is now. If you
>don't like it, go and live in the coral reefs.
...
>At this point, professionalization has no alternative. The problem is not
>with professionalization -- the problem is with too many poor
>professionals. Poor professionals that see the world one-sided, that
>maximize only one or two criteria and leave the rest unattended. I always
>say -- there are no sick buildings -- there are dumb engineers. It is so
>simple. However, we should not blame professionalism in principle for that
>rampant stupidity. The problem is with poor preparation of engineers. Too
>narrow thinking. Too much laymen' enthusiasm and self-confidence. And this
>makes the ignorant arrogant.
>
>May be after centuries everyone will reach professional level in all areas
>of human endeavor, but now it is not possible. Postings at this list prove it.
>
>Have a nice day and take a sober look at the current civilization.
First, thank you for labeling me as poor professional, one-sided,
stupid, ignorant and arrogant :-)
But seriously, I think that you are right that 'Professionalization
is what made Western society the way it is now'. My problem is that a
'sober look at the current civilization' makes me very sad. The good
could have been achieved with less misery as byproduct; but the
'common good for all' has not been the goal of the 'progress' - and
where it has been, and succeeded, it's success has mostly been local.
Most great development in some indirect way or another has relied on
the exploitation of some others. I enjoy the results of that, and I
feel responsible to some extent, and I will try to do something about
it through my own professional specialization.
I am not proposing that we should throw away the professionalism or
specialization. But I believe that we should not continue on the
current path of hegemony of technocrats, resource owners, corrupt
politicians and exploiters. (Many (most?) of the technocrats end up
working for the goals of the others in the belief that their work is
'neutral'.) More voices, dramatically so, must be taken into account.
And in order to be useful, they should be better empowered and
informed. That is not easy, we do not yet know how to do it, and
moreover, the possibility is politically and intellectually
threatening to many people, and therefore something to resist well
before it could be realized. We need a better mix of modes and lots
of new specializations - for example, ones that help more people to
play meaningful roles.
A development that gave more people a voice has taken place in
politics. The power used to be in very few hands, and now there is a
large part of the worlds population that believes in democratic
ideals and tries to somehow realize them.
I think that there may be change ahead, because the problems of the
hegemony and fight over limited resources are becoming greater and
have new dramatic manifestations. Increasing connectivity (electronic
and material traffic) and global media coverage makes it difficult to
hide the problems of reality from the funders and voters: the happy
consumers. Globalization creates a global market, but also
distributes problems globally. The awareness of the reality of a
global insecurity (that in my opinion results from arrogance,
selfishness, misuse of power and exploitation that breed misery and
hopelessness) is today much higher than it was two years ago, and is
increasing. Old solutions have not brought results, and every month,
new kinds of problems are emerging. This creates pressure for changes
of many sorts. Hopefully the 'civilization' can change in a civilized
way...
I am not proposing that Jumbo Jets should be designed by laymen.
Specialists must do that. But there are numerous areas where there
are no design specialists, and design has to and does take place all
the time. For example, 'laymen' design their own homes, careers,
business models, work systems, birthday party invitations, community
activities, personal computer uses, etc. Why don't you oppose the
idea of 'ordinary people designing' with reasonable real life
examples that make sense?
kari-hans
|