Dear John
i value your response very much. i am very alone and dying to talk to people.
John Feland <[log in to unmask]> schrieb am 10.03.03 14:35:02:
> Is not economic theory based on historical data coupled with predicted and
> then validated observations of the future?
>
> Doesn't physics operate under similar rules?
i donīt know much about economics and physics. so i better not comment.
> Even psychological theory has it's roots in observation.
yes. but what is that got to do with design?
> I agree that one static look at designing will be like a faded snapshot of
> the real activity.
> What about the efforts that use dynamic observation to understand the
> efforts of designers?
that is better. but the observations are not theory, strictly speaking.
> You can't be saying the Delf Protocols are full of hooey?
no. that is not what i am saying.
> How can you help your students? Under the view that you are provoking,
> your observations of their efforts can be of no help to their development,
> only providing a history of their work.
i am breading an idea that by changing the language, we can start to think differently.
i have been stuck with 'design theory' for a good three years and yesterday i realized
it circumscribed the way i evaluate and think 'things'.
i happened to be thinking that if we think of our observations are histories then we
evaluate them as histories, then we don't expect them to predict, but rather we expect
them to tell us stories that make us wiser. that's all.
> Just some other provoking thoughts on a late night.
thank you. i love provoking thoughts. they keep me alive.
best regards. rosan
______________________________________________________________________________
Mit der Multi-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail koennen Sie 760 Zeichen versenden.
Informationen unter http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021184
|