Responding to my confusion regarding Birgits remark:
"To sum up, my point then is; do we need to sort out
for example these
other kinds of uses of 'design' as merely analogical
language for other
purposes (if we are not interested in design-oriented
language in other
kinds of situations per se)? And seek appropriate
substantial distinctions
also for the use of the 'professional designer' term
thus sorting out when
the term "professional designer" is used more as an
analogy or used
metaphoric?"
and Ken's response:
you (Birgit) have brought up an issue that
may lie beneath at least some of the questions and
terminological
problems in the debate. This is the question of
whether some of us
feel that we are using the term design as a metaphor
or an analogy.
It may also be a matter of whether some of us read
others as doing so.
...In this particular inquiry, I am not using the term
"design" as
metaphor or analogy. Metaphor, analogy, and forms of
sensitizing
concepts are useful ways to approach many issues in
the initial
stages.
...I would be curious to know whether people feel they
are writing (about design) metaphorically
or explicitly.
My confusion lies in the lack of explicitness
regarding the use of the terms metaphor and analogy.
I am also curious about what others mean when using
these terms with reference to design.
How can one usefully express an analogy without
explicitly saying what is analogous to what? If one
simply alludes to the similarity between things the
analogy remains undefined (without explicit
relationships). While suggestive of a domain of
thought to consider - something in the domain is
analogous - such a reference is usually not very
helpful and may be confusing.
With regard to understanding design as a metaphor for
something else: Is "design" the source or the target
of the metaphor?
If we are seeking to understand "design" by reference
to something more familiar - What is it? If we seek to
understand something else by reference to design we
must have a clear definition/understanding of design
to work from. Metaphor is often used to interpret a
designed object in terms of something else and
sometimes used to describe the design process in terms
of another process that is more familiar (or
constrained i.e. engineering, problem solving, etc).
In any event, we need to know what metaphorical
relationship is proposed before the metaphor can
become meaningful in a useful way.
The importance of metaphorical projection to language
and thought has been recognized (Lakoff and Johnson,
1980 Metaphors We Live By; 1999, Philosophy in the
Flesh, etc). Metaphor is essential to creative thought
and design thinking, yet, again, we have no
operational theory related to design. (I have recently
attempted to articulate an explicit operational
structure for design thinking based on cognitive
schema and metaphorical projection; Burnette, 2001,
Cognitive schema and their conceptual extension to
support design thinking, Unpublished) I hope others
will also address the issue of metaphor and analogy in
explicit, operational terms suitable to design in any
domain of application.
Best to all
Chuck
Dr. Charles Burnette
234 South Third Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Tel: +215 629 1387
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
|