Dear Rosan, and all.
> The results strictly speaking, are not theories of design, but histories of
> design.
I think we might agree on this, but rather than spend a long time offering a
view on theory, I would like to point you to a paper I wrote on this
question about six years ago, for a Vision Plus Conference. It's called
'Theory for Practice' and it's on our web site @
www.communication.org.au/html/paper_34.html.
Something similar was said by Dick Buchanan at the 'Common Ground'
conference last year. Though I'm not sure if Dick would necessarily agree
with me. Perhaps Dick would care to comment?
As you will gather, I don't share the current emphasis on 'theory',
particularly in higher education. However, just in case someone wants to
have a go at me on this, I'm not against theory per se.
David
|