> Ah, work! It's rumoured the solution is to sleep more quickly!
> Wondering what is this specific kind of design you are referring to
> when you say <Research into design with potential application to other
> fields> - as distinct from <design as it is used in another field>
This is a touch amorphous, so please bear with me...
I'm trying to refer to design without the notion of "kind"; something
like "design-in-and-of-itself". So not "engineering design",
"industrial design", "fashion design", etc., but just "design".
I've been trying to come up with interesting questions that work for
"just design" better than for "X design" and some of my ideas include:
- When did "design" as a distinct concept enter the lexicon?
- Is there something about the progression of a field where it
suddenly says "right, we're now designers"?
- Are there common distinctions between "design" and "non-design"
activities in different fields?
- Does the concept of "design" necessarily embody a realist ontology?
- Is the concept of "design" compatible with a positivist epistemology
- Can a designer's ability be measured?
I don't think that it's possible to completely divorce "design" from
the context in which it takes place (e.g. "engineering", "fashion",
etc.) but I do believe that attempts to do so have value as they
promote an improved awareness of both the context and this distinct
thing that we call "design".
Clear as mud, I imagine...
Jason
|