I agree with the statement:'Design is not a science and therefore it does
NOT yield to scientific analysis'
Design, is not a rigid set of systematic approach. Hence it doesn't succumb
itself to a specified / particular method of investigation. However, the
methodology of doing design would be be highly debatable since there is no
universal/fixed acknowledgement of laws as we would follow when studying a
particular Science subject ( in a way that we apply a particular formula
whenever we identify a certain situation)
Some small thoughts about the thread. I was also thinking about the potatoes
and rice issue. Actually it isn't a waste of time. Sure there is an area
when we need to know that potatoes are mainly eaten in the west while rice
is taken in the east. But then again some people in Asia love to have
vermicelli, which is a 'designed' by product of rice. The only difference is
that the rice is grounded into powder and mixed with water which later form
various kinds of rice noodles and vermicelli.
But we do not forget that the primary cultural staple food for us is
potatoes/rice. There is also a 'dish' where the potatoes are done in liquid
form that you drink it down instead of eating them in solids. It is the
different kinds of thinking that we have such an exciting array of delicious
dishes that we could enjoy after a hearty Friday night.
Cheers,
Karen Fu
who is downloading some pdf documents for reading after following the
thread.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter J. Walters" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:42 PM
Subject: integration (2)
> sorry my last sentence should have read:
>
> Design is not a science and therefore it does NOT yield to scientific
analysis
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
>
> Peter Walters
> PhD Student
> Sheffield Hallam University
> http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cs/cri/adrc/research2/peterwalters
> [log in to unmask]
|