susan,
regarding your earlier post,
we also have visual metaphors, by which i do not mean vague innuendos or
suggestions but perceptions that upon analysis may well be tied to
familiarity with other artifacts but tell us instantaneously how to use
something that one may not have seen before.
i am saying that because you seem to tie metaphor entirely to words, to
speech. metaphors in language have a longer history of our being aware of
them, literature, and are somewhat easier to explain.
yes, we agree substantially. what i do not quite understand is your
objecting to accept a metaphor as an end product. i am not sure what kind
of end product you mean. i suppose that whereas i would be quite content to
replace "design theory" as the account of design processes by a detached
observer with "a framework for design," which entails some kind of spatial
orderliness, or given my uneasiness of the static nature of "framework,"
with something like "design approach" (vs. "observer approach" or "user
approach"), you seem to want to look for something without metaphorical
origin. which some would say are "dead" metaphors, for something of which
we have shed its metaphorical origin by an effort to define the concept. i
am suggesting that even if we define "object," "theory," or "intention" we
can rarely escape etymology or the original metaphorical entailments. we
can only chose to ignore them (and may be surprised when they hound us
later, when least expected).
unless i understood you not clearly, i would not recommend being afraid of
stopping with a suitable metaphors as way to describe what you want to
conceptualize and discuss with others, for example in being able to support
what we do when engaging in design. it serves human communication often
better than rigid definitions
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
Of Susan M. Hagan
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Design & Theory
Hi Klaus,
One other quick note. I think that we probably share a lot of common
ground. When you talk about the metaphor of process, you break it down into
parts rather than assuming that the metaphor can simply make the case by
itself. When I use the metaphor of framework, I take it down to identifying
parts that I think might be useful for making and for analysis.
I don't know exactly where that leaves us, but I wanted to put it out there.
Best regards,
Susan
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Susan M. Hagan, Ph.D., MDes.
Postdoctoral Fellow
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh PA 15213
v. 412.268.2072
f. 412.268.7989
|