Jenny, Jason, Fillipo
I think Jenny has it right. I would add that structuring and analyzing
differentiates what is integrated in the synthesis that expresses/is a
design. They are necessary to both the conceptualization and unpacking of
what is integrated and expressed in the design but are not the same thing as
that holistic vision or outcome. They are different ways of thinking but
part of and necessary to designing. (Incidently, I see construction as
analysis as the same kind of thought but having different intentions.)
Best regards,
Chuck
On 3/21/05 10:52 AM, "Jenny Ure" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Re Jason/Filippo
>
>> Is structuring information the same as performing an analysis? And
>> where did design go?
>> [...]
>
> Perhaps it appeared when you combined the analysis/structuring of
> information to achive a particular outcome/meet a set of needs, and used
> your own personal or cultural preferences in the selection of particular
> solutions
>
>
>
> -----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 Filippo A. Salustri
> Sent: 21 March 2005 15:25
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Engineering Design--topic was something or other
>
> Jason et al,
>
> Catching up to old postings. Sorry.
>
> Jason Foster wrote:
>>> The whole grammatical approach is something I find tremendously
>>> useful to help visualise and represent design facts, beliefs, etc. at
>
>>> a level that the 'strict' mathematical methods don't treat. And
>>> that, for me, is golden.
>>
>>
>> No argument, but I would say this leads to an important question:
>>
>> Is structuring information the same as performing an analysis? And
>> where did design go?
>> [...]
>
> On the 1st question, it seems to me that it depends on your perspective
> on the process of structuring information. If one takes 'structuring
> information' as the discovery of patterns that are already there, then
> I'm not sure I see it as 'design'. If, on the other hand, one takes the
> phrase as the imposition of structure (i.e. the structure is only there
> in our minds), then there is very possibly a very strong design
> component present.
>
> It seems to me that it depends on the 'framework' that one adopts in
> this regard - back to philosophy!
>
> Personally, I accept that there is structure in the universe, and that
> we can recognise at least some of it, and that this explains our ability
> to predict the kinds of 'physical' phenomena that scientists and
> engineers love to worry about.
>
> I'm unprepared to commit at this time on the matter of structure in the
> human mind (although I lean towards it).
>
> Your mileage may vary.
>
> Cheers.
> Fil
> --
> Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
> Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
> Ryerson University Tel: 416/979-5000 x7749
> 350 Victoria St. Fax: 416/979-5265
> Toronto, ON email: [log in to unmask]
> M5B 2K3 Canada http://deed.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|