Dear Rosan
C. West Churchman's understanding of philosophy (from a philosopher
of science's perspective) was provocatively stated as: "But to me the
essence of philosophy is to pose serious and meaningful questions
that are too difficult for any of us to answer in our
lifetimes." (Thought and Wisdom, 1982). Churchman was critical of the
journal Philosophy of Science (he was editor-in-chief during
1948-1957) for never asking questions at that would take philosophic
inquiry beyond the boundaries of scientific inquiry. His challenge
was to ask philosophers of science to go beyond what
"is" (description and explanation) to deontic questions of what
"ought" to be asked in relationship to scientific inquiry. For him, a
philosophy of science is inadequate when limited to questions of
"is". I agree with his appreciation of what a philosophy of science
ought to be.
I believe that design inquiry expands the list of relevant questions
even more. For me a candidate list would include: 1) what is true?,
2) what would be ideal?, 3) what should/needs to become real?, 4)
what is desired to be made real?. Answering these questions take
design inquiry beyond any predefined boundaries drawn by disciplines,
fields or professional domains. It is what I would describe as a
holistic form of inquiry—which is not the same as comprehensive
inquiry or hierarchical inquiry.
Harold
On Nov 29, 2005, at 3:19 AM, Rosan Chow wrote:
> Dear Erik and others
>
> Philosophy, if I understand correctly, like science, focuses on the
> question 'is'.
> Design, if i understand correctly, focuses on the question 'as'.
>
> A philosophy of design explores what design is.
> A design of design explores what design can be, (design as so and
> so, and
> sees what happen).
|