Fil,

I had to respond to your observations about patterns!

When we talk about patterns, what we are referring to are evolutionary
processes, whether they be physico-chemical, biological, biosocial,
sociocultural or technological.  It seems to me that if we reflected
more carefully, integrally and less homocentrically about these
patterns, we should be able to design much more effectively.  Work with
these change systems rather than irrespective of them.

best wishes,
john broadbent

Filippo A. Salustri wrote:

> Klaus,
>
> Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
>
>> no,
>> these undoubtedly technological innovations do not come from
>> understanding
>> how the universe works, but from making something work that could not
>> have
>> been found in nature.  what worked yesterday is only the starting
>> point for
>> design.
>
>
> That's one perspective.  My perspective is that the creativity of design
> comes from adapting observed patterns in what is to a need to attain a
> goal.  I don't believe I actually get any ideas that are NOT driven by
> patterns I perceive.  I don't believe *anyone* does.  And the perception
> of the patterns is based in part on an understanding of the universe.
>
> This has been my experience actually doing design, teaching design, and
> researching design for over 15 years now.  I know it's just anecdotal,
> but it's what I've got.
>
> I would squirm with delight if I could be involved with research to
> investigate this, but I just haven't had a chance to do it yet.
>
>>
>> why do you want to hold on to the renaissance conception of science
>> with its
>> effort to map what is outside there when we know only its
>> descriptions and
>> speculations?
>
>
> I don't *want* to.  I *have* to, because it's the only explanation I've
> come up with so far that explains all the things I've seen/experienced.
>  I'd love to learn of an alternative, but it's going to have to offer
> me some practical advantage over the way I do things now.
>
> Cheers.
> Fil
>
>>
>> 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 Filippo Salustri
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 5:02 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: imitating sciences
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
>>
>>> [...]
>>> to preface my suggestion, let me say that in my experiences, when
>>> people
>>> observe, even very carefully, they rarely report to see the same thing.
>>> observation cannot easily be separated from the conceptual framework
>>> that
>>> observers bring to what they face, the social situation they find
>>> themselves, the language they have available to describe what they
>>
>>
>> observed
>>
>>> and to whom they account for what they see.  in the renaissance
>>> conception
>>> of the mind and of science, observation is a holy cow.  the natural
>>
>>
>> sciences
>>
>>> are built on the assumption that one could bypass these determinants of
>>> observations by dismissing everything that is inaccurate and for which
>>> agreement or observer independence cannot be achieved.  in my view,
>>> this
>>> privileges one framework among many other possible ones and when we use
>>
>>
>> the
>>
>>> language of this kind of science, we become entrapped in this one
>>
>>
>> conceptual
>>
>>> framework as if all other frameworks were inferior or ought to be
>>> usurped.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eh?  (said the Canadian)
>>
>> Klaus, while I understand what you're suggesting (I think), I still
>> can't overcome one very real issue (to me at least).  Science, the
>> scientific method, the manipulation of its results by engineering, and
>> its formalisation with math and logic, actually *works*.  Look around
>> you.  All that stuff you use every day is only there because we were
>> able to understand enough about how the universe works to create that
>> stuff.  Observation is right at the heart of that.
>>
>> And there's a big difference between what I observe when I'm walking up
>> the street and what a scientist observes when he's running an
>> experiment.  A scientific observation is a particular kind of beast, of
>> limited usefulness, but immensely useful within those limits.
>>
>>
>>> i think instead of observing what exists, what is true for everyone and
>>
>>
>> can
>>
>>> be described accurately and reliably, designers should build their
>>> science
>>> on observing what can be altered and how.  this would acknowledge the
>>> framework dependence of observation.  let natural scientists observe
>>
>>
>> within
>>
>>> the framework of obtaining accurate and reliable descriptions,
>>> therapists
>>> observe within the framework of finding ways to help clients,
>>> lawyers and
>>> judges observe within the framework of deciding who committed criminal
>>> offenses, (professional and lay) politicians observe within the
>>> framework
>>
>>
>> of
>>
>>> whether the distribution of resources is fair and arguably acceptable,
>>
>>
>> etc.,
>>
>>> but let a science for design focus on what matters to designers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ah, right.  Here's a good question: what, exactly, matters to designers?
>>
>>
>>> observing possibilities does not need to be shared by everyone, only
>>> among
>>> those who have similar concerns.  it is a framework that we can adopt
>>> proudly as our own without succumbing to the dominant framework within
>>
>>
>> which
>>
>>> natural scientists chose to observe.
>>
>>
>>
>> Proudly?  I'm not proud to be an engineer, or a scientist, or a
>> (engineering) designer.  That'd be like being proud of having brown
>> hair.  It's just what I am.  We shouldn't "adopt a framework" as a
>> matter of prestige or pride, but just cuz it's the right thing to do.
>>
>>
>>> klaus
>>> [...]
>>
>>
>>
>> Proud to be priviledge to participate in this list.
>> Fil
>> --
>> Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
>> Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
>> Ryerson University
>> 350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada
>> Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
>> Fax: 416/979-5265
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>> http://deed.ryerson.ca/~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/



--
UTS CRICOS Provider Code:  00099F
DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain
confidential information.  If you are not the intended recipient, do not
read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments.  If
you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority,
states them to be the views the University of Technology Sydney. Before
opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.