RE: Three motives for design -- reply to Klausi read the article and you are
right, this anthropologist realizes that even ethnographic accounts do not
necessarily contribute to improving the world. incidentally, he cites
several scholars who have realized the problem of positivist research, one
is gregory bateson who lend my professorship his name.
-----Original Message-----
From: Nsenga François-Xavier [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:23 PM
To: Klaus Krippendorff; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE : Three motives for design -- reply to Klaus
Dear Klaus,
I am under the impression that we both agree: the two kind of knowledges -
one from the present and the past, and the other prospective - should not be
confused, indeed, neither one should be priviledged over the other. They
both are useful towards a more complete understanding of the world, in which
we are compelled to propose courses of action that would better our unique
habitat.
Along these lines of our current exchange, the following piece has just
been posted this morning, from the electronic international Journal of
Reserach Practice : //jrp.icaap.org/content/v2.1/bekerman.html
I invite you and all interested to have a look at it. Although it comes
from an Anthropology Professor, I nonetheless found it highly pertinent to
design researchers, educators and students as well.
Kind Regards.
François
Montréal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
De: Klaus Krippendorff [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Date: mer. 2006-03-01 21:44
À: Nsenga François-Xavier
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Objet : RE: Three motives for design -- reply to Klaus
françois,
you are asking:
True, design "develops proposals for actions that bring forth a desirable
future". But a future desired by whom?
desired by all those who will have to live in that future, are affected by
a
design, have a stake in what it brigs about. designers are not the only
one's that count. much of their efforts must consist of listening to
others, convincing those who matter, in other words, they need to
communicate their design and act in view of promised futures.
you say:
We are ... advocating that design proposals (briefs, specifications,
etc.) be anchored in a certain reality, as EVIDENCED in the situation on
hand.
sure enough, the presence is the only reality we can observe, re-search.
you say:
In my opinion and that of many colleagues, problems to be adressed by
professionals called "designers" are not imaginary problems, in future.
i think you do a disservice to concerns for desirable futures when you
relegate such concerns to be merely "imaginary, abstract, or theoretical"
(as opposed to presently real). what has not yet arrived can only be
speculated about, predicted, inferred, theorized and in any case talked
about. this is an epistemological given.
designers cannot help but act (in the present) in view of what their
actions
can bring forth. as a profession, designers have to be trusted. and one
way of gaining this trust is to develop compelling arguments for what not
yet exists but could become a future fact
you say that
our activity of designing starts in the real life present, informed by the
past of our own
experience and that of all assembled, both humans and non humans. It is
this past experience, present positionning and negotiations that, me and
many others, consider as not sufficiently researched, prior to most
present design proposals.
yes, you always have to continue a journey from where you are. however,
where you come from may not inform you about where you want to go. i am
far
from denying the value of investigating the resources that designers have
presently available. but, whereas scientific research aims at describing
past experiences with what was and has continued to exist, in my opinion,
inquiries of the kind that supports design decisions should aim at what is
variable, what one can change, what is possible yet would not come about
naturally. i prefer that these two kinds of knowledges not be confused,
and
that scientific re-search be not mixed up with inquiries that are
supportive
of design.
klaus
|