Dear Klaus and all,
I agree.
I feel that one of the roadblocks in building coherent design theory and a
sound discipline of design research has been the peculiar focus on
attempting to use external things to try explain internal human activities
such as feelings, creativity, thinking, deciding, judgement etc.
It simply doesn't work. Its like trying to explain the way the motor in a
power drill is constructed by looking at drilled holes. Even worse, it is
like trying to develop a model of humanity with our complex of human
functioning, thinking, feeling, illusions, delusions, hidden knowledge,
motivations and all those fuzzy human internal functions that are dictated
by our biological evolution - by looking at holes drilled by power drills.
Silly.
The obsession with wicked and ill-defined design problems has a similar lack
of connection with design thinking. To attempt to use wicked problems as
the basis for a theory of design thinking is epistemological dodgy -
regardless of the emotional feelings that designers may have that they feel
that design thinking is represented by wicked problems. We all have 'common
sense' simplifications and naiveties but those are no basis for
epistemologically sound theory .
It makes perfect sense for a DESIGNER to be interested in classifying types
of problems. A designer's primary interest is trying to solve them. It
makes good sense for someone trying to invent automated design methods to
classify design problems. Their aim is to use physical knowledge of the
external world to predict and identify design solutions to difficult design
briefs. The terms wicked, ill-defined, variation, routine etc are simply
classifications to make process identification and automation easier.
To try to use wicked or other problem classifications as the basis for
theorising about human internal feeling-driven design thinking behaviours is
epistemologically incoherent. Daft.
Best regards,
Terry
===
Dr. Terence Love
Tel/Fax: +61 (0)8 9305 7629
Mobile: 0434975 848
[log in to unmask]
===
-----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 Klaus
Krippendorff
Sent: Thursday, 29 March 2007 12:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: wicked problems
"ill-defined" is a category from inside the problem solving paradigm.
it signifies being closed to other ways of thinking of conceptualizing
design.
klaus krippendorff
-----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 Gordon
Rowland
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 11:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: wicked problems
For related early work, also see the following. Reitman referred to these
sorts of problems as ill-defined.
Reitman, R. R. (1965). Cognition and thought: An information processing
approach. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
|