Dear Klaus, Terry and Jerry
This conversation about design and information is positively rivetting
and I just could not stay away for too long. Reflecting on my experience
in designing industrial and crafts products in India over the past
thirty years, design management experiences across hundreds of projects
at NID and teaching design processes to graduate and post-graduate
students I find that I am agreeing to much that has been said by Klaus
and Jerry about the nature of design and the role of information. Terry,
Graphic Design can indeed be very complex, particularly when you try
communicating matters of sex to orthodox communities in the context of
HIV AIDS and its management in a multi-cultural setting that we have in
India, to give just one example that is far more complex than any
engineering problem that I know of.
Klaus, firstly I would love to have a copy of your first draft of and
encyclopedia entry on information theory. Please do send it to me
directly. I am half-way through your book, and it is very stimulating
indeed. But I just cannot rush through it, as I did the last chapter
when I first got it on hand from Amazon.
My offering on the role of information is as follows. Information in
design is not as important as another variant of it which is in my view,
"Insight". This is perhaps the outcome of an information process but
from my experience it seems that it is very different from the
information that is referred to in research literature. It is the
product of both intellectual as well as sensory explorations and the
"insight" gained is not usually available in any form in the sources
that have been addressed but it is a product of the source and the
sensing that the designer brings to the situation. This insight is quite
similar to the concept of "Design Opportunity" that i have explained
some time back on this forum. For me design opportunity is not visible
to anyone but the designer since it is a product of a "Perception" and
an "Imagination" which is internal to the designer and therefor not
visible to any other partner until it is experssed in some external
model or expression, verbal, visual or dimensional. In some cases at an
early stage it is not even visible to the designer since it is a tacit
concept if I can call it that and only after some number of iterations
does it get recognised as a valid concept and be moved to a more
explicit level. This could sometimes take a few years to be recognised,
if at all.
I have been talking to my students about this particular conversation on
the PhD-Design list and in my discourse which I called the design
journey I had tried to explian the role of information and insight, and
called on them to be sensitive to insights that really neeeded to be
harvested as in agriculture, with care and nurture, which is at the very
heart of design action.
In December 2005, during a lecture on design research to a group of new
faculty at the NIFT Gandhinagar I had coined a term, "Inploration" to
describe the internal journey that the designer makes when he is armed
with information and insights, feelings and touch sensations etc., and
these further modify the concepts that emerge in the form of models and
expressions and each are also strongly associated with feelings and
convictions that ususly grow as the proposals emerge in the designers
mind and in the guts at the same time. Explorations and Inplorations are
used to process information into insights which are then harvested into
convictions and expressed as design opportunities and offerings which
move gradually from the abstract expressions to very concrete and
particular variants that can meet the variety of expectations that the
situation seems to demand. This description of both 'Design Opportunity"
as well as "Design Inploration " are explained briefly on my website in
case anyone is interested at the link below:
Design Theory: <http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp/About_Design_Theory/Menu79.html>
Design Opportunity: <http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp/About_Design_Theory/Personal76.html>
Design Inploration: <http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp/About_Design_Theory/Personal85.html>
The design journey is therefore a convoluted one in which numerous
forays into situations and information sources lead to the harvesting of
"Insights" which are then processed into models and prototypes that are
offered for evaluation and market acceptance.
I ha ve a diagram of the "Design Journey" which I had prepared for my
students in ball pen on white paper which I scanned and made into a pdf
file which I circulated to my class alomng with a voice file describing
the model. However the voice file is too big to be sent by email but I
propose to make a transcript which I would share with the list at a
later date (when it is done).
I the meantime I look forward to a stimulating discussion on this matter
and sign off with warm regards for now.
M P Ranjan
from my Mac at home on the NID campus
11 April 2007 at 10.35 pm IST
_______________________________________________________________________
Prof M P Ranjan
Faculty of Design
Head, Centre for Bamboo Initiatives at NID (CFBI-NID)
Chairman, GeoVisualisation Task Group (DST, Govt. of India) (2006-2008)
Faculty Member on Governing Council (2003 - 2005)
National Institute of Design
Paldi
Ahmedabad 380 007 India
Tel: (off) 91 79 26623692 ext 1090 (changed in January 2006)
Tel: (res) 91 79 26610054
Fax: 91 79 26605242
email: [log in to unmask]
web site: http://homepage.mac.com/ranjanmp/
web domain: http://www.ranjanmp.in
_______________________________________________________________________
Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
>
> terry,
>
> let me intersperse my comments in yours:
>
> Hi Klaus,
>
> I think that like Jerry you are faultily presuming a simplistic logical
> positivist approach to information in what I wrote. The underlying
> epistemology is constructivist (social and individual) and ethological, but
> not phenomenological. Like any constructivist perspective it presumes faulty
> construction and self-delusion as equivalent states to sound understanding.
>
> frankly, i do not understand what you are saying that i am presuming, and
> the big labels you are connecting: simplistic positivist, constructivist,
> epistemology, self-delusion, sound (as opposed to unsound) understanding....
>
> I am happy with the approach you have to information and the roles that you
> give it. From experience, I have found that all of those richer
> understandings you describe of how a designer functions seem to work well in
> viewing design methods as primarily modes of gathering information. Its
> also possible to extend the richness of understanding how designers fucntion
> and are informed through extending your approach into a biological
> perspective of human functioning - and one that includes humans/designers
> being self deluded.
>
> A couple of questions though. What is the 'it' that you say 'reduces
> uncertainty'; 'is always relative to what you know'; 'is always an issue of
> timing' etc?
>
> it can be a conversation about a subject matter, the experience of reading a
> report, observations that confirm of deny a hypothesis, connections you made
> that give you the confidence in acting knowledgeably
>
> Second, if designers thrive on not taking 'information' too seriously in
> order to bring something new forth (which I have no problem with) then
> 'what' are they exploring?
>
> i'd say they are exploring possibilities
>
> With 'what' do they reflect on it?
>
> with their minds and in conversations with others, other designers,
> stakeholders, users.
>
> With 'what' do they express it?
>
> i have said it often. designers make proposals for possible futures that
> they hope other stakeholders will pick up and realize.
>
> My suggestion is that this is all a matter of informing and information -
> tho perhaps with a perspective on information that is more than a simple
> fact such as the 'the date is the 10th of April'!
>
> a proposal is not a fact, nor a convention, e.g. to label time in reference
> to an agreed upon calendar. it must make realistic suggestions, pass
> possibilities for desirable futures to potential stakeholders, possibilities
> that others can see as realizable and enroll them into the project that
> designers are proposing.
>
> proposals are linguistic in the broad sense to include presentations,
> drawings, visualizations, instructions, and if you want, address the
> capabilities and aspirations of those stakeholders who matter. proposals
> have no truth value in the sense of accurately describing what exists. they
> must be compelling others into actions to bring forth something not yet
> realized.
>
> Understanding the practices and internal activities of engineering designers
> is in a way much more complex and difficult than understanding graphic
> designers. The difference is the intermedial conscious and unconscious roles
> of formalised unambiguous yet inaccurate abstractions.
>
> the comparison is a bit simplistic. there are simple engineering problems,
> like routinely varying the design of a fastener to fit an unusual situation,
> and there are complex graphical design problems, like developing the
> graphical strategy for a large advertising campaign, having to anticipate
> the responses of culturally diverse audiences. the failure of a graphical
> design may cost millions and have long lasting effects for the future of an
> agency. the failure of an engineering design can be costly too, but can be
> corrected within a narrow problem solving paradigm.
>
> i hope this answers your questions
>
> klaus
>
> ps, since the discussion group does not allow detachments, i am sending you
> (or anyone who requests it) the first draft of and encyclopedia entry on
> information theory
>
> One thing that hasn't yet (to my knowledge) been adequately written about in
> the design research literature is engineering designers' artistic use of the
> information provided by abstract meta-representations of phenomena via
> equations. Many good engineering designers (particularly conceptual phase
> designers) can 'feel' their way round the potential for better solutions by
> feeling round the multi-dimensioned phenomenological potentials represented
> by the relationships between variables in equations. This artistic use of
> information about phenomena is in respects different and no different from
> the perhaps less abstract ability central to all designers to be able to use
> internalised informal representations of the visual, 'what they have seen',
> or mixed external perceptions 'what they have experienced', (both
> information) to be able to feel their way using internal biological
> processes to identify potential or better possibilities for design outcomes.
>
> If anyone knows of good literature about the above application of designers'
> feelings to formulae in design research I'd welcome knowing about it. I'm
> aware of several books and papers in the realms of mathematics, physics and
> biology that document this phenomena.
>
> Warm 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: Tuesday, 10 April 2007 9:35 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Defining Design (Re: Evidence and ethics)
>
> dear terry, jerry, and others.
>
> when terry speaks of "gathering information," his choice of words implies
> that there exist some entities in the world outside, called information,
> that the researcher needs to pick up and use. this is a popular conception
> that many people live by. from my perspective, "information" has quite
> different qualities, for example, it reduces some uncertainty, it is always
> relative to what you know, especially in the dimensions of interest (outside
> of which it is irrelevant), it is always an issue of timing (what is
> information today may not be tomorrow), etc.
>
> within relevant dimensions of uncertainty, something can provide information
> only if it is true or believable. this ties information to the world that
> exists, not the world that designers are thinking to bring forth. hence,
> information gathering keeps designers stuck in what is known, true, already
> existing.
>
> the point of design -- at least from my perspective -- is to get out of what
> exists, to conceive and realize what others are not able to perceive as
> possible, to render uncertain what everyone else considers settled, to make
> the unpredictable real.
>
> in information theoretical terms, this means to undo available information.
> i would not discourage designers to explore what others consider information
> -- gathering information if you insist on that phrase -- but designers
> thrive on not taking information too seriously. think about it
>
> 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 Jerry
> Diethelm
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 8:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Defining Design (Re: Evidence and ethics)
>
> Dear Terry,
>
> In my experience, information must be chosen because no one can ever really
> afford to just gather. One tries to distinguish between useful and relevant
> kinds of information related to the effort at hand.
>
> And so information is "gathered" purposefully toward some end and where
> possible in a form related to the nature and scale of the questions driving
> the process. Call it wisely selected, chosen, or whatever, it is an
> inescapably judgmental, modeling and sorting process.
>
> Putting evaluation in a box at the far end of things is for me to miss the
> central role that evaluation plays in all phases of designing.
>
> Best,
>
> Jerry
>
> On 4/9/07 5:24 PM, "Terence Love" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jerry,
> > I referred to 'gathering information' rather than 'choosing information'.
> > 'Gathering' doesn't necessarily require 'choosing'. The point (and
> > benefit) of many design methods is that they gather information that
> > one wouldn't otherwise choose.
> >
> > Choosing a design method? That's a different question!
> >
> > Warm regards,
> >
> > Terry
> >
> >
> >
> > -----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 Jerry Diethelm
> > Sent: Tuesday, 10 April 2007 8:17 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Defining Design (Re: Evidence and ethics)
> >
> > Dear Terry,
> >
> > You are mistaken. Choosing information is an evaluation.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> > On 4/9/07 5:01 PM, "Terence Love" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Jerry,
> >>
> >> You are mistaken. Information gathering means exactly that.
> >>
> >> Analysis is a form of information gathering. The central role of all
> >> design methods is to provide information to the designer. This even
> >> includes creative thought producing techniques.
> >>
> >> Evaluation is a later stage covering only a small part of the game.
> >> It depends on having information to work on. Design can occur without
> >> evaluation - unless you extend the meaning of evaluation to include
> >> anything that results in a decision. I think that takes it to too
> >> broad a role that reduces the value of evaluation as a concept.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> 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 Jerry Diethelm
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 10 April 2007 4:24 AM
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: Defining Design (Re: Evidence and ethics)
> >>
> >> On 4/9/07 7:35 AM, "Terence Love" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> 1: The central purpose of ALL design methods is information gathering.
> >>> Period. (Its because of the definition of design as a human activity).
> >>
> >> As I read further in the post, it becomes clearer that "information
> >> gathering" is intended here to mean ANALYSIS.
> >>
> >> I'd assert that EVALUATION is a larger and better concept for
> >> designing, yielding a broader cultural conversation about what matters.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards to all,
> >>
> >> Jerry
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -
> >> ------
> >> Jerry Diethelm
> >> Architect - Landscape Architect
> >> Planning & Urban Design Consultant
> >>
> >> Prof. Emeritus of Landscape Architecture
> >> and Community Service ? University of Oregon
> >> 2652 Agate St., Eugene, OR 97403
> >> ? e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> >> ? web: http://www.uoregon.edu/~diethelm
> >>
> >> ? 541-686-0585 home/work 541-346-1441 UO
> >> ? 541-206-2947 work/cell
|
