It seems like we are having another variation on the big-D little-d
distinction (see the first paragraph of
http://www.re-public.gr/en/?p=358 for a good summary). Perhaps it will
forestall another round of discussion to agree that there are multiple
types of conversations to be had on this list. Some conversations relate
to the group of professional experts who call themselves (little-d)
designers. Others are relate to how people could and should be (big-D)
Designers.
It seems counter-productive to confuse the two subjects of conversation.
No one here is actually suggesting, I believe, that only designers
Design. The argument about the self-identification of those who
professionally to design is a different question.
Elizabeth
Charles Burnette wrote:
> Klaus, Terry and others interested in this thread;
>
> I believe that the attempt to define designers through their
> profession of belonging to and being recognized by a specific "design"
> community is not worthwhile. It has led to self protecting
> professional societies that narrow expertise and defeat broader
> understandings of how to improve the quality of life. It also works
> against understanding design thinking as a universal human capacity.
> Children need to acquire this capacity long before they confront
> narrowly purposed "design briefs" or any of the other ways that
> institutions and communities of interest limit their action to what
> they find comfortable and practical. We all know that design produces
> a practical, situationally specific outcome but we need to get beyond
> the restrictions imposed by narrowly defined disciplines based on old
> patterns of behavior and social identity.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 11:32 AM, Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
>
>> terry,
>> yes and no.
>>
>> in my working with engineers, they usually profess to be engineers
>> first and
>> then say the are designing a transmission, for example. engineers go to
>> engineering schools, not design schools and get a degree in
>> engineering. so
>> by their own identification they are not designers.
>>
>> the same with public opinion researchers. they say they inquire into
>> public
>> opinion, usually are trained social scientists, but they readily tell
>> you
>> that they design a questionnaire and the survey they are conducting
>> with it.
>> while the design of questionnaires is part of their job, they do not
>> call
>> themselves designers nor do they go to a design school to get their
>> degree.
>>
>> i think one has to listen to how people fit themselves in various
>> institutional frameworks before theorizing and categorizing what they
>> do in
>> one way or another. of course one can argue with all of them, try to
>> preserve one's own favorite term for one's own activities, but then one
>> becomes a politician or lawyer who designs conceptual systems for the
>> allocation of authorities and the distribution of resources.
>>
>> the point i was making that all of what you hear from me in cast in
>> linguistic terms. although i had a chance of meeting you once, all your
>> arguments occur in language and i would argue that professional
>> designers
>> profess in language, are given brief in language, collaborate among
>> themselves in the completion of a project by talking, and justify their
>> proposals to stakeholders in an ideally compelling design discourse
>>
>> klaus
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Terence Love [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 12:49 AM
>> To: Klaus Krippendorff; [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: RE: On design - again?
>>
>> Dear Klaus,
>>
>> So you ARE saying that your definition of professional designers
>> includes
>> groups such as engineering designers, medical informatics program
>> designers,
>> learning and development program designers and similar sorts of
>> people. All
>> of these self-declare themselves to be designers and get paid for
>> doing that
>> kind of design - i.e there are job adverts asking for individuals in
>> these
>> professions.
>>
>> I hadn't thought of it before. A mass search for the term design on
>> the last
>> decade or two of the world's job adverts would give a another
>> dimension to
>> the measure of the number and scope of sub-fields of design (I just KNOW
>> Eduardo would also want me to do it in Portuguese!).
>>
>> All the best,
>> 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 Klaus
>> Krippendorff
>> Sent: Tuesday, 22 September 2009 12:26 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: On design - again?
>>
>> terry,
>>
>> i am saying you can't legislate or deduce from abstract definitions
>> whether
>> someone is a designer or not. this is possible only when the world
>> is fixed
>> and perfectly institutionalized. to me it is a question of
>> professing to be
>> one and finding enough people who accept your profession, e.g. by
>> entrusting
>> you with a design job.
>>
>> i am also saying that the activity of inventing futures to live in,
>> including improving existing conditions, is a pretty general human
>> activity.
>> we do it all the time in small and large ways, without necessarily
>> calling
>> us designers when we do. the sentence i just wrote is an invention.
>> people
>> who create new sentences more likely call each other writers, not
>> designers.
>>
>>
>> klaus
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Terence Love [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 11:58 PM
>> To: Klaus Krippendorff; [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: RE: On design - again?
>>
>> Hi Klaus,
>>
>> I'm still not clear on what you are saying. Your post seems to
>> contradict
>> some of your earlier comments.
>>
>> Are you saying the scope of 'professional designers' in your email
>> includes
>> engineering designers, software designers, mathematical configuration
>> designers and all those kinds of professional designers that call
>> themselves
>> by the name 'designer' that are outside the fields covered by Art and
>> Design
>> design schools?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Terry
>>
>> ===
>> Klaus wrote:
>> members of a profession profess to belong to a community that is
>> marked by
>> some - however loose but nevertheless satisfactory - agreement about
>> what
>> they profess to. when you say you are a designer, and other professed
>> designers don't object to that, you are one.
>
|