Dear Tobie

As I see it, the avoidance of an ethics applied bureaucratically necessarily requires a deontological morality. Starting from the categorical imperative (Kant) and applying communicative action (Habermas) will produce a morality of action, but in your case, the indeterminate (speculative) nature of the encounter is then lost. And, from your piece I suspect that this encounter as unknown event is central to the interaction. (speculative -  spectaculum - spectare - spectacle...)

Risk taking in an open and non-judgemental environment is central to the success of any design process but this applies to the design agent, not the subjects and other stakeholders, and throws particular weight on the validation process (which I assert must necessarily be trans-subjective). From my perspective, Arendt's notion of what it means to act in the public sphere and Taylor's notions of authentic morality are central here... In other words acting in order to see the look on someone's face may be dramatic but simply not ethical.

And, truth claims are always problematic: think of Donald Schön's tension between rigour and relevance - the more rigorous the truth claim, the less relevant it gets. If one understands the event as particular and singular and subjective one can move away from this dilemma...

"Philosophy does not consist in knowing and it is not inspired by truth. Rather it is categories like Interesting, Remarkable, or Important that determine success or failure."(Deleuze and Guattari, 1994:82)

Not sure this is helpful as in any sort of convergent reasoning way but design is about divergent reasoning too... And necessarily true to my premises, this is a personal, subjective, and entirely singular response to your query...

ciao,
we


Habermas, Jürgen (1991) Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Arendt, Hannah (1998) [1958] The Human Condition. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Taylor, Charles (2003) [1991] The Ethics of Authenticity. Cambridge Massachusetts and London England: Harvard University Press.
Schön, Donald A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Felix (1994) [1991] What is Philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press.

On 2010-04-12, at 9:43 AM, Tobie Kerridge wrote:

hi,

In my thesis I'm writing about speculative forms of design. I don't mean unpaid client pitches, rather a form of product design where hypothetical design is exhibited and disseminated in other public settings. 

In the previous 2 years I've been helping lead a brief with postgraduate design students with a focus on speculative design as a form of public engagement with science and technology, and we have had some interesting situations:

- A student filmed themself letting blood from their arm into an instrument, and then brought the instrument into the crit, with the needle still attached.
- A scientist was filmed, then the interview was used without consent, causing some problems.
- Students have worked with patients and patient groups, and then represent individuals or groups in their work in unexpected ways.

Additionally students frequently blur fictional accounts with claims of truth. Individuals are consulted initially, then the work takes a turn, and there is little or no attribution or care to separate subsequent material from the initial research. Scientific research, or policy documents, or market research, or literary fiction are used as sources, with no attribution.

I am undoubtedly guilty of most of these things at some stage (though not the blood-letting). I also feel that we should be encouraging students of this form of design to work independently, and to encourage them to take risks. I would hate to crush these problematic approaches with some form of design bureaucracy.

But there surely is some place here for a form of ethics for designers, as they increasingly move into the territories of other disciplines with different expectations, and simultaneously become more sophisticated at promoting and circulating their work to broader audiences.

Does anyone have any thoughts on these issues? Have you any references for accounts of similar situations?

best wishes,
Tobie Kerridge


Tobie Kerridge
PhD candidate
Interaction Research Studio
Department of Design
Goldsmiths, University of London
New Cross
London SE14 6NW

T: +44 (0)20 7078 5183
F: +44 (0)20 7919 7783