Dear Fil, Andy, Peter and all,
There is a temptation in making theory about this to over privilege
consciousness as the central process.
The obvious reason for this is human ego and selfishness as it is one's
thinking and consciousness and 'sense of self' that is making the case that
'it' (one's sense of self' as in 'consciousness' should be centre stage and
the most important way that any of these design related situations should be
viewed.
There is an alternative more meditative perspective that gives rise to a
better, simpler and more coherent body of design theory.
An alternative is to view consciousness, sense of self and sense of self
having feelings and thoughts as a secondary artificial construction created
in the moment by each body. This perspective gives primacy in the
explanation to human bodies and their processes as the primary basis for
understanding design activity.
Usefully, it then enables design theories to integrate and cohere with
research and theories about other organisms, many of whom exhibit similar
activities to those that underpin creating a design. Perhaps more
importantly, this moves the discussion away from self perceptions that seem
all so important to individuals yet are problematic and often false when
subject to critical review.
I suggest it is unhelpful to privilege self-perceptions and consciousness as
the basis for theories about design activity- even those about design
thinking or the use of designed objects and services.
Best wishes,
Terry
____________________
Dr. Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
Senior Lecturer, Design
Researcher, Social Program Evaluation Research Unit
Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia
Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, [log in to unmask]
Director, Design-based Research Unit, Design Out Crime Research Centre
Member of International Scientific Council UNIDCOM/ IADE, Lisbon, Portugal
Honorary Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development
Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
____________________
-----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 Filippo
A. Salustri
Sent: Monday, 4 April 2011 8:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The false dichotomy of theory vs practice in desgin
[was:NASA,Hasmat, etc.]
Yes, we do agree on what consciousness has access to. What interests me is
in consciously understanding what we unconsciously do, via science. I hope
you agree there benefits would accrue from such an understanding.
Cheers.
Fil
On 3 April 2011 20:39, Keith Russell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Filippo,
>
> I think we are on the same pages.
>
> I was merely trying to point out that even though we can be aware that
> things happen outside of consciousness, pre-events that consciousness can
> subsequently speculate about as causing events in consciousness, still,
all
> that consciousness has available to it is events that happen in
> consciousness -- including theoretical events, speculations, brain scan
> evidence etc.
>
> cheers
>
> keith
>
--
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|