Hi Klaus,
Thank you for your message.
Before I reply, I'd like to confirm with you my understanding of what you
were saying in it.
I agree with you language is relatively ubiquitous in human life; like many
things - water and aeroplanes for instances.
I suggest we should view design through whatever lenses are needed; and
avoid primarily viewing design through the lens of language/communication.
Before I present the detail of why, I would like to confirm with you what
you meant in your email. As I understand it, you put forward four
speculations:
1. That Terry doesn't get it
2. Nobody you know would claim that everything that goes on in design
processes can be articulated. This in the following sentence seems to say
'language is limited in what it can represent.'
3. That terry confuses 'theory with theorised'.
4. That theorising should only be done through the lens of
language/communication because all theories use language, mathematics, or
graphical devices, and because on PhD-design we write about design
activities unless we get trapped in epistemological nonsense rather than
exchanging design activities.
Previously you suggested my writing was undertaken with a blind spot and the
above seems to be another aspect of you detailing of why you think so.
(Your previous message, attached below, seems to say the same as point 4
above.)
I feel you are mistaken, and the privileging of language and communication
in some areas of design theory and practice has been a mistake. There seem
to be several good reasons, some of which go beyond the position you appear
to have taken and the reasoning you use.
To simplify things, please could you confirm the above is the basis of your
reasoning, or, if you feel appropriate, clarify.
Best wishes,
Terry
==
Dr Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
PhD, B.A. (Hons) Eng, P.G.C.E
School of Design and Art, Curtin University, Western Australia
Psychology and Social Science, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia
Honorary Fellow, IEED, Management School, Lancaster University, UK
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
[log in to unmask] +61 (0)4 3497 5848
==
-----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: Friday, 14 December 2012 6:20 AM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: Wicked Problems
sorry,
terry,
you just don't get it.
nobody i know would claim that everything that goes on in design processes
can be articulated. there are even more basic examples of linguistic
limitations such as human face recognition. it would be difficult to
describe the face of someone familiar to you for someone else to pick that
person out of a crowd -- unless that person has some unique features in
addition to its face.
you still confuse theory with the theorized by saying: "it is inappropriate
to view theorising about design activity primarily through a
'language/communication' lens." i asked you before if you could give me any
example of a theory that does not use language, mathematics, or graphical
devices. of course you can't do it.
on this list, we do not exchange design activities but we write about them
(unless we get trapped in epistemological nonsense).
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 Terence
Love
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 2:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Wicked Problems
Hi Klaus,
It's a matter of 'necessary and sufficient'.
Language doesn't provide 'necessary and sufficient' explanation of design
activity. Hence, it is inappropriate to view theorising about design
activity primarily through a 'language/communication' lens.
Similarly, viewing humans as unique creative beings is as false as a basis
for understanding and theorising about design activity.
Humans are primarily routine, 'robotic' beings in which creativity is
usually an illusion. Creativity, like will, is rare - and, from experience,
rare in artists.
Best wishes,
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: Thursday, 13 December 2012 3:29 AM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: Wicked Problems
terry,
your response continues to reveal your blind spot.
you once claimed that design theory had nothing to do with language. i
challenged you to show me a theory that is free of language - informal,
mathematical, or graphical. you didn't respond and i guess because you
couldn't. (i couldn't either)
now you again claim that i inappropriately privilege language in stating
what a problem is. that claim and indeed everything we say on this list
takes place in language. it seems that you see language as transparent,
invisible, blanked out while speaking. i know, you are not the only one who
does this. but communicating of design becomes difficult if one participant
is blatantly unaware of what he or she is doing.
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 Tim
Smithers
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 4:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Wicked Problems
Dear Terry,
Notions of what is right and wrong are not what is needed here, I think. To
ask or say what or who is right or wrong serves only to setup a false debate
and establish ill-founded distinctions.
Disagreeing with what Klaus says and/or the stance from which he says it
does not make him or what he says wrong, nor right.
It should make it interesting, thought provoking, and useful.
Having a different and alternative point of view or explanation also doesn't
make Klaus and what he says wrong.
It does mean, however, that you need engage with what Klaus says (on this
occasion) and carefully explain how you're alternative explanation differs
from what he says and why, and how this leads us to something interesting
and useful.
Argument by assertion and empty value judgements won't do this.
Best regards,
Tim
===============================================
On Dec 12, 2012, at 09:27 , Terence Love wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> I would agree, if Klaus was right.
> Klaus privileges language and frames his view of wicked problems
> through a language lens regardless of whether it is appropriate or not.
> The position described in Klaus' 6 points also depends on a particular
> view of what it is to be human.
> I've been suggesting there is a different explanation that goes beyond.
> Best wishes,
> terry
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|