Hi Robert,
The whole issue about clarifying concepts is to get away from the mess of
seeing the meanng of every theory concept being dependent on its context
and the view point of the person using it. Making that step is a key step
between speculating about design and making sound theory about design - the
step that Tim points out is not made yet in many areas of design .
A start is the definition.
Best wishes,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
BA(Hons) PhD(UWA), PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
Director,
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[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 Robert
Harland
Sent: Thursday, 28 February 2013 9:53 PM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: design research and design practice
Dear Terry
'Confusion' may be happening because some see 1 & 2 as affecting each other,
as I do. For me, 'design research and theory making' (1) benefit from
contextualisation (2). Is substituting 'design' for 'specification' just
another way of contextualising design?
Regards, Robert
Dr Robert Harland | Lecturer | Learning & Teaching Coordinator for School of
the Arts | School of the Arts, English and Drama | Loughborough University |
Recent publications | Harland, R. G., 2012. Towards an integrated pedagogy
of graphics in the United Kingdom. Iridescent: Icograda Journal of Design
Research, 2012, 2 (1).
https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134<https://dspace.lboro.ac.
uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134/11349>
On 28/02/2013 13:01, "Terence Love"
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
-snip-
We seem to be talking, however, about different issues. There are two
completelty different threads going on
1. Identifying a useful way of describing design that will enable a sound
foundation for design research and theory-making about design (which the
majority of definitions in the literature don't do very well.)
2. Describing some attributes about design that are: a) useful to designers
(your message below and Kari-Hans message) , b) useful in selling designs to
potential customers (Robert Harland's definition), c) help rhetorically
manipulate people's emotions about design in order to obtain funding for
the Humanities (Richard Buchanan's position), and d) defining design so that
it is seen only as a human activity (Klaus' position and part of Ken's
position).
The description and reasoning I've been giving are purely dedicated to 1)
and not to 2) which perhaps causes some confusion.
-snip
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|