Hi Tiiu, Derek, Birger and others,
As I read some of this discussion I find little about theory making relative to research.
I have been working, seemingly forever, to develop a theory of design thinking that could function as a potent framework for research
to determine if the theory was valid. To me this must be a precedent for scientific research focused on "design thinking".
This is a quite different point of view than must inform how to improve design practice or its contribution to a user situation, society or culture where
other methods might be appropriately used.
The making of theory is an inductive search to formulate a basis for testing the foundation of our discipline, one that should be undertaken with
understanding but without commitment to nostalgic convictions, such as that of drawing, a powerful and much loved aid to thinking,
probably because it is allusive, spatial, formative, and a felt expression of thought externalized for further attention. Nevertheless, it is a technique,
not a prerequisite for perceiving or expressing a design outcome. A theory must recognize its role but not prescribe it.
I believe, with Tiiu I think, that a PhD in design should be open to anything that can add knowledge of high quality to the field. I would welcome a
PhD focused on philosophy or psycholinguistics as they relate to design as much as I would one dedicated to competence in research methods that may never
adequately explain the phenomena they address. Understanding is as much an art as a science.
Or, so I believe,
Chuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|