Robert,
Eating lunch results in creating products inside me that serve me (as a
human being) in the accomplishment of my individual and collective
purposes. Buchanan's definition doesn't explicitly require that I do any
conceiving as well, or planning.
Buchanan's definition doesn't make explicit:
1) whether of those activities or aspects of human power any or each of them
satisfy the criteria of an activity being design
2) whether it needs all three of them
3. Whether it is sufficient for 'the human power' (in whatever way it is
conceived) to exist for design, or whether humans actually have to use that
power.
4) it implies that design IS the human power (an abstract potential) rather
than an activity, outcome or anything else
5)It doesn't indicate whether or not this is an exclusive definition. That
is, whether 'Design' also is something else
6) I note (for Ken's sake) that Buchanan's definition is a NOUN-based
definition not an activity/verb-based definition
7) It uses the word 'product' which is relatively undefined itself. Does
this only apply to physical products? What about designing activities, or
services,, or processes, or strategies, or organisaitons, or policies, or
education programs, or the many other things that are not 'products'.
Buchanan's definition apparently excludes the design any of these outputs.
8) The definition also excludes designs that don't work (i.e 'do not serve
human beings in the accomplishment of their individual and collective
purposes')
This level of explanation of critical analysis of why Buchanan's definiton
doesn't work in theory terms is while not even really trying.
Check out Houkes, W. and Vermaas, P.E (2010) Technical Functions. On the
Use and Design of Artefacts. Dordrecht: Springer for examples of what a
serious critique of definitions looks like.
I did a review of it a couple of years ago for Springer and was impressed
by the high standard of discourse and analysis in the book.
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: Friday, 1 March 2013 1:04 AM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: design research and design practice
Dear Terry
I don't think your example of 'eating lunch' satisfies Richard's definition.
If we stick with the definition, as one possibility for defining design, we
can follow it through and it might lead us to question if design has
happened if one of the parts is unfulfilled.
I can understand how conceiving, planning, making, and eating a sandwich
might be called design. If you conceive of the idea, you are just conceiving
of the idea. This may not be called design. If you conceive of the idea, and
plan to make the sandwich, you are conceiving and planning. This may not be
called design. If you conceive, plan, and make the sandwich, you are
conceiving, planning and making the sandwich. This may not be called design.
If you conceive, plan, make and consume the sandwich, this collection of
ideas might be grouped and known as design. I personally find this a helpful
proposition and will accept that this may be more useful in practice than
research and theory. Or, is design the theory that explains the continuity
of thought between these happenings?
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 14:06, "Terence Love"
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
<snip>'Design is the human power of conceiving, planning, and making
products that serve human beings in the accomplishment of their individual
and collective purposes'
I've just eaten lunch ( cheese and tomato sandwich). Me eating lunch (eating
- not even making it) satisfies this definition of 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|