Dear Terry,
Thanks for your post. While I appreciate the effort, I am not sure that this actually represents a step forward over ordinary language.
In my view, there are several difficult or problematic issues here.
1) As I see it, what you have done is to render somewhat ambiguous and difficult terms into terms that do not deserve the precision you ascribe to them.
2) You have not described the complete set of ten statements that Rittel and Weber describe in their article. You have rephrased one aspect of the ten statement into your own statement -- "wicked problems are not solvable" -- and then you have created a mathematical description of your statement rather than a mathematical description of the ten criteria of wicked problems. If we can rephrase everything as we prefer it without respect to the original content, then anything can be rendered mathematical.
3) The crucial issue is even more significant. You have made a mathematical transcription of a set of propositions. The mathematical transcription makes sense as mathematics. While the mathematics seems to be correct, it is not clear that the ideas or issues in design theory work. Back in the 1800s, Lewis Carroll demonstrated to hilarious effect the fact that one can state propositions that are true in logical or mathematical terms while being false, problematic, untrue, or ridiculous in the world of human affairs.
So while I accept that you have offered a mathematical statement of a proposition in design theory in which your mathematical transcription makes mathematical sense, 1) you did so by doing violence to the actual language and sense of the design theory, 2) you did so without translating or even attempting to translate all ten terms of the theory I put forward, and 3) you did so in correct mathematical terms without demonstrating a relationship between your correct mathematics and the propositions I stated from Rittel and Weber.
I do not argue that Rittel and Weber's theory of wicked problems is a complete, accurate, or entirely scientific theory. I argue that it is a theory, that it is a reasonable theoretical statement despite its potential for ambiguity and difficulty, that it is one of the best known theories in design, and that it may indeed be impossible to restate this in mathematical terms.
Your proposition here was that you can state any design theory in mathematical terms. Birger challenged you to demonstrate one such theory. You asked me to propose a theory suitable for translation. I did — you may not like it, but it meets the criteria.
In my view, this is an interesting effort, but it fails to support the claim that you can restate any design theory in mathematical terms. I will argue that you have stated a specific proposition of your own choosing, and I accept that your mathematical statement of a proposition trimmed to render it translatable may shed light on the proposition — but it doesn't support your earlier claim.
This is a narrow argument. I tend to agree with Arjun in a broader sense — and I think that you must address the language challenges of the word "problem" to properly translate even your own restated proposition.
Thanks for trying, but it is my sincere assertion that this does not meet the criteria stated in your claim.
Yours,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | University email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Private email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Academia Page http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman
Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Adjunct Professor | School of Creative Arts | James Cook University | Townsville, Australia
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|