Hi Jude,

I wonder of some of the  confusion is due to conflating:

1.  Identifying whether a situation can be validly defined as a wicked
problem
and 
2. Identifying whether the  *concept* of  'wicked problem' is validly
defined.

These are unrelated.

It also seems  important to avoid confusing   the  wicked problem as a
theoretical entity, and the real situation to which it refers.  

Cheers,
Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CHUA Soo Meng Jude
(PLS)
Sent: Friday, 28 March 2014 12:00 AM
To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design
Subject: RE: Wicked Problems

OK I wonder if the accusation that those writing about wicked problems are
putting out nonsense in fact applies to what is put out below.

You should read RW's paper, before you speculate on what the claim that
there is no definite formulation means.  a wicked problem lacks a definitive
formulation because of contested goals and values and ends. TO say that a
wicked problem lacks definitive formation does not mean that, if x is a
wicked problem, then it cannot be formulated definitively as a problem, and
therefore is not a problem. Quite the contrary a wicked problem continues to
exist as a problem, or better as a multitude of problems depending on the
number of ways to problematise it. Indeed, because the problem is wicked and
not tame, it is very hard to make it disappear, because if someone backs out
on a problematisation, another possible way of problematizing it is
available.  If it were a tame problem, once it ceases to be problematized,
then it is no more a problem cos if it is a tame problem there is only one
frame or way of problematizing it, thanks to one clear goal.

Social engineering and social policy is all about wicked problems, because
there are so many parties with so many values and their importted
interpretation of the "problem".  The recognition that there are wicked
problems is of utmost important.  The danger is to treat reality as if it
were a tame problem, defined by one set of values, so that say when you have
solved the economics, say, there's nothing else to worry about, or be
concerned about.

It's not that wicked problems cannot be defined.  Rather wicked problems are
ill-defined, because given many contested definitions. Once there are a
multitude of ways of definition the problem qua problem, you have in a sense
a kind of wicked problem if the different problematizations are because of
different values and goals.  There is, as it were, a kind of
under-determination.

J


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------