Hi Chuck,
Thanks for your message. I agree. I didn't mention the other developments in
the 60s , 50s and before that you draw attention to. This was to avoid
the post being even longer than it was. It would be a richer story and
understanding (and much longer) if they were included. Please consider them
included! We are working off very similar bodies of literature. There are
minor differences are in how we interpret them. I suggest, however, we agree
on most things. For example, although I haven't talked much about the
developments in architecture and urban design. I'm aware many developments
that later emerged in the design research movement actually emerged well
ahead of it in architecture and urban design. In many cases, it appears that
publications about 'new knowledge about design' occurred in the design
research literature sometime after their development and publication
elsewhere such as in architecture. This is not to denigrate the design
research literature. It developed as a refining filtration or focusing of
work in other fields centring on design process and associated aspects of
design methods and design thinking.
All of this supports the focus of my post which was to indicate:
1. That the 1963 conference in the UK occurred long after design research
and design theory (including design thinking) was already well established
but without a strong publication history. The reality appears to be that the
Jones and Thornley conference instead marks the start of interest in these
issues in academia in the western English speaking world. Interesting that
the Jones and Thornley conference doesn't mention Visual Design.
2. The predominate focus on design as design process at that time is very
understandable in terms of the extensive structural ways that the
technologies used by designers and the structure of design activity as
primarily a large scale endeavour shaped how design was undertaken, viewed
and analysed.
3. In industry and later in academia, the idea of 'design thinking' emerged
as a counterpoint to more pressing concerns about improving design processes
and design methods. Both of the latter interests being akin to the rather
more recent interest in Business Process Modelling. If BPMN and BPDs had
been available in the 50s and 60s, the direction of design research might
have been very different!
On a completely different tack, if you still have it, I would appreciate a
copy of Burnette, C.H., 1966: "Cognitive Categorizing and The Subject Matter
of Algebra"; Submitted as a matter of Interest to Dr. George W. Patterson",
unpublished. Well to be honest, I'd appreciate a copy of all of your early
work!
Warm regards,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, 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: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Charles Burnette
Sent: Tuesday, 2 September 2014 9:52 PM
To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design
Subject: Re: Design Thinking and the insights Design History could have
offered but hasn't yet
On Sep 2, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
In essence, design thinking emerged to fill a gap identified by engineering
designers as not being addressed by the improvement of design focused on
design processes.
The whole of these origins were shaped by the realities of design
technologies of those times, huge numbers of designers, drawing boards,
tracing and later the use of expensive and toxic ammonia-based plan copiers,
which in its early days still required a second traced drawing in Indian
black ink.
Terry and all,
Terry's engineering/technology-centric comments fail to note the tremendous
changes in thinking that emerged in the 60s along with information and
communication science, (Shannon) management science (Simon), cybernetics
(Ashby), artificial intelligence (Schank), psychology (Piaget. Bruner,
etc.), cognitive science (see Gardner's The Minds New Science), design
research (Archer). and the emergence in the 70s of group dynamcs (Gordon,
Prince), problem solving (De Bono), pattern language (Alexander) and on and
on. It may help to look at The Bibliography Behind A Theory of Design
Thinking at www.independent. academia.edu/charlesburnette to accurately
place the time for publications that contributed to the emergence of Design
Thinking as a focal subject. Design Thinking didn't emerge in a single
discipline, even if someone in some discipline used that name first.
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
