Dear Terry,
To describe delusional behaviour as delusional is not an emotional attack. It is a description of behaviour.
Mike’s suggestion was a marvellous idea. I’d like to see the editors of all design journals publish Don’s epigram somewhere in an issue — perhaps as a stand-alone block of text, perhaps in an editorial, perhaps by seeing if an author can tuck it into an article. It would be something of a cross between “Where’s Waldo” and a shout-out honouring Don's contribution to the design field based on significant empirical research and important published contributions to design theory.
When you become editor of a journal, you may choose the epigram you prefer.
But seriously, I have a different question.
What evidence can you provide for the claim that it is possible to predict human behaviour?
If the claim were true, then it would be true that those who learn something else are mistaught and should be retrained along with those that taught them.
If it were true that the moon is made of green cheese, it would be true that those who learn the moon is made of rock are mistaught. This would probably mean that the so-called "moon rocks" collected on lunar landings are fakes, an indication that there was no lunar landing at all, that the Apollo missions were shot in a movie studio, and it might even mean that the earth is flat.
Once you start with false premises, the conclusions can go anywhere.
If the glass bead game were not fictional, all designers could predict human behaviour while accounting for complex dynamic systems with multiple loops of action and behaviour by learning to play the glass bead game. We’d add it to the curriculum at every design school and retrain all design professors at Waldzell.
Isn’t it time for you to demonstrate that you actually have a modelling method that effectively predicts the behaviour of human beings as individuals and human beings in social groups by accounting for complex dynamic systems with multiple loops of action and behaviour?
As Nigel Cross once wrote in an editorial, “Demo or die.”
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
—
On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 08:18:29 +0800, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Hi Mike and Don and all,
>
>I'd prefer you share the opposite in Visible Language:
>
>'Designers who believe that human behaviour cannot be predicted have been mistaught and need retraining (along with those that taught them)'
>
>First it is more useful. Second it's more accurate. Third, as a personal criticism it is more positive, accurate and specific: and less of an emotional attack.
>
>Best wishes,
>Terry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
