Sure,
Klaus
Apparently you wrote:
>
> "any science explains how things work. designing means proposing something
> that changes how things work."
>
> Could/should the proposed 'design science' be aiming at explaining how
> 'design' activity proposes things (theories, methods, artifacts) that
> change how things work?
Now please explain how designers propose or do anything without suggesting how purposeful thought occurs in human beings and how values and skills shape thought and action as designers work individually, in groups, or in communities.
Similarly, you wrote:
> designers who work in interdisciplinary development teams are unlikely to be taken seriously when withdrawing into their subjectively convenient design thinking abilities, implicitly denying this ability to team members from other disciplines.
That seems to me to be a subjective valuation based on scanty evidence not a "simple epistemological fact” as you suggest. All members of a team will presumably draw on what they know and do when objectives are shared. Their distinctive contributions will be acknowledged for whatever they are. Thought that is not communicated is not necessarily convenient or implicit in denying anything.
Or, so I believe,
Chuck
Charles Burnette
[log in to unmask]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|