Dear Ken,
How about we avoid trying to have a war and try to tease this out.
The fact that we both see things differently on such a key issue suggests there may be some benefit in this, rather than one position being right.
My thinking is about the difference between technical definitions and descriptions of meanings.
An example, for me, is that the term Energy is described in Merriam Webster in a very limited manner compared to say the (also quite simplified) description of (say) the Wikipedia page compared to (say) the Hamiltonian or Lagrangian definitions or the definition of energy described by Noether's theorem.
My suggestion is that for creating design theory we are missing the quality of definition in design that is the equivalent of technical definitions, and that neither Simon's description of meaning nor Merriam Websters' fulfils that role.
I suggest that the commonly held idea that dictionaries provide definitions is not accurate. Rather it is a folk description of what dictionaries do: a simplification from school . A better description is that a dictionary describes current and past usages of a term. This is not the same purpose or outcome as a document that describes a particular concept (allocated to a term) in ways to define the limits of meaning, the boundaries, of the concept to ensure they are distinct from other concepts that potentially have overlapping meanings. The primary role of practical and theoretical lexicography of general purpose language is to describe language use. Dictionaries provide 'lexical definitions' that are *descriptive*, the meaning of the term as commonly used. For these kinds of descriptions of meaning it is not possible to question whether it is epistemologically or terminologically correct.
I suggest what we are needing in design research and for the creation of design theory is something different - prescriptive technical definitions - based on epistemological grounds rather than usage.
Warm regards,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Sunday, 10 January 2016 11:26 PM
To: PhD-Design <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [SPAM] Re: Evidence & Beauty - Was: Bass evidence
Dear Terry,
Now we’ve come to the point where the argument becomes circular. To straighten the argument out requires that I rebut your claims. To do so will lead to one of those heated threads where you believe me to be rude and you become irritated and angry over what you consider to be rude comments.
The definition derived from Simon is a definition, whether you find it useful or not. The Merriam-Webster’s definition is certainly a definition. To write that “Simon and Merriam Webster are not providing definitions” is incorrect. Merriam-Webster's is in the definition business — this dictionary and its predecessors have been in the business of defining words since 1806. You might not like the definitions, but you cannot say that these are not definitions.
To write anything further requires me to explain why I believe your claims to be mistaken, and this also requires me to address the reasons for the mistakes.
Let me stop here.
Yours,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|