Dear Klaus,
My apologies. That comment in my post did not apply to you.
Your behaviour in avoiding personal attack and focusing on the theory and
discussion is exemplary.
I thought it was obvious that in that paragraph of the text that I was
referring specifically to Ken's post requesting I explain why both Simon
and Merriam Webster statements about design fail as definitions. There is a
'your' in the paragraph that should be 'Ken's' as in:
'Usually, I avoid responding to posts that are mostly ad hominem attack
rather than arguing against the theoretical position presented. In this
case, it makes sense to answer Ken's question about why the definitions of
Simon and Merriam Webster are inadequate'.
I'm sorry. The post could have been written better.
Warm regards,
Terence
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Klaus Krippendorff
Sent: Friday, 15 January 2016 11:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Definitions
Terry,
But you addressed my post as if I did attack you. I am attacking confusions,
epistemological absurdities, directions that go nowhere, and too narrow
perspectives, but not the personalities of writers most of them I never met.
Klaus
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|