ken,
you said: " Klaus and some others dispute the value of theory altogether."
i am not disputing theory altogether.
in conjunction with the idea of design thinking, am merely pointing out that human thinking is a private affair, not accessible to direct observation. what one knows about someone's thinking is found in linguistic accounts about one's thought processes -- which are known to have little to do with what is actually going on in someone's brain. abduction, induction, and deduction are constructs of logic and manifest in descriptions of what someone says he or she went through coming to an conclusion, proposal, or justification.
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 3:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Abduction, Induction, and Deduction
Dear Chuck,
At this point, I feel as though I will be repeating myself to respond yet again.
One issue that recurs in your posts is a repeated reference to “A Theory of Design Thinking.” As I see it, this is not yet a theory in the three key senses that Merriam-Webster’s uses the term: “the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art,” or “a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena,” or even “a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject.”
So far, “A Theory of Design Thinking” is a series of draft papers that one can label a theory in this sense of the term: “a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation” or “an unproved assumption.”
I’m not yet willing to work my way through “A Theory of Design Thinking” simply to respond to a post on the PhD-design list. When you bring the draft papers together in a finished book or publish them as a series of peer-reviewed articles, they’ll constitute part of the design literature. Right now, references to “A Theory of Design Thinking” have neither greater nor lesser status than any idea that any one of us may have. I’m sorry if this seems blunt, but your repeated references suggest that a theory exists where I see a series of working papers.
Klaus and some others dispute the value of theory altogether. I don’t. But neither do I agree that everything an individual thinker publishes constitutes a theoretical contribution. For those who are interested in considering what theory is — and what theory is not, I have posted two articles (Sutton and Staw 1995; Whetten 1989) to the “Teaching Papers” section of my Academia page at URL:
https://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman
I have read your draft with interest, but I’m not ready to agree or disagree. These are drafts in progress — before I am ready to respond post by post to “A Theory of Design Thinking,” I’d like to read them in a published version that forms a theory in one of the relevant meanings of the word: (1) “the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art,” (2) “a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena,” (3) “a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject.”
For now, I see no reason to change my mind of the consilient nature of what we know about most fields — including design. As I read (or misread) your comments, you seem to suggest that design is in some way fundamentally different to all other human endeavours.
Since you argue that deduction does not apply to design, this would suggest design is in some way exempt from the problem of induction. I disagree. As I wrote earlier, the universe has not changed since David Hume discussed the problem of induction. While we understand induction more completely, designers have no special way to leap-frog this problem. As I wrote earlier, understanding the relations between abduction, induction, and deduction is helpful in developing a theory of design or of design thinking. If you have a theoretical explanation for why this is not so, then it is time to publish “A Theory of Design Thinking” in finished form to make your case. Repeated reference to drafts that requires us to read, understand, and reflect on the consequences of a dozen or so unpublished draft papers asks too much of us.
Given this, I prefer not to repeat the arguments that I have already made. I may be wrong, but I’ve made the case as I see it and I’ve provided supporting material to substantiate my views. If design actually is different to all other human endeavours, then my views may well wrong. But then I’d like to see a convincing argument to demonstrate how and why this is so.
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
—
References
Sutton, Robert I., and Barry M. Staw. 1995. "What Theory is Not." Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Sep.), pp. 371-384
Whetten, David A. 1989. “What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?” Academy of Management Rev1ew, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 490-495.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|