> Le 22 mars 2017 à 20:23, Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
>
> At any rate, I will call it a day. If we cannot manage to define terms or draw accurately on history, then we’re simply stating beliefs. Since you have stated your belief, that’s enough for me. While I don’t agree, I accept that you “truly believe that Art Academies produced enough work to root Design PhDs.”
I sit pretty much on the side of Eduardo. Ken is correcting some factual points, yet I don’t see that they completely question both positions. My feeling is that factual inaccuracies don’t make the way to stating beliefs (at least what I understand as beliefs). Both of you are experienced professionals, and what you are stating reflects the blending of experience, practice, positions, convictions and visions of what education and educating might be. That’s not what I call beliefs.
To me, the divide is profound, and cultural. I guess that Eduardo and myself carry this specific way of building the future with the familiar, daily, active (and not ghostly) presence of the past. That is being european.
This is also why I find Don’s optimism fascinating, not because of the faith he has in the power of design (which I somehow share), but because the practicality that he sees as a major divide from art should then —in my understanding— include the whole economy of design realization (who orders, who pays, who uses, who decides…). And if I look at it like this, I would be building a theory of design out of a week-end excursion in a couple of shopping malls, rather than from history or anything else.
Best regards,
Jean
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|