Great.
Thanks for sharing! Doing the same here!
*Aurileide Alves*http://about.me/aurileide/
http://instagram.com/aurileide/
2017-05-14 18:13 GMT-03:00 Luke Feast <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear all,
>
> The recent issue of Design Research News (May 2017) contains an open
> letter—‘Stand Up for Democracy’—in which Ezio Manzini and Victor Margolin
> maintain that the design community should stand up, speak out and act to
> resist on-going de-democratization. I have included a copy the letter after
> this post and I am writing to support this initiative.
>
> Democracy is more than a political method and in my opinion one way to
> resist forces of de-democratization is to articulate an inclusive and open
> view of democratic society. I agree with Mackie’s (2003, pp. 418-419)
> argument that democracy includes but is not limited to the following
> components. First, democracy implements what free and equal people will the
> public good to be based on wide suffrage and contested elections. Second, a
> democrat may recommend institutions that neutrally inform and enlarge the
> will of the people through public deliberation within multiple overlapping
> forums and sites. Third, a democrat may maintain that direct democracy may
> be impractical in a large territorial state and that it is necessary to
> implement a system of representatives who are capable to professionalize
> and depoliticize political conflicts. Fourth, a democrat may insist that
> there are essential preconditions to democracy such as fundamental rights
> to life, liberty and personal property, regular elections, equal voting
> rights, freedom of association, and freedom of speech. Fifth, a democrat
> may propose independent standards of justice and propose consent to
> constitutional arrangements that approximate such independent standards. In
> my view, democratic society embraces all these notions.
>
> In addition to the normative aspects of democratic society, there are good
> reasons to believe that democracy produces reliable decisions due to its
> tendency to maximize the cognitive diversity of the people involved in
> public deliberation (Landemore, 2013; Landemore & Page, 2014; Mercier &
> Sperber, 2011, 2017). Consequently, a necessary condition for a flourishing
> democracy is equal capability for people to associate and deliberate in
> formal and informal public spheres (Anderson, 2006, pp. 15-17; Bohman,
> 1997, pp. 325-326).
>
> Finally, in my opinion designers can help to confront forces of
> de-democratization by creating diverse and accessible infrastructures that
> correct inequalities in the capability for people to initiate public
> deliberation on their interests, to participate in collaborative projects
> together, and to publicly express dissent.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Luke
>
> Luke Feast, PhD | Postdoctoral Researcher | Department of Design | School
> of Arts, Design and Architecture | Aalto University | Finland
>
>
> -snip-
>
> Open Letter to the Design Community:
>
> Stand Up for Democracy
>
> 1. There is no need to point out that we are now in difficult and
> dangerous times. For many years we were living in a world that, despite its
> problems, has been nevertheless engaged in a democratization process
> whereby human rights, fundamental freedoms and opportunities for personal
> development were increasing. Today, this whole picture has changed. Attacks
> on democracy are active in several countries, including the ones where
> democracy seemed to be unshakable.
>
> 2. In these new times, the design community (practitioners, researchers,
> theorists, students, journalists, publishers and curators who are
> professionally involved in design- related activities) should stand up,
> speak out and act. To do that we do not have to share the same idea of what
> democracy is. It is enough to recognize the strong convergence between
> democracy and design. This convergence can be characterized in four ways:
> (1) design of democracy, improving democratic processes and the
> institutions on which democracy is built; (2) design for democracy,
> involving issues of access and transparency, allowing more people,
> especially using technology, to participate in the democratic process; (3)
> design in democracy, including projects that help to bring about conditions
> of equality and justice; (4) design as democracy, whereby the equitable and
> inclusive principles of participatory design set a stage on which diverse
> actors can come together to share constitutive power in shaping the present
> and future world we live in. Design has always been instrumental as a tool
> for democratization, in the four ways described above, either directly or
> indirectly. Today, these multiple commitments should continue, and
> designers need to support and increase democratic practices in their
> respective communities and countries. But now "normal" ways of designing
> are not enough. At this time it is essential that the design community
> takes a strong stand against the on-going de-democratization process and
> supports broader and richer opportunities for democracy and well being. In
> practical terms, this can be defined by as conceiving, developing and
> connecting multiple actions of resistance and proposals of new
> possibilities. It means using every possible arena where design has a
> voice, to stand up against de-democratization. It means conceiving of and
> enhancing highly visible and effective actions of resistance. It also means
> proposing and developing projects that address both crucial short-term
> problems such as job creation and welfare reform and long-term issues such
> as environmental and economic sustainability. These two threads of action
> should interact and support each other, resulting in a dynamic proactive
> resistance.
>
> 3. Beyond expressing and sharing our concern, this letter aspires to help
> catalyze discussions and initiatives that we know are already happening in
> the design community. We believe that it is important that these
> discussions and initiatives have more visibility and state clearly how the
> design community, with its richness and diversity, is standing up and
> taking a stance in these troubled times.
>
> To contribute to this effort, we are sending this letter to friends and
> colleagues who play different, relevant roles in the design community
> including design associations, design schools, research centers, design
> publications and media, and design-related cultural institutions. Our
> proposal to the community is that its members consider our open letter, and
> if they agree with its spirit, act in three ways:
>
> - write a personal statement of less than 500 words
> - make it public and circulate it in their networks
> - organize an event in the next few months
>
> The two of us are committed to collecting these statements and the
> information related to these events and to trying to find a way to give
> them visibility. How this last step will happen is still an open question.
> It will depend on how this letter is received and what new energies it
> generates. We hope that it will stimulate designers to stand up and fight
> for democratization in their own communities and throughout the world.
>
> Ezio Manzini and Victor Margolin
> Chicago, 5 March 2017
>
> Please, send your feedback to: [log in to unmask]
>
> -end snip-
>
>
>
>
> Anderson, E. (2006). The Epistemology of Democracy. Episteme: A Journal of
> Social Epistemology, 3(1), 8-22.
> Bohman, J. (1997). Deliberative Democracy and Effective Social Freedom:
> Capabilities, Resources, and Opportunities. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.),
> Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics: MIT Press.
> Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective
> Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many: Princeton University Press.
> Landemore, H., & Page, S. E. (2014). Deliberation and disagreement:
> Problem solving, prediction, and positive dissensus. Politics, Philosophy
> and Economics, 14(3), 229-254.
> Mackie, G. (2003). Democracy Defended: Cambridge University Press.
> Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an
> argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(02), 57-74.
> Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2017). The Enigma of Reason: Harvard
> University Press.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|