In reply to Martin Salisbury:
" My answer would be 'no'. In my humble opinion, most intelligent impartial observers would be very surprised by a definition of 'design' or 'designer' that did not include reference to aesthetics.," wrote Martin.
Indeed. This is what I have been driving at and also what bothers me about Simon´s definition.
David Pye´s lovely book "The nature and aesthetics of design" has this (page 75 of the 1978 edition, Herbert Press):
"The fact that compromise is inevitable in so many kinds of design has led theorists to classify design as a 'problem-solving activity', as though it were nothing more than that. It is a partial and inadequate view..... Design is not all a matter of problem-solving, neither is it all a matter of art. It is both..."
As summer reading, I heartily recommend David Pye´s lucid writing. He wrote before it was common to pepper so much text with references (Jones & Smyth, 1999; Rutland et al. 2017).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|