Hi Terry, João, Arjun, David,
First of all let me clarify that I don’t believe that Noah Webster was thinking about prototypes when he mentioned medals. I believe that he was mentioning precisely a drawing before even a prototype. That’s why he writes: "The idea or scheme”.
Also I must clarify that was not saying that all first ideas are aesthetical.
What I was saying was that a first idea externalized (in Webster’s days by a “drawing", "a scheme", "a sketch" or "general view") has a value that can not be much more than aesthetic due to its almost immateriality. It’s Ethical endeavour starts right after its formalization.
Finally, I don’t think that "almost everyone on this list is using the term aesthetic in its recent sense to mean beauty”. The level of education on this list indicates a rather more elaborated comprehension of the term aesthetics. Which may differ from people to people but it is way more complex than simply beauty.
Having this in mind, I think that the most promising meaning of Design in 1828, and still relevant to us was:
“ 6. In music, the invention and conduct of the subject; the disposition of every part, and the general order of the whole.”
What a Beautiful metaphor for today ! (I’m saying Beautiful on purpose)
warm regards,
Eduardo CR
> No dia 30/05/2019, às 11:59, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> escreveu:
>
> Hi Eduardo,
>
> Yes, I'm assuming that the 'first idea' is only a part of the activity of designing.
>
> A question. What is there to suggest that any idea or first thought is intrinsically and essentially aesthetical?
>
> I suggest many 'first thoughts' are not essentially aesthetic and some first thoughts have no aesthetic dimension at all - unless you are using the words to mean something different?
>
> I'd like to see the argument for your claim that first thoughts are in their 'firstness, aesthetical by nature'. This is not at all obvious to me nor does it align with any theory of cognition I'm aware of. It is the equivalent of saying that all first thoughts are functional in nature, which I would also have problems with . Again unless you are using the words differently?
>
> I'm aware of the original meaning of 'aesthetic' as only referring to perception via feelings. This was before the Art marketers got hold of the term and perverted it into only meaning beauty.
>
> I'm happy to decide to use the term aesthetic in either way, but I suggest one can't have both at the same time as they are contradictory. Also I suspect that almost everyone on this list is using the term aesthetic in its recent sense to mean beauty.
>
> Warm regards,
> Terry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of eduardocorte-real_iade
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2019 6:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: A definition of design must also exclude as well as include
>
> Hi Terry again,
> I would prefer that you had choose the 5th meaning "In manufactories, the figures with which workmen enrich their stuffs, copied from painting or draughts. “ By the way, the first meaning from the same 1828 dictionary (almost 200 years ago) was:
> "1. A plan or representation of a thing by an outline; sketch; general view; first idea represented by visible lines; as in painting or architecture.”
>
> What seems to be separating us is, first, this “first idea”.
> What you appear to stand for in your “overall activity of designing” is precisely what comes after the “first idea”.
> For me, this “outlined” first idea lacks the materiality of its future implementation, development and production. It is, by its nature, purely aesthetically perceived because its absence of materiality. Your prototyping example is a step further away from this first idea. So, a step further away from the essence of design (It can be made by another person than the one that had the idea and externalized it). So, if we assume that design is an intellectual activity, we must assume that the first externalized idea is closer to design as an intelectual activity and thus, in its firstsness, aesthetical by nature. And this, Arjun, by the way, in my opinion, is going to the core of the questions that allowed design spread throughout so many activities (all intelectual).
>
> Terry wrote:
>
>>
>> What I was suggesting is that it is really useful to get a clearer research understanding of all the details of the design activity (especially when one is exploring the details of design cognition and automation).
>>
>> To do this, I propose it is helpful in research and theory making terms to view the aesthetic activities as epistemologically distinct from the overall activity of designing (still with the idea that aesthetics are a part of designing) and avoid blurring 'designing and aesthetics' into a single muddy conceptual hole.
>
> So, it looks like a bit different from " I'm seriously arguing that aesthetics is NOT part of design.”
> And since you reason "still with the idea that aesthetics are a part of designing”, I might agree with you in "avoid blurring 'designing and aesthetics' into a single muddy conceptual hole" if the research and theory on design would leave out the elements that can not, by any means, be epistemologically connected with aesthetics.
>
> so, in the end, I agree with you.
>
> warm regards,
>
> Eduardo Corte-Real
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|