Dear Terry,

In my reply I will argue for the impossibility of separating aesthetics
from design.

In short, Aesthetics is a branch of Philosophy concerned with the study of
the principles behind the nature and appreciation of *beauty*.

I care not for the discussion if Beauty is found in things or in people (in
the eye of the beholder); I do not have the philosophical tools to settle
that dispute, let us just agree that beauty is a phenomena that exists
somewhere in the process of people interacting with things. If you grant me
that point, and for the sake of brevity, I will refer to beauty as a
property of things.

So, let's take beauty as a property of things like love is a property of a
father-son relationship. There are many aspects to a father-son
relationship, like there are many aspects to the manufacturing of a medal.

There are numerous practical/functional tasks a father must do in the
unfolding of a father-son relationship. Diaper changing, for instance, is
something a father does with (dramatically) differing degrees of delicacy
and effectiveness. In fact, the same action could probably be conducted
with much higher degrees of effectiveness and delicacy by the son's
caretaker in daycare (I'm drawing the example from personal experience), in
practical terms the caretaker is faster, more delicate (in terms of
softness of touch and economy of movement) which means she is functionally
more efective than the kid's father.

So, notice how on both occasions the diaper was changed, therefore altering
the present situation into a preferred one. But there is an essential
difference between the two actions; the father's diaper-changing is
animated by that complex combination of emergence of meaning, care,
responsibility towards others, happiness, poignancy, fear of death, and
melancholy we call *love*. (Of course, a caretaker may develop intense and
caring relationships — most often do — with the children under their care,
but paternal or maternal love is something else entirely).

It would be hard to argue that there isn't something universally moving
about paternal our maternal *love-in-action*. Love cannot be extracted from
the mundane comings and goings of everyday life because any father's action
towards his son is ignited by the fire of paternal love. Likewise, you
cannot extract beauty from the Parthenon and place it under the microscope
for analysis — beauty is a part of the Greek temple like irony is a
constituent of wit. If you wanted to design a witticism would you be able
to separate astute observation, from irony and from humour?

Returning to fathers and sons. We cannot separate love from all other
dimensions of a father-son relationship, love pervades the relationship and
manifests itself over and over again in ways great and small. It is neither
manifested in a grand gesture not is it found only in the smaller ones.
Further, it cannot be added at the end of the *process* (like landing a
kiss on the forehead after the diaper is changed) love is either there
throughout or it is not.

Like beauty in design.

Of course, this raises a (ontological) problem, because love is both a
catalyst for and a property of a relationship. Be that as it may, how is
one to describe a father-son relationship without mentioning love?
(Sometimes, tragically, by referring to its absence).

Same goes for beauty and things.

Not quite a formal theory, I admit, but perhaps the beginnings of a
substantive one (Glaser & Strauss, 2017).

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). *Discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for qualitative research*. Routledge.

'best,

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:28 PM David Sless <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Hi Terry,
> I can only speak about the fields I know and work in which, as it happens,
> are all the field you mention, and the answer is most definitely yes.
>
> David
>
> --
>
> On 30/5/19, 7:51 pm, "PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD
> studies and related research in on behalf of Terence Love" <
> [log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Thank you for your message. I understand what you wrote and suggest
> that it is similar to what I was suggesting.
>
> Would you say that aesthetics is ALWAYS a NECESSARY part of all design
> activity across all the 800 or however many fields of design?
>
> For example when I produce software code architecture (designs for how
> something might be programmed), or business process optimisation designs
> it's not that obvious that aesthetics is a necessary part of the design
> activity at all.
>
> If in typesetting a magazine I'm managing the words to space-available
> aspects of news stories, its not obvious that this bit of design activity
> involves any aesthetics.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best regards,
> Terence
> ==
> Dr Terence Love,
> School of Design and Built Environment, Curtin University, Western
> Australia
> CEO, Design Out Crime and CPTED Centre
> PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> +61 (0)4 3497 5848
> ORCID 0000-0002-2436-7566
> ==
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
> related research in <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of David Sless
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2019 9:40 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: A definition of design must also exclude as well as
> include
>
> On 29/5/19, 7:37 pm, Terence Love" <[log in to unmask] on
> behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I'm seriously arguing that aesthetics is NOT part of design. That
> is It would be better if research definitions of design explicitly
> excluded aesthetics.
>
> I too must dissent from this provocative and unusual exclusion. But I
> do so from a pragmatic professional position. In information design we have
> created a suite of standards against which to measure the effectiveness of
> our work. These are analogous to engineering design standards but
> specifically designed for our field.
>
> Over half the standards are to do with avoiding the rubbish bin.
> Because there is so much information circulating in our society, most
> people have developed information avoidance strategies. We have to meet
> these information avoidance strategies head on and ensure that what we
> produce gets attention.
>
> Some of these standards are concerned with issues that are part of the
> range of things that come under the heading of aesthetics. If we neglect
> them, our work ends up in the real or virtual dustbin, making a
> contribution to landfill and digital waste which in turn lead to
> environmental pollution, energy wastage, loss of productivity, and
> increases in social inequity and disadvantage.
>
> I vote for keeping aesthetics in.
>
> BTW, if you want to look at our standards and why we have them go to:
>
> https://communication.org.au/standards-communication-information-design/
> https://communication.org.au/standards-getting-attention/
> https://communication.org.au/standards-engaging-people/
>
> David
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>


--
João Ferreira
REDES - Research & Education in Design
Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Arquitetura, CIAUD

00351 967 089 437

[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------