Dear Arjun:
I can´t disagree that some of the methods used by designers have become widespread in society. However, the position I take is that much of this is managerial problem-solving or some form of facilitation. Much of this deals with pressing and serious social problems so it´s worth inquiring into. My contention is that the aesthetic requirement allows us to set up some kind of a boundary between the worthwhile things done inside the boundary and the worthwhile things beyond it. "Design is something bigger and more versatile than we previously believed".
Designers found more ways than pencils to solve design problems; some of those methods are useful outside design; the deployment of those
new methods does not make what is done with them "design".
oOo
"I’m always excited to see the Definition of Design topic rekindled on this list, and then I’m always disappointed in the subsequent discussion. The practice of design and its role in society is changing rapidly. Designerly modes of working have been exported to nearly every domain and sector of society, and designers are increasingly working way beyond the traditional boundaries of the profession, shaping complex intangible things like policy, services, strategy, culture, systems, social change, etc.
Faced with these changes, I hoped we would jettison the old artifact-centric and aesthetic-based definitions of design. They once felt a comfy fit, but they simply do not have the explanatory power to account for the today’s emerging landscape. As scholars, this should excite and motivate us. Design is something much bigger and more versatile than we previously believed. We should be digging deeper, rethinking core assumptions. "
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|