Dear Ken,
A hasty note from China, where we are winding down on an absolutely fabulous visit. From my viewpoint, evolutionary systems thinking has the potential to embrace both reason and intuition, as they both exhibit a potential to change and also exhibit patterns over time at both the personal and societal levels. I have set myself the task of mapping out the field of evolutionary systems thinking (particularly as it relates to design) more fully during the rest of my long-service leave, so I shall hopefully be able to give you a more thoughtful elaboration of the above claim during the coming months!
Very best,
John
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, September 19, 2004 8:18 am
Subject: Educated intuition
> Dear Rob and Terry,
>
> For me, the point of design research is to find ways to subject
> different processes and issues to analytical inquiry from several
> directions. The challenge of reflective practice involves bringing
> assumptions forward.
>
> In one of his notes on integration, Peter quoted John Chris Jones's
> statement, "If reason comes first and intuition second, then
> intuition declines to come."
>
> While this may not be the case in every instance, it does point to
> the value of linking intuition and reason for good results in all
> areas of practice, both the professional practice of design and the
> practice of research.
>
> IMHO, we could go a long way to reducing the failure rate of designed
> artifacts and services if designers were to practice reasoned inquiry
> as well as seeking intuitive global optimized solutions. The point of
> adding design research and training to design education is giving
> today's students the skills they need for better professional
> practice as designers. Traditional design education has always been
> strong on craft, form skills, and intuition. The missing issues
> include work in such fields as systems thinking. One must be able to
> work with systems to generate an optimized global solution. That, in
> turn, requires logical, analytical, and rhetorical skills.
>
> The greatest single twentieth-century example of an optimized global
> solution would probably be Einstein's two theories of relativity, the
> special theory and the general theory. Einstein developed his
> theories using intuition. Einstein's intuition was an educated
> physical intuition based on prior advances in physics, and a deep
> classical understanding of how particles, objects, systems, and
> fields behave in physical terms. Once Einstein developed an intuitive
> insight, he subjected his insight to a series of rigorous tests and
> critical procedures.
>
> Designed systems and artifacts more often resemble biological
> entities, evolutionary systems, or non-linear physical systems than
> the linear physical systems of classical physics or even relativistic
> physics. Even so, the rigorous inquiry involved in systems thinking,
> evolutionary biology, or complexity theory is a step that moves far
> beyond pure intuition.
>
> It is difficult to find only one solution to all problems in an
> optimized global solution if your only resource is intuition. This
> explains the extraordinarily high failure rate of design projects.
>
> In this sense, Terry raises significant issues.
>
> Educated intuition is the product of many kinds of experience.
> Einstein felt that one important foundation for his mastery of
> intuitive physics was his early experience mastering the principles
> of Euclidean geometry. It is my view that analysis, rhetoric, and
> logic can play a similar role in helping designers to educate their
> intuition to the point that intuition leads to the optimized global
> solutions we require for effective products and services.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ken
>
>
> Terry Love wrote:
>
> >"It's serious question to ask why designers conflate the TWO
> questions>(or answers) into ONE ? It seems that designers do this
> automatically,>consistently and without any awareness that they
> have done so or that
> >it might be analytically flawed. What are the underlying reasons?
> >Habit? Lack of clear thinking skills? Lack of perception? Reading
> >problems? "
>
> Rob Curedale wrote:
>
> >"I am not familiar with the details of your study but could this
> >difference show that design is about optimizing many unrelated
> variables>to find an optimized global solution rather than
> following a strictly
> >logical path of serial yes/no answers? For a designer the answer
> is a
> >red hammer not a color and a hammer because there is little logical
> >connection between the seperate inputs to a design problem such
> as cost,
> >color, usability but the designer must somehow unconciously find only
> >one solution to all problems."
>
>
> --
>
> Professor Ken Friedman
> Department of Leadership and Organization
> Norwegian School of Management
>
> Design Research Center
> Denmark's Design School
>
> +47 67.55.73.23 Tlf NSM
> +47 33.40.10.95 Tlf Privat
>
> email: [log in to unmask]
>
UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F
DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not
read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If
you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority,
states them to be the views the University of Technology Sydney. Before
opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.
