 |
 |
terry, i know what a theory is. in a nutshell: * it needs to explain a set of specific observable phenomena * it is concerned with phenomena that can be observed repeatedly * it needs to be general, i.e., one should be able to extrapolate it to phenomena not yet observed -- able to predict, to explain phenomena in advance of observing them * it is stated from the position of an outside observer, etymologically a spectator * it needs to be inter-subjectively falsifiable, i.e., by agreement among multiple observers on available evidence, which also means that a theory must be understandable by observers i am sure there are more conditions. to me design means introducing innovations which, by definition, may rely on existing phenomena (technology, materials, and practices) but proposes something fundamentally new, something that could not grow on trees, so to speak. there are all kinds of teachable practices that can lead to innovations. but they are actionable strategies, not theories constructed to explain observations. you claim to know mathematical models of complex system (i know some as well) that could explain design activities (the emergence of novel technologies and practices, including revolutions). please give us a hint of how they look like and what they entail beyond merely claiming that you are in possession of them. klaus -----Original Message----- From: Terence Love [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 2:52 AM To: Klaus Krippendorff; 'PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design' Subject: RE: design theory Hi Klaus, Thanks for your message. Not a rhetorical game. I'm cautious and exact about using the term 'design theory' and wanted to know your way of using the term so I could align my answer to your thinking. I'll answer without locating in design theory. Best regards, Terry -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Klaus Krippendorff Sent: Sunday, 7 December 2014 3:08 PM To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; 'PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design' Subject: RE: design theory terry, i asked you to give me an example of a design theory which you talk of as having to be predictive. instead of stating one (or at least a few propositions of one), or stating what it is to predict, you refer to "predictive modelling methods" in the abstract and talk of "responsibilities and creative design activity that comes with using better predictive methods." This is a far cry from giving me at least a hint of an answer to what i had hoped you learn of how a design theory looks like. i just don't know what it should predict: responsibility? creative actions? how to solve problems? change the world? then you ask me to "detailed for (you) what (i) regard as a design theory, and what are the characteristics of the boundaries of the concept of 'design theory' (in general) that differentiate design theories from other forms of theories" i happen not to talk of design theory, i do not have any. i have insights in what it means to design, what is important and what is less so, but i would not frame these experiences in terms of design theory and would not have asked you if i knew how you conceptualize design theory. in effect, you now asked me to answer the question i posed to you. i was not playing rhetorical games. klaus ----Original Message----- From: Terence Love [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 12:57 AM To: Klaus Krippendorff; 'PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design' Subject: RE: design theory Hi Klaus, You asked me to ' give us an example of a predictive "design theory"' I've described my response to this in detail at other times. In essence, I refer to predictive modelling methods for complex socio-technical design situations and their use in design process, and the changes in roles, responsibilities and creative design activity that comes with using better predictive methods. You seem to be somehow collating this into a 'predictive design theory', but that's not how I see it. Rather, implicit in it is the idea that the current way of thinking about design theories is limiting, and part of the problem. For the remainder of today, I need to travel and work. I'll reply more fully tomorrow. In the meantime, it would help if you detailed for me what you regard as a design theory, and what are the characteristics of the boundaries of the concept of 'design theory' (in general) that differentiate design theories from other forms of theories. Best wishes, Terry --- Dr Terence Love PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI Director, Love Services Pty Ltd PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks Western Australia 6030 Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848 Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> -- -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Klaus Krippendorff Sent: Sunday, 7 December 2014 12:07 PM To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subject: design theory terry, i've read your response to my question to you to give us an example of a predictive "design theory" which you and ken are advocating. i've read it on my cell phone and wanted to answer on my computer but can't find it on either device. part of your message complains of feeling attacked. this is far from my intention. i was aware that i posed a challenging question whose answer would clarify what you had in mind regarding design. i had asked you because i have the feeling you are subscribing to a notion of theory taken literally from the natural sciences in which predictions is the currency of publishable success. when you refer to theories you have a tendency to talk about generalities, including what constituted evidence, etc. i was more interested in design as a communication scholar i am dealing with theories of human communication all the time, with conceptions of dialogue, with the relationship between speech acts and what they accomplish, with models of influence, with issues of power, submission, and liberation. such theories then to be propositional, occasionally based on mathematical formulations, for example, limits on communication in information theoretical terms. although i have proposed some theoretical propositions on design, but they do not reach the requirement of the kind of predictive specificity you seem to impose. so, i just want to read an example of a valid design theory - not assertions of requirements for one, such as that they should be evidence based, predictive, general, useful for designers, etc. i think this simple question deserves an answer from a vocal proponent of design theory. klaus ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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 -----------------------------------------------------------------