Gunner wrote:
> Are you saying that a term having been used in one context precludes its use by others in other contexts?
Not at all. What I’m saying is that within the context of Gibson’s theory, affordances make sense and are useful
In the design context, you are left with having to explain something not covered by the term affordances and that rather defeats the point of using the term; you still have to explain in some other way the problem you started with, you’ve just added another term to your vocabulary.
I think Keith explains it rather well. A handle is a case in point. We have created rules about things we find useful. I know how to use a hammer because of its handle. I can quickly apply that to learning how to use an axe. But I need to apply a different though similar type of rule to using a chisel.
> the handle on a beer mug seemingly inviting grasping it to pick up the mug.
Handles do not issue invitations. We recognise the handle as a means of grasping hold of something because we have done it with other handle like things before.
The notion of rules is more useful in design than affordances because affordances requires you to focus on the characteristic of the thing, itself. As if the meaning of something we use is inherent in the object itself. Rules are things—ways of doing, ways of thinking, that we apply to a number of things. Rules are malleable and we can change them. To me this is better way of trying to understand what people do in the world—a mutable constantly changing world to which we continually attach new ways of relating to that world.
Thus we attach certain meanings to objects with certain characteristics. Architecural ornamentation is an example of retaining features of objects which have long since lost their function and original meaning, but none the less work in orientating us to our surroundings.
I have just read Keith’s excellent post. I shall say no more on this subject.
David
--
blog: http://communication.org.au/blo <http://communication.org.au/blo>g/
web: http://communication.org.au <http://communication.org.au/>
Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
CEO • Communication Research Institute •
• helping people communicate with people •
Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
Phone: +61 (03) 9005 5903
Skype: davidsless
60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068
> On 17 Nov. 2016, at 11:31 am, Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 16, 2016, at 7:14 PM, David Sless <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Rather than being a useful technical term in design, it is almost always misused and leaves unanswered the question of how object or features in the environment can have meaning for people, how they acquire that meaning, and how that meaning can change. To answer these question requires a theory of meaning. When applied by designers, the term ‘affordances’ lacks all the specificity that would make it ’technically’ useful for designers. In our own work, we have found it much more useful to think in terms of rules, but, that’s another story:
>
> David,
>
> Are you saying that a term having been used in one context precludes its use by others in other contexts?
>
> I’m also not understanding why the term can’t be useful ("technically" or otherwise) to designers even without a theory of meaning.
>
> I also am not sure what you mean by thinking in terms of rules being more useful. A classic example of an affordance as the term is generally used in design is the handle on a beer mug seemingly inviting grasping it to pick up the mug. How would that be described in terms of rules?
>
>
> Gunnar
>
> Gunnar Swanson
> East Carolina University
> graphic design program
>
> http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Gunnar Swanson Design Office
> 1901 East 6th Street
> Greenville NC 27858
> USA
>
> http://www.gunnarswanson.com
> [log in to unmask]
> +1 252 258-7006
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
