JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  2000

PHD-DESIGN 2000

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Lubomir Popov, Ph.D.

From:

"Lubomir S. Popov" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 21 Apr 2000 17:36:11 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (144 lines)


Dear all,

I have to reply to several points.

First, and most important, I made a linguistic mistake using the German
word Mögen instead of Können in the sense of "being able to do". The reason
that I used a German word is that I used before that a term in German (Die
Wissenschaften) so that I can imply an association with
"Kulturwissenschaften," a term that I don't know to have an equivalent in
English. In the context of my thesis, "Kulturwissenschaften" was much more
appropriate than "Humanities," because it implies the status of science for
research in the areas of theory of art and design, rather than non-science.
There was also an implicit intention to refer to the German tradition in
philosophy of science and praxis.

Second, I thank Oliver for his open remarks. However, I already announced
that I surrender and I will back off. If most of the people don't want to
hear what I am talking about, this means this discussion is not a place for
me. I also thank Oliver for helping me understand the gap between
designers, even designers that say they make research, and researchers
trained in the conventional philosophy and science traditions. Designers
want to play the research game in their own way. Let them do what ever they
want, and let them name it as they want. However, I object that they abuse
terms (research, Ph.D.) already appropriated by conventional
sciences/disciplines. 

Designers are great. They are colorful even when they make research. They
are so amazing when they do research for their own enrichment (see Oliver's
message below). It is interesting that they understand well that when they
are doing research they go beyond their area (of competence) and enter into
non-design domains. >What Lubomir Popov, Ph.D doesn't seem to understand is
that a PhD written
>by a designer is not limited to his/her discipline. My own research has
>little to do with my practical work in graphic design (my discipline). It
>has more to do with philosophy, semiotics, psychology, marketing and
>statistics. <

However, at the same time designers want to do it in their own way, totally
disregarding the traditions of the fields they are entering. In most cases
this doesn't bring new refreshing perspectives, but irresponsible
contamination. Don't tell me that little kids are the most creative people
in the world when they start inventing words and making fingerpainting.

>But the whole exercise as largely enriched my practical work
>and my understanding of underlying cognitive and creative processes.<

Good, but this is not like making Ph.D. research. However, I don't see a
problem if advanced design research is referred to as Doctoral Design
Research or what ever other terms that indicate the distinctions between
the doctoral studies in philosophy and traditional sciences, and doctoral
studies in technical sciences. In many countries the doctoral title is
followed by the name of a scientific discipline so that people understand
what kind of research they should expect from that person. If I were a
doctor of architecture, scientists would expect and can tolerate different
standards for research -- much more relaxed, more discriptive, more
evaluative/critical, and more subjective and interpretative. Doctorates of
technical sciences are different than doctorates in philosophy. Engineers
have to invent a device. That is a must. Then they have to explicate their
path to the invention, including the use of scientific information and
making their own "engineering experiments" and processing experimental date
with statistical aparatus. Then they write a problem statement chapter, a
literature review chapter, a methodological chapter, a theoretical chapter
(where they explain theoretically the natural principles they have used in
order to invent/design their device), a chapter with test results, etc.

For a philosopher this is not research, this is a technical invention. And
a philosopher will respect the genius of the inventor and his/her work, and
will accept that as far as that person is awarded the degree "Doctor of
Technical Sciences/Engineering" everything is OK. But a philosopher will be
greatly confused if our inventor asks for a Doctor of Philosophy degree by
presenting a technical invention and 37 patents for it. 

If I fought to promote a particular way of thinking it was because I
believed that I am talking to researchers. Now I understand what is design
research and the design research mentality. It is not that different from
design. I can relate to designers with the help of my second self, who is a
designer by education and practice. I regret I pushed the community to the
limits, but believe me, I didn't know the limits of the community until
that moment. 

As I already announced, I back off. No need to torment my colleagues with
abstract phrases and academic labeling. I can speak in plain language.
However, abstract language and terms (labels) have a number of positive
functions. Abstract language allows people to think about phenomena that
have no real and material representation. Abstract language allows us to
create concepts and to operate with them, thus creating connections between
essences rather than formal features. The essences are at the heart of
science, while the form is at the heart of design.

Terms are conventions specific for a specific discipline or domain. They
help us communicate quickly, without long explanations. Terms make the
jargon of each discipline. That's why designers get frustrated when someone
uses the jargon of Philosophy of Science or other disciplines. 

I wish everybody a Happy Easter Weekend and success in design!

Friendly,

Lubomir Popov (no need of PH.D.)

PS By the way, this list is much more interesting than IDFORUM and the talk
is much more research-like. However, if you know a list in
philosophy/sociology of design/technology, please inform me. I will
appreciate it greatly. I am eager to learn a lot.


At 04:11 PM 4/21/2000 +0100, Oliver Haas wrote:
>Dear all
>
>I have noticed that since Lubomir Popov, Ph.D wrote his lengthy attack on
>designers who write PhDs it has become very quite on this mailbase site.
>
>Don't let yourselves be intimidated by the opinion of one. PhDs in Design
>and PhDs in any area written by Designers can be a very welcome, useful and
>insightful thing.
>
>What Lubomir Popov, Ph.D doesn't seem to understand is that a PhD written
>by a designer is not limited to his/her discipline. My own research has
>little to do with my practical work in graphic design (my discipline). It
>has more to do with philosophy, semiotics, psychology, marketing and
>statistics. But the whole exercise as largely enriched my practical work
>and my understanding of underlying cognitive and creative processes.
>
>And this is what it is about: increasing understanding, your own or that of
>others. So don't let yourselves be put off by somebody who seems more
>interested in academic labelling and obscuring understanding ('Mögen', by
>the way, does not mean 'to be able to do it' but 'to like'. 'Vermögen' is
>an oldfashioned German word meaning 'ability' but is today largely used to
>mean 'wealth'. I don't understand how the use of German, even if used
>correcly, could have helped his point).
>
>I hope it will become a little livelier again.
>
>Oliver
>
>
>




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager