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: Roots of theories about designing

From:

Tim Smithers <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Tim Smithers <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:12:41 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (176 lines)

Preface: Thanks to Ken for clarifying the role and nature
of the phd-design list---very useful---and to Dick for also
confirming that this thread is in the right place.

Warning: Sorry, this too is a bit long. About 170 lines.

Dear Terry,

Thank you for your thoughtful and thought provoking reply.
To continue with just two things, you say that

   "... My take on this is to regard designing as the
    core activity of addressing non-routine situations."

I like this.  I think it fits with the concise
characterisation of designing I use to tell people (in as
few words as possible) what I'm interested in.  It goes
like this:

   We design things when there is a need or a desire for
   some part or aspect of our world to be different, and
   we cannot immediately specify how it should or could
   be changed.

Which I could shorten to:

   We design things when there is a need or a desire for
   some part or aspect of our world to be different in a
   non-routine situation.

Further on, you say:

   "... The difference between our perspectives is between
   'knowledge as object' and 'knowledge as an a human
   activity/state'. Your model utilises 'knowledge as a
   capacity or potential for rational action' (an object).
   My approach takes knowledge as a dynamically evolving
   activity existing in a uniquely individualised  biological
   process that includes reflexively related cognitive and
   feeling sub-processes."

Actually, I don't think that there is this difference
between us, though I agree that it can, and perhaps does,
look like there is.

I am quite sure that for Newell and Simon, knowledge at the
Knowledge Level is to be thought of and treated as an
objective concept: knowledge is something agents have but
which can properly be treated as having an independent and
externalised existence. This is also the predominant view
in AI and Knowledge Engineering, and to a lesser extent in
some quarters of Knowledge Management: people or agents are
necessary as the carriers of knowledge, but their knowldge can 
be treated separately from them. 

Thus knowledge, for these people is (was, in the case of Newell) 
like the concept of energy.  You cannot have any energy, in any 
of its forms, chemical, electrical, heat, or mechanical energy, etc. 
without some physical source, but we can and do theorise about 
energy, without having to include any theory of the physical 
processes that can provide a source of energy.

However---and I realise that this is a bold thing to say---I think it 
is a category mistake to understand knowledge in this way,  
even knowledge conceived of as a capacity or potential for 
rational action, as we have it from Newell and Simon.

I hope Klaus won't mind me borrowing his phrase "any
understanding is always someone's understanding"
(Krippendorff, 1997) to say that any knowing is always the
knowing of someone, or of some particular agent or agency.
Furthermore, any talk of that knowing must come from the
agent that is the knower: it must be subjective talk.  It
cannot come from some other agent. That would be an agent
talking of the knowledge it has of the knowing of another
agent, or second-order first-person talk of some
first-order first-person knowing, to use Sid Newton's
terms.  In other words, any knowing must be in the
'head/body' of an agent, and any knowing inside the
'head/body' of one agent is not directly accessible to any
other agent.  One agent can come to know of the knowing of
another agent through observation and/or communication,
but this is a different knowing; a second-order knowing,
again to borrow form Klaus.

So, to summaries, the concept of knowledge we have is a
proper abstract notion, but the knowing it refers to is
always a subjective matter.

How, and to finally get to the cause of the category
mistake, we often form representations or models of
knowledge. Indeed we must do so in order to communicate it
or about it.  Modeling knowledge is central to modern
Knowledge Engineering methods, and building computable
representations is what knowledge-based systems technology
is all about.  Building a model or representation of some
knowing involves, on the part of the agent doing the
modeling, reflection and externalisation.  Notice that an
agent can only reflect upon and externalise its own
knowing.  An agent cannot reflect upon or externalise the
knowing of some other agent.  Most often of course, we are
interested in modeling or externalising the knowledge of
some other agent or agency, but doing this necessarily
requires obtaining a knowledge of the knowing of the other
agent first. It is this second-order knowledge of the
knowing of the other agent that is then modelled. The
knowing of the other agent is not modelled or represented
directly.

Externalised models and representations of knowledge are of
course objects, things that any and all other agents can
access, at least in principle.  The category mistake is to
think that because models and representations of knowledge
are objects and objective, then the knowing that they are
models or representations of is an too.

The process of obtaining knowledge of the knowing of
another agent, is what is called knowledge acquisition,
and we often see this described and talked about as some
kind of transfer process, of the knowing of the expert to
the knowledge engineer who does the modeling.  This is
knowing as an object talk and an example of the category
mistake in action.

It is quite easy to see that the reality is not like this
because any knowledge modeling always changes the knowing
of the agent whose knowledge is (supposedly) being
modelled. In other words, if agent X obtains, by
communication with agent Y, say, knowledge of some knowing
of agent Y, and agent X then forms a model of its
(second-order) knowledge of what agent Y knows, which
agent X then presents to agent Y, to see if agent Y
approves of it as a model of its knowing, agent Y ends up
knowing something else, which, in turn means that what
agent Y now knows is not quite captured in the model. This
process is not one that typically converges, so going
round the loop several times does not necessarily result
in a situation in which agent Y gains no new knowledge as
a result of being presented with the new model.

So, again, to summamrise, models and representations of
knowledge are objective constructions, but the knowing they
model or represent is not.  The knowing is and remains a
subjective aspect of the agents that do the knowing.  This
is, as I am sure you fully appreciate, quite different
from the situation we, as scientists or technically
educated people, are used to, where our objective models
and representations are of objective things in the world.

I should stop here to see what you, and others, make of
this.  I would simply add, however that this critique and
the idea that knowing is and can only be a subjective
aspect of agents is being swept away by the rush to
establish the knowledge economy, to manage knowledge as an
asset, to engineer knowledge systems, etc.

Agur,

Tim
CEIT, Donostia / San Sebastián


Reference

Klaus Kkrippendorff, 1997. Human-Centeredness: A paradigm
shift invoked by the emerging cyberspaces, Annenberg
School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania.
[http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/krippendorff/CENTEREDNESS.html]






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

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
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

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

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