Folks,
I think it is by no means an accident that we are trying to understand
the relationship between thought and action in the context of design
today. And it is not surprising that we have not settled on a single
view of this issue--simple or complex. In 20th century philosophy, the
relationship of thought and action is one of the central problems of
debate. In fact, philosophers as diverse as John Dewey and Bertrand
Russell--to name only two--regard this as the central problem of our
time. Dewey went so far as to identify this as the central metaphysical
problem of our time. And he remarks:
"There is then need of some theory on this matter. If we are forbidden
to call this theory philosophy by the self-denying ordinance which
restricts it to formal logic, need for a theory under some other name
remains."
What interests me at the moment is not a single solution of the
relationship but the diversity of ideas about what the relationship may
be and how each of our ideas allows us to think and act in particular
way.
In other words, a single universally accepted solution is rather
unlikely in a world of such diversity as we see around us. What we may
hope for is better understanding of the options that are available to
us--with a strong commitment to leaving space within our own personal
solutions for other views. Without leaving space for others, we have
only dogmatism and the dangers that follow from that in power structures
formed around "the truth." I think this has practical as well as
intellectual significance for design in the next century. It would, I
think, make of design a cultural art rather than a narrow political art
of power.
Just some thoughts on which we may act.
Dick
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|