Actually, as time goes on, we may reflect that the spirals of abstraction
are very much needed.
I receive regularly a lot of industry literature about design and the
factory workplace, electronic digest and so on.
They cannot be read, the stuff is so boring - a real waste of paper really.
It would be better as spam. If this list became too concrete, it might go
the same way - and in the end - the list is not for practitioners to air
laundry - it is for folk supervising and researching a Doctorate of
Philosophy.
Looking at a design list confirms the first point:
http://www.core77.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=General+Design+Discussion&number=1&DaysPrune=45&LastLogin
=
Personally speaking, as time has gone on there has been a slow realisation
that a lot of design research theory 'appears' (ahem - excuse me) to rest
on the work of several psychologist/ philosophists from this century. There
is a lot of discussion about a central body of knowledge. How we understand
the mind to operate (or exist) seems to provide the foundation for how we
'go about the act of design'. (whatever that might be). Much of this core
knowledge exists as abstraction, or as was mentioned earlier - soft
science. It is also founded on work that makes inferences - with little in
the way of concrete evidence to speak of.
Speaking as a practitioner, it is very difficult to make the leap into
being able to discuss and argue - with any validity - on such interesting
stuff. But, it is very interesting nonetheless - if somewhat opaque. Yes,
there must be a jealousy of theory that most designers feel when perusing
the posts on this list. But as designers - we have to accept we can't have
everything.
However, what worries me, is that this very foundation may be unsettled by
some later fundamental discovery in the theories of gestalt. Is the list
helping to create a house of cards? The discovery in the next century that
design is say only a mutant form of survival instinct just might tear it
all down. Coming across the aquatic ape theory recently, helped foster this
concern. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5168/aat/leaflet.html
Instead of a vertical and great tower of knowledge - maybe a few earthquake
proof two storey dwellings would suffice?
The bedrock of a few 'connected' cases might serve to tie down the house,
and in that manner, abstraction can flourish.
Aren't researchers allowed to 'blue sky' also?
Glenn Johnson
Industrial Design Manager
Industrial Design Studio, B/E Aerospace Inc.
1455 Fairchild Rd. Winston-Salem NC 27105-4588 USA
Tel. (1) 336 744 3143 Fax. (1) 336 744 6934
http://www.beaerospace.com/
|