Dear Mikhal,
Please could you say more about the idea of 'fields' as you see them. To date I've understood the idea of a 'field' mainly in terms of the 'content' of knowledge and practices used by people who profess to be in particular fields. In this sense, mechanical engineering is a field, whereas science is a conceptually different category: an approach to acquiring knowledge, which might be the content of various different fields.
I suspect you mean something very different in your concept of a 'field' that looks useful. I'd like to know more.
Best wishes,
Terry
____________________
Terence Love, PhD
Tel/Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629 (home office)
[log in to unmask]
____________________
-----Original Message-----
From: dr.popowsky
Sent: 20/11/2005 3:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Distinguishing design from art-and-design
Dear Ken Friedman
The actual subject of discussion seems to me very important and even crucial for those who ask themselves what design is. It is in that context that I want to add that - the formulation or/ and the concepts used are not always clear to me.
I quote and stress
1." They distinguish between THREE traditions, [1] design, [2] science, and [3] art. The design tradition as they describe it is distinct from the art-and-design tradition practiced in art-and-design schools."
Tradition is certainly an important word/concept .As I understand it- it implies that design as historical foundations. It also implies that design has historical ways of teaching . However- thinking in terms of present time- would not the word "field" be more fit? Adopting the concept/word " field" would lead to the fact that [1] design, [2] science, and [3] art would be considered as different fields leading to questions such as- how do these fields relate to one another? what common zones do they share? what impact do common zones sharing have on the field of design itself?
As I see it- the concept of "field" would lead to define "design" not in terms of "art-design" or "art-and-design" but, in terms of fields exchange processes. ( wherein one would find more than the field of art and the field of science.)
More- the concept of "design" translated into "the field of design" , we would have to accept the fact that "the field of design" is defined by its ability to transfer, transform, integrate, adapt, share or /and reject - systems, laws, items coming from or pertaining to other fields.
In any case, the idea of "field of design" would prevent small scale definitions. It would also prevent feelings leading to - I quote- : " If you conflate all design to art-and-design, then you might as well say that most of us are "outside design."."
Mikhal Popowsky
|