Sorry folks, my last message should have followed this one which was
rejected by PhD list for reasons I can't quite work out.
Chris
***************
Dr. Lauchlan A. K. Mackinnon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> can anyone sum up for me what is generally accepted to be the core of design
> philosophy / design thinking? (etc)
That's certainly a workable description of design practice (if not the
only one) but I don't think that would be my way of approaching the
topic of design thinking.
To inquire into the "core of design thinking" I would start with two
sources:
1. Horst Rittel's concept of the wicked problem (1)
2. Henrik Gedenryd's work on cognition in design and beyond (2)
But I daresay there are a lot of other answers coming down the pipeline
as I write and they will all go to prove that "generally accepted" is a
slippery concept.
very best
Chris
(1)
the best known primer on this topic is Richard Buchanan's paper:
Buchanan, R. (1992) /Wicked Problems in Design Thinking/, Design Issues
8,2 Spring 1992 5-21
but it's important also to go back to source:
Rittel, H. Webber, M. (1973) /Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning,/
Policy Sciences 4, Elsevier Scientific Publishing, Amsterdam, pp. 155-159.
(2)
Gedenryd, H. (1998) /How Designers Work – making sense of authentic
cognitive activities/ PhD thesis, Lund University, Sweden
(http://www.lucs.lu.se/People/Henrik.Gedenryd/HowDesignersWork/index.html
accessed 30/12/03)
That copy may not be accessible any more but I have a copy of Gedenryd's
thesis on my website at
http://www.chrisrust.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/academic/resources/gedenryd.htm
And Ken Friedman will tick me off because he uses a different citation
but I'm happy with this one (brace myself)
--
*********************************
Prof Chris Rust
Head of Art and Design Research Centre
Sheffield Hallam University
Psalter Lane, Sheffield S11 8UZ, UK
+44 114 225 2706/2682
[log in to unmask]
www.chrisrust.net
|