dear tim,
i resist C to be subsumed under a theory for two reasons:
(1) i don't like people to project motivations, particularly hidden ones, to
my own actions when i have different motivations or none whatsoever. by the
same token, i think it would be unethical to theorize the motivations of
others without inquiring with them what they are, or constructing them
without their consent. what i am teaching my students is to respect what
people say how and why they do what they do. understanding their
conceptions in their own terms tends to predicts their behavior better than
the conceptions by a detached observer/theorist.
(2) in evolutionary processes, natural selection and random variations go
hand in glove. this is true for the evolution of technological systems as
well. engineers introduce changes and if such changes are not
disadvantageous for the reproduction of their design, they may stay until
challenged or eliminated by future selection. if you take a birds' eye
perspective on technological development, it is random mutations, that can
get a technological lineage of artifacts out of one niche into another one.
theory confines changes to what the theory demands. therefore there is an
important place for unmotivated design, changes that seem to have no reason
whatever, yet can keep a class of artifacts alive.
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Smithers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Smithers
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 6:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: A problem of wicked problems for design research
Dear Klaus,
Thanks for your note.
I accept your clarification that C is un-motivated by needs or desires, at
least explicit ones. Nor would I want to (somewhat artificially) extend my
account to include implicit or tacit motivations, to cover play.
Nonetheless, I do wonder why you would not want to subsume C under a
particular theory: is it somehow a-theoretical for being non-motivated?
Best regards,
Tim
================
>dear tim,
>a minor point of clarification, C is not motivated by a need or desire
>to achieve something but unmotivated play, random variation in the
>genetic sense, without purpose. i don't like to subsume that option
>under a particular theory kk
>
|