JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  July 2008

PHD-DESIGN July 2008

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Working across multiple design sectors (was A simple definition of 'Design'?)

From:

"Filippo A. Salustri" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Filippo A. Salustri

Date:

Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:05:11 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (125 lines)

Lubomir,

You don't see a theory-level similarity between engineering designing 
(as it is practised, NOT reported in the lit) and other kinds of 
designing (like Teena's wine label design)?

I do.  Granted, I am casting my own biases on things - which may or may 
not be best - but I do see something there.

I have, in the past, been asked by other designers how I teach design, 
for e.g., and told them, and they're surprised to hear it was in line 
with how they taught design.

"You must be a font designer, like me," they say.

"Uh, no; I'm an engineer."  I reply.

I see tasks - not necessarily always in the same order - appear 
consistently when I see non-engineers designing things.  These include 
'understanding the problem,' (oops, the P word again), 'conceiving 
alternatives', 'selecting alternatives', 'fleshing out / making manifest'.

I also see many methods or techniques like what we call 'root cause 
analysis', FMEA, morphological charts, pairwise comparison, etc - and 
especially analogical reasoning (which is I think the same as your 
precedent strategy, Lubomir) - being used to one degree or another, more 
or less formally, with or without knowing it.

Almost every architect and urban planner I've witnessed 'on the job' 
does some kind of what engineers call 'system design' even though the 
architects & urban planners usually don't *know* they're doing it.

And I'm sure I'm unknowingly using techniques or methods from other 
non-engineering fields.

All this suggests to me that there's a deeper similarity, one-up from 
practise - i.e. at the theory level - than is generally considered.

Cheers.
Fil

Lubomir S. Popov wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> It is getting interesting. The original thread that Terry started could 
> have lead us to discuss our differences. Instead, we started discussing 
> the nature of design problems an demonstrated our differences.
> 
> I have no problem with the notion of problem. Usually, "engineering" 
> designers are pretty much at ease with it and actually love it. On the 
> other side are the artists, they hate it. Actually they do 
> problematization, but in a different way. Fill explained it beautifully. 
> Artists are in a different situation compared to engineers and can 
> afford a broad and soft approach. Compared to the Arts, Engineering is 
> already in an advanced stage of explicating its own methodology. (I will 
> reconsider this if you object.) There is a tendency to explicate the 
> process and the method in every profession. Luckily for the humankind, 
> the Arts resist this tendency and continue to operate with the broad 
> net. However, if we go back in history and compare, we might see that 
> compared to previous epochs, nowadays even artists start explicating 
> their process and method and becoming more reflective over the steps in 
> the process.
> 
> I can understand Teena if she is a book illustrator. Very often defining 
> the problem might lead to a poor illustration. The reason is that the 
> problem might not be defined properly or adequately at that time, or the 
> artist simply cannot go step-by-stem from the problem to the solution. 
> There are other ways to sniff and fetch. I teach my students how to 
> conceptualize and start with a design concept. However, after the first 
> half of the project time passes away without a good design, I encourage 
> students to change the strategy -- just find an exiting precedent and 
> make something innovative. The precedent carries in its genotype the 
> problem and the solution. That is the logic of the precedent approach.
> 
> I personally work on the phase of problem definition in design and love 
> my business. It makes the process and the outcome more predictable. In 
> the design areas where the functional requirements are paramount, 
> starting with an initial definition of the problem helps a lot, saves 
> time and effort, and in the long run, brings better functional performance.
> 
> We are all designers, but we are also very different designers. I mean 
> our substantive areas are different. Each substantive area has its own 
> peculiarities in ontological and methodological aspect. (Forgive me for 
> using these concepts here.) That makes the design process and method of 
> a civil engineer very different form the process and method of the 
> architect, and I bet, very different from the process of an illustrator.
> 
> Our common ground cannot be found at practice level. It cannot be found 
> even at theoretical level. Our common ground is at philosophical level. 
> If we want to talk one language, we need to discuss these issues at a 
> very abstract level. We can say that there are general principles of 
> design that apply to all design fields. But these general principles are 
> so abstract that they never appear in their scholastic format in design 
> practice and even at the theoretical levels of different design 
> disciplines. These principles crystallize in their full beauty only when 
> we talk at philosophical level about the planning and design approach 
> (Gerals Nadler, 1981).
> 
> To be honest, at the beginning I was curious what is Terry doing when he 
> asked that question about our disciplinary design affiliations. Now I 
> might be interested more than him. Knowing each other background, it 
> will be easier to figure out what the other colleague thinks and says, 
> why that colleague thinks that way, and why he or she objects a 
> particular concept.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Lubomir
> 
> Lubomir Popov, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> School of Family and Consumer Sciences
> 309 Johnston Hall
> Bowling Green, OH 43403-0059
> phone: (419) 372-7935

-- 
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager