All,
All this is my first post to the list so I hope I can contribute to the degree of intellectual rigor that I have been witness to thus far.
Mike's post regarding critical realism absolutely required my comment as I possess degree in both Design (MA in Interior Design, and PhD studies in Interior Design) and theology (BA). One of the progenitors of this intellectual perspective is the Theologian Bernard Lonergan. Lonergan was interested in developing a systematic approach to the study of Theology, which presents the sticky problem of drawing data which can be studied from a positivistic perspective (for example how many family units might it take to form a cohesive and functioning religious community) and also data that defies statistical manipulation since it is based on culture and belief. I have always believed that Lonergan's work could contribute to the discussion of an epistemological perspective for Design, since design too draws from these very broad categories of data, and have been working on paper related more specifically to how it might guide research in evidence based design and the development of the body of knowledge in Interior Design for the last two years.
Lonergan is a wonderful resource here since he discusses the basic pattern of mental operations that allow us to "objectify the contents of consciousness" and therefore develop categorical "knowledge" and leading to a "transcendental method" that provides a framework for the development of any discipline from a systematic perspective. The two works which may be relevant to the discussion at hand are "Insight" in which he lays out the notion of a basic pattern of intellectual operations leading to knowledge, and "Method in Theology" in which he relates this pattern to the development of systematic categories of study and examines how their interconnections make possible a real body of knowledge.
Sincerely,
Justin Wilwerding,
Interior Design Department Chair,
Brown College,
Off.: 651.905.3592
-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Mike Zender
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Clarifying an epistemological and ontological confusion
I've been watching this conversation with interest because I'm working on an article
discussing a possible epistemology for design.
Agreeing with you Ben that it is counterproductive and a little more than beside the point
to debate whether there is a mind or not by using our mind to debate the point, I would
like to know what features of a sound way of knowing are. That is, rather than thinking
about whether we think or not, I'd like to have a productive discussion around how we
think.
I'm particularly interested in critical realism as a philosophical approach, which John
Polkinghorne says is widely accepted either overtly or de facto by scientists and more
than few theologians, as a way to bridge ways of knowing as diverse as rigorous science
and metaphysical theology. I'm interested if anyone would like to comment on the
epistemology of Michael Polanyi which is based on / parallel with critical realism.
I see good balance in the ways of knowing described by Polanyi in Personal Knowledge
(1958) and The Tacit Dimension (1966), where he outlines an epistemology based on
critical realism. The gist is that knowing is a process of integrating particulars into
universals. Polyni's unique insight is into how the integration happens. He says that
particulars cannot be integrated into universals (concepts, new ideas) so long as the
particulars remain the focus of attention (focal awareness). For example, if we focus
attention only on individual trees we can never comprehend a forest. But by holding in
mind the features of many trees, plus shrubs, grasses, soil, light and other particulars
you may arrive at a new integrated knowledge called a forest. In this example, when you
integrate many features of particular things into a new idea that is greater than just the
sum of the particular parts you are forming knowledge.
I'd appreciate any thought about how we know, the processes, and a way of knowing that
works for design, a field that relies on both reason of science and the revelation of
creative insight.
Mike Zender
|