chuck,
i didn't really want to get into mentalism and avoided the word
intentionality. all i wanted to say that the meaning of the word design is
manifest in its use. there are many discourse in which the word design has
particular meanings, such as when you are asked to pay more for a
merchandise, or when psychologists say they have designed an experiment to
test a scientific hypothesis. we can't legislate the use of the word design
outside of our community of professional designers and i find it futile to
develop a super theory that embraces every use of the word design.
what we professional designers have in common is a way of talking, drawing,
presenting, and coordinating our actions with others or in the service of
others and we teach, develop, utilize and identify ourselves with this
competence. -- and to respond to terry, this way of languaging is not
separate from what we are doing.
regarding your cherished concept of intentionality, i was suggesting instead
that designers are accountable to others for the changes they propose. we
can develop design methods as ways of accounting for design activities --
which i have done in the semantic turn -- but i find it difficult to develop
methods for being intentional.
nice to hear from you again
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Burnette [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 9:26 PM
To: Klaus Krippendorff
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: On design - again?
On Sep 15, 2009, at 4:01 PM, Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
> We all do things that impact the world, but unless we talk of these as
> design, they aren't design.
Klaus: You have argued previously against intentionality in design.
It seems to me that you have a contradiction here. To talk of something as
design is to take an intentional stance in that regard.
However, I like the idea that if we talk of how we deliberately impact the
world we are talking about design. Note the key word is deliberately, ie
intentionally, purposefully. Chuck
|