thanks,
jose,
for amplifying my point. you are absolutely right.
when a scientist designs an experiment to test a scientific hypothesis, they
do design in the sense of creating something new. nobody can legislate the
words they use in their literature. it entails displaying certain
competences that not everyone shares, but it is done in the course of
advancing science, not to make the experiment usable to others (avoiding the
word everybody). this, i think is the crucial distinction between design
that is not human centered and design that is.
i think it is useful for the community of professional designers to be clear
about what distinguishes them from, let us say, engineers who can calculate
stress levels in beams, figure out the hardware of a machinery, or design
the hardware of a computer. i am talking about particular kind of knowledge
designers need to generate to make the interfaces between humans and
artifacts work for their stakeholders. that knowledge is one of interaction
between human cognitive and social abilities and perceived features in the
world.
engineering students do not generally learn about perception, have courses
in ethnographic methods, social interaction, and how artifacts acquire
meanings in use, which provide designers with the kind of knowledge they are
most qualified to translate into artifacts that support human social
activities.
it would be a mistake to downplay the need for designers to be able to work
with others, understand they vocabularies. most artifacts straddle the
boundaries of several disciplines, production, mechanics, finance, social
science, especially cultural anthropology and ecology, and it is not
altogether impossible for designers to do something novel with knowledge
from these disciplines. but this does not mean that designers could not
generate and teach their own body of knowledge and argue from this strength
in cooperation with others.
professional designers can define their own profession and in fact do so by
how its is taught, practiced, and talked about among themselves. there is
no need to chase the uses of the word design by all disciplines
klaus
-----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 jose luis
casamayor
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 10:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: current Trends in Design Research, where are we going ?
Hi Fil,
I believe..that Klaus did not mean that design engineers or other
disciplines with topics included in Terry’s list do not carry out design
activities, of course they do, but the purpose and design parameters they
use are different. Klaus was trying to make the point that to try to
differentiate them is important. I agree totally, as i have seen some PhDs
in 'product design' that might well be from other disciplines, i.e.: design
engineering.
Industrial, graphic, interior and interaction designers’ design activities
are user-centred because the purpose of them is mainly aimed at experiences
(where human/user are involved) rather than function. Design engineers can
also do this job, although this is not their main role, and therefore,
usually should not be carried out by them. In the same way that graphic
designers do not try to design the software of the programs they use, for
this role there are engineers who are more qualified.
I hope this helps,
Jose
_________________________________________________________________
Con Vodafone disfruta de Hotmail gratis en tu móvil. ˇPruébalo!
http://serviciosmoviles.es.msn.com/hotmail/vodafone.aspx
|