Hi Klaus,
Thank you for your comments. I would like to clarify a small detail. I have never said nor implied that we have to exclude designers from the discussion on design profession. I said that design is too important to leave it ONLY to designers. So, using the word ONLY implies that designers are already considered, but they should not be the only participants. Also, paraphrasing the adage about war and generals implies that I use its spirit to involve interest groups outside the profession.
Thanks again,
Lubomir
-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Krippendorff [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 12:08 AM
To: Lubomir Savov Popov; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: On design - again?
lubomir,
i am sympathetic to the view that design is too important to be left to
designers, mainly based on personal experiences that shifting perspective
often open new ways of seeing.
however, i suggest to go without designers would be a mistake, perhaps an
expression of arrogance and misplaces authoritarianism. imagine a situation
in which i find a formula to describe the design process but designers are
unwilling to conform to it? whose version should be accepted?
i would much prefer to see theoreticians of design either have own
experiences designing or at least interact with designers to see how their
conceptions fit the conceptions of practitioners. if it adds to their
self-understanding or improves their practices than there is virtue to a
theorist's formulations, if it doesn't one has to question the claim.
there are many examples where an outsider claims to know better, for example
in medicine, where a patient might complain of stomach ache without knowing
a successful remedy. medical knowledge serves first and foremost the
doctor's task of curing a patient's ills, not so much of informing the
patient about the medical knowledge that goes into decisions among treatment
options. so, medical knowledge is generated within the medical community of
practitioners, researchers, educators, etc. of medicine and outsiders'
conceptions tends to be shunned by the medical community.
i suggest that human-centered design cannot afford to ignore user
conceptions and this means engaging users in dialogue while designing.
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: Lubomir Savov Popov [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 10:11 AM
To: Klaus Krippendorff; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: On design - again?
Dear colleagues,
Even when I follow this erudite and imaginative debate, a primer for
scholarly discussions, I can't help reflecting on my previous proposals. I
still believe that when discussing a profession and the social construction
of a profession, an approach coming from philosophy and sociology of
professions might be more productive. Many of the issues we discuss can
easily be resolved from the position of one of those approaches. And many of
the issues and problems we formulate here might well be reformulated so that
they are resolved productively.
There is an old adage that war is too important to be left only to the
generals. We can paraphrase this for design and will see that the social
construction of a profession is far more complex that the linguistics
regarding this profession. There are so many parties involved, each one
construing its own version, promoting it, defending it, and actually often
fighting for it. It seems to me that we went too far working only with words
and shying away from the social construction of conceptualizations,
meanings, conventions, criteria and norms for identification of a
phenomenon, and so forth.
Let's take as an example the current process of social construction of
interior design profession in the U.S.A. It can serve as a great laboratory
for exploring the making of a profession, the making of conventions, the
sharing of conventions, the economic interests, and the politics of
defending economic privileges. It is also an example of use and abuse of
language, languaging and language games, premeditated and spontaneous
distortions of meanings, restricting and controlling the use of words, and
so forth.
Design is too important to be left only to designers, design researchers,
and even the general public. It evidently needs a coordinated effort from
all parties to negotiate the boundaries of the profession. Actually, when we
talk about design in our tradition on this list, we touch hundreds of
professions. By the way, that is another topic. Design, its many
applications, and the corresponding hundreds of professions.
Thank you for attention,
Lubomir
PS In the example regarding interior design I skipped many other interest
groups/stake holders. Let's ask architects what is interior design and the
war on words will start again.
|