Hi Ken and others.
Indeed very intriguing conversation here and i would have only one though to add.
In my research over the past years, I did find another perspective to look at the so called practise-based research, without opposing the various doubts mentioned.
Here it is interesting to draw upon the various discourse formalities.
Even Foucault stated in his book: The archaeology of knowledge (The Archaeology of Knowledge & The Discourse on Language, Vintage (September 12, 1982)) from the latent discourse of a painter who interacts with his canvas. This means that from a discourse perspective we can speak about a method which allows us to generate knowledge, which is nothing else then a form or many forms.
I have used this approach with students to look at the public discourse from companies, engineers and designers creating new generations of products. Easy to understand when we look at the generations of new cell phones every month.
The question however here is, whether a cell phone is knowledge or it is applied knowledge.
With this statement I do not oppose to the problem and the distinctions between theory and practise. But from various perspectives, meaning theoratical frames, we can see identity, from others we see the difference.
All best,
macromedia hochschule für
medien und kommunikation
Jurgen Faust
Vicepresident Academic Affairs and Research
Dean Media and Communication Faculty
Professor Digital Media
gollierstraße 4
80339 münchen
telefon 089.544 151-868
telefax 089.544 151-14
[log in to unmask]
|