Re: Chuck's Paper
Yes, I do agree that we need a design theory that "is responsive to wants
and needs, is goal oriented, and guided by preferences and experiences." And
perhaps not just "guided by" but explicitly centered in purposeful thinking
and that helps explain the intentional wholeness of {preferences and their
embodied actions and expressions}.
I think Chuck's is a fair description of our present situation and my
preference would be to try to explore with him the structure and function of
purposeful thought and its flip-side transformation into formative
expression. Attempting to build a systematic vocabulary seems like a good
start. So I take this as a proposal, not a conclusion. What other examples
are there out there with which to compare?
A pragmatic response to Chuck's articulation of purposeful thought would be,
is it useful, rather than is it true? And this could be tested. It may
turn out that there are neural networks that correspond to his different
modes of thinking, but we could watch light bend around that star at some
later date.
Where to put this theory philosophically? The approach is pragmatic,
associating the most appropriate and useful philosophical stance from the
analytical - continental array with each mode of purposeful thinking.
The general location would seem to be Axiology, the philosophical study of
value, which includes the areas of ethics, aesthetics, economics and, let's
assume for this discussion, design.
Intentions, goals, objectives, interests, wants, needs, desires, passions
are all part of the vocabulary of value and valuing. Significantly, values
are always transitive, providing a pragmatic strategy for dealing with
mind/body epistemological concerns. Interests always have objects and
objects come alive in the light of interests. Valuing powerfully unifies
the cognitive, affective and conative as thinking.
Design, on this view, is an historical process that translates a purposeful
and emotional consciousness (Dennett) into human culture.
And what of science? To critically build our knowledge of design and
designing.
But, "Reason is, and ought only to be, the slave of passions." David Hume
Snip
> Dear Ken and list,
> Thank you for your thoughts. It is a reasonable assessment on the scope and
> complexity of the field. That said, all attempts in knowing have to begin
> somewhere, and for that I think Chuck's attempt is commendable not only on its
> ambition--which is sorely lacking in a poststructuralist academic world--but
> also for its reasonably stated starting poise.
> Best,
> Jeff
--
Jerry Diethelm
Architect - Landscape Architect
Planning & Urban Design Consultant
Prof. Emeritus of Landscape Architecture
and Community Service € University of Oregon
2652 Agate St., Eugene, OR 97403
€ e-mail: [log in to unmask]
€ web: http://pages.uoregon.edu/diethelm/
€ 541-686-0585 home/work 541-346-1441 UO
€ 541-206-2947 work/cell
|