Dear Ken.
I am not an expert either. This is one of the challenges in today's world
demanding multidisciplinary approaches: you cannot merely place one expert
beside the other to link disciplines, they have to interact to create new
knowledge, to enhance understanding. OR there has to be moderators inspiring
the experts to interact. OR being experts themselves, interacting by opening
neighboring research fields like cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology and
more. OR by writing for non experts and thereby opening up for
multidisciplinary collaboration. Damasio is a neuroscientist -but also a
moderator. As you say Ken, even for you as a non expert he is a pleasure to
read.
There are others: Ramachandran, Frith, LeDoux, Brizendine, Wilson, Bennet,
Dennet, Maturana/Varela, Maldonato ... These are all scholars, often
presenting hard evidence but also sometimes (like Brizendine) transforming
these into popular science, possible to apprehend also for practitioners -
and an interested public.
In Frith's book (2007. Oxford: Blackwell): "Making up the Mind. How the
Brain Creates our Mental World", there is a very interesting prologue about
Hard and Soft Science respectively.
I personally would like to see much more interdisciplinary exchange to
identify areas which have the capacity to develop and refine each other
mutually by continued research.
It was when researching timelessness that my work moved into exploring
neuroscience, which finally resulted in the notion of "affective
sustainability". BUT, I am therefore not an expert, I merely opened a door
and went into "the antechamber". Maybe I should call myself a moderator.
I wrote a paper for CEPHAD in 2010: "Meaning: Making sense of non-sense."
It is not very scholarly as it was meant for a round-table discussion but
fair enough.
I will be happy to send it by demand off line.
Best
Kristina
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Friedman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: Meta-Language and Terminology
Dear Kristina,
Thanks for this post. I am aware of Antonio Damasio’s work and I agree with
him on this point and others. I also agree with you on the importance of
neuroscience in these issues, in design research, and in design.
That said, I am not knowledgeable and skilled enough to deploy neuroscience
in a reasonableway, so I’d rather not address it. No one can be expert in
everything.
There are people who do address these issues. Project UMA brings together a
partnership of professors and researchers from Technological University of
Delft, Cambridge University, University of Vienna, and Swinburne University
of Technology toexplore some of these issues under the rubric of
neuroaffective design.
Using neuroscience to support the argumentation in some of the recent
threads would require reasoned argument from evidence applied carefully to
the claims made in different notes. Since I do not understand the science
involved here, I’ll stick with reasoned arguments from issues I understand.
Perhaps I will one day know enough about neuroscience to say something
interesting. I have a bit of study and learning ahead of me to do so.
Until then, I welcome your comments. I’d be delighted to see some comments
to these threads from someone who does have something useful from the
perspective of neuroscience with the carefully developed argumentation and
robust evidence that make Damasiosuch a pleasure to read.
Yours,
Ken
Professor Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished
Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia |
[log in to unmask] | Phone +61 3 9214 6102 |
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design
--
Kristina Borjesson wrote:
—snip—
I have jumped in and out of the discussion, which has had it’s high and low
points.
I might have missed something but I have so far seen no reference to
neuroscience. When discussing issues linked to mind and body, self and
consciousness, reality and illusion, and more, advances within neuroscience
are very relevant. In a recent keynote a famous Swedish neurologist said
something like: “neuroscience can today prove what philosophers suggested
hundreds of years ago.” Or as put by Antonio Damasio: (free quote) “as a
neuroscientist you must have a good understanding of philosophy.”
—snip—
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
