Hello,
The concept of 'knowledge' is problematic in many ways.
The idea that humans 'have' 'knowledge' or are capable of 'knowing' has
become established primarily as a convenient but problematic mental shortcut
to explain human interactions simple ideas and simple situations. In
essence, it doesn't explain - it's simply is a different word for "it
happens by 'magic'". The concept of 'knowledge' doesn't work well (or in
some cases at all) beyond that. Particularly it fails in relation to
reliable evidence from research about human biological functioning.
The primary merit of the idea of 'knowledge' and 'knowing' is they
'appears to be real in terms of what is subjectively perceived by an
individual'.
The problem with reifying *that* assumption into presuming'knowledge' and
'knowing' are useful concepts is in terms of their contradiction with and
lack of support from research and evidence. There are several of millennia
evidence that humans subjective self is not reliable and can best be
considered as illusory. More recently, this is proposed as the subjective
self being a convenient individualy-based illusion incidental bodily
functioning that offers evolutionary advantage.
In epistemological terms, this suggests the concepts of 'knowledge' and
'knowing' are intrinsically unreliable - 'dead ducks' in common research
parlance.
Fortunately for design researc, everything that we use the concepts and
terms of 'knowledge' and 'knowing' can be replaced more accurately and
reliably by combinations of other more reliably evidenced concepts.
This suggests, for the design research field, that one of the best ways
forward is to create all the theories of design avoiding and without
reference to the concepts of 'knowledge' and 'knowing'.
. . . a bit like dealing with the problem of ether.
It's not that difficult. . . .
Best wishes,
Terry
==
Dr Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
PhD, B.A. (Hons) Eng, P.G.C.E
School of Design and Art, Curtin University, Western Australia
Psychology and Social Science, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia
Honorary Fellow, IEED, Management School, Lancaster University, UK
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
[log in to unmask] +61 (0)4 3497 5848
==
-----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 Ken
Friedman
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2012 8:28 PM
To: Dr Terence Love
Subject: Re: Meta-Language and Terminology
Dear Kari,
Thanks for your response. We agree on most of the key issues, though I'd
like to refine on aspect - the issue of knowledge.
Epistemologically, and ontologically, I'd prefer to say that artifacts
contain information: artifacts represent knowledge or contain
representations of knowledge rather than containing knowledge itself. In the
same sense, I propose that a book represents knowledge or contains
representations of knowledge. In my view, only a knowing being can "contain"
knowledge - once knowledge leaves a human being or another knowing creature,
it is no longer knowledge. It is information.
There are probably arguments as to what kind of creature can "know"
something. I'd say that horses, dogs, and higher primates can "know." There
is probably some boundary at which we can say that creatures on one side of
the boundary "know," and creatures on the other side of the boundary do not
"know."
For me, this has much to do with the issue of what kinds of creatures may
design, in the sense that a creature that designs must be able to choose
preferred future states. These issues are closely linked to questions of
agency and knowledge. This has echoes across several threads - I'm still
working on the question of speculative realism and flat ontology.
Our vocabulary has gaps in it where it comes to talking about what we can
learn from artifacts and how we can understand them, as well as the issue of
the role that artifacts can play in what we know and how we represent what
we know.
The issue fascinates me. I appreciate your reflections.
Warm wishes,
Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|