A BIG hooray to Klaus for these six remarks on Wicked
Problems.
I'd like to suggest that everybody reads these again, here,
now. I've included them here so that it's easy to do this.
Then read them all again, carefully.
If, after this reading you find things you don't understand or
have questions about, ask them here, on PhD-Design.
But notice how Klaus here shows us that the language we use
matters. It always does. So, the response to this post, or
indeed any other post, is not a re-statement of your own
thoughts in your own terms. The response needs to be a
carefully thought out attempt to frame questions or present
further remarks in a way that others can see how to
constructively reply and respond to.
As wicked as (so called) wicked problems may be, working on
them is not best done like in a boxing match.
Best regards,
Tim
On Dec 12, 2012, at 04:54 , Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
> terry,
>
> first: you pursue a classical and engineering definition of problems. rittel experienced that it did not work in quite a number of cases. unfortunately rittel got you into this conceptual trap by calling them "problems." had he called such situations by another name, we might not have gotten this discussion.
>
> second: you ignore that problems do not exist without someone stating them as such. language is a constitutive part of them. unattended nature doesn't have problems.
>
> third: you confuse a particular someone's claim of something being a problem with the problem to be solved. again, the engineering conception of accepting an authority that states the problem to be solved.
>
> fourth: if the problems you consider wicked are solvable, why do we have so many of them? i mentioned the middle-east conflict as one example. less drastic, labor disagreements, popular protests, and city planning issues.
>
> fifth: wicked problems always involve human actors with different perspectives. you completely ignore stakeholder participation by talking of THE problem in the abstract.
>
> sixth: in my understanding of wicked problems is that they could become resolved or made to disappear, for example, by reframing the discrepancy between what is and what should be with the consent of the interested parties, or disappear in view of more important issues to be addressed.
>
> cheers
>
> klaus
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|