JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  March 2013

PHD-DESIGN March 2013

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: A Call for Conversation on PhD-Design List Culture

From:

Fiona Jane Candy <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 17 Mar 2013 01:28:21 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Really enjoyed your post John



I've not been following this "self destruction of the list"  thing - it has seemed to me when I dip in and out now and then that it could often be happening and I 've always interpreted this as the inevitable cost of 'debate'. I remember that a list contributor very aptly described several years ago,  the clashing of  ( certain pairs) of antlers. Debate is definitely not my thing so  I'd like to contribute to the list via the following:



30 years of working in education has shown me that there are many models of intelligence and also that what is described as perception is not a generic experience.



In spite of the dogmatism of the University system and its disciplines that vie for educational supremacy, people experience the world  differently. Neuroscience has a long way to go before it can meaningfully map the functions of the brain in relation to individual perception and lived experience....something as clumsy as science may take a long time to work that out....and it's hard to understand why anyone would attempt such a feat.



There are many models of intelligence  - not the one model that is required to substantiate a  black and white concept like 'debate'. I propose that the mediatory nature of  Design means that it can have a special, flexible role in linking the intelligences.



Is there a way that Ken and Terry  - along with the rest of the list and beyond, can accept and value diversity of perception and intelligence? Or would the loss of the tradition and mechanism of debate be too much to lose?



Fiona



www.a-brand.co.uk











________________________________________

From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Calvelli [[log in to unmask]]

Sent: 16 March 2013 18:15

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: A Call for Conversation on PhD-Design List Culture



About a decade ago, I discovered this list, lurked for some time, then posted. Then I dropped off, rarely revisiting. I thought the list interesting, though it seemed to me at the time that the discussion was controlled by a few. It was how I came to be introduced to Ken, admiring his rigorous, critical and encyclopedic mind - and perhaps more so, his generosity in sharing his knowledge resources.



I left because the kind of conversations I wanted to have, and the way I like to bring ideas in the world, did not fit the culture of this list. On the one hand, I felt 'illegitimate,' on the other bored with the type of discussions that seemed to dominate.



After several years - a few years ago - I returned, just in time to see this list in a process of self-destruction. Now, I am a legitimate PhD student, in my late 50s. I take it back, I might not be legitimate, as my PhD isn't in design, at least in name. I had thought re-joining the list (or re-lurking at the least) might help me keep my research connected to design discourse. I was even pleasantly surprised to see that Terry was now interested in neuroscience. I have found myself, strangely, interested in neuroscience as well recently and thought it might be worth sticking around the list, and perhaps contribute at some point.



Yikes! I guess not. Terry, who I met at a conference in Lisbon a few years ago, seemed to me an intelligent and inquiring mind. It is a shame I came too late. But it doesn't surprise me, this blow-up and departure. The conditions for it were always there. Terry was one of the Alphas, but not as Alpha as Ken. Bound to be some scrape-up.



I don't mean to disparage Ken, as I've been the recipient of some of his intellectual generosity, and destruktion, before. A few years after beginning to teach I was offered an opportunity to write a paper for a peer-reviewed journal, which I did. For some reason, the only way I could write it (my first paper for an academic journal) was in the form of an allegory with extensive footnotes. It was accepted and published in the e-journal. I sent its link to Ken, who was kind enough to send me his super long and scathing review. I still read the paper sometimes to students, who always seem to get something out of it, as it is a way for them to understand some of the difficult issues around unsustainability and design, perhaps because being an allegory, it's not too threatening to their aspirations. When I considered moving to Australia to (finally) do a design PhD, Ken was extremely helpful. For personal reasons, it was not to be and I'm in Canada instead.



To a large degree, the culture of the PHD-DESIGN list is the culture of Ken. Rigorous, disciplinary, you-better-be-prepared, generous with knowledge sharing and critique both. To some degree, it is the culture of lists in general. In my experience from back in the modem days, there is usually one or a few dominant participants and there are at least occasional consequences for not knowing what you are supposed to know on whatever the topic is on the list.



It is also, more importantly for the intellectual concerns of those on this list, a problem stemming from a) the relatively recent issues arising from practice-based PhDs; and, more troubling, b) the desire to constitute design and design research as a legitimate area of academic inquiry.



To paraphrase Baudrillard, "(Don't) Forget Foucault." Disciplines accrue and distribute power. The need to legitimate design research as a legitimate area of academic inquiry will be exclusionary and will be based on discursive practices and engaged in through the activities of individual bodies and brains. But also, don't forget Baudrillard: "Power itself must be abolished - and not solely because of a refusal to be dominated, which is at the heart of all traditional struggles - but also, just as violently, in the refusal to dominate. Intelligence cannot, can never be in power because intelligence consists of this double refusal."



It seems that it would be better for designers, design researchers and design theorists to be facing off with the world and not simply with each other. As illustrious as the history of the Academy is, it hasn't prevented our species from actively working towards our own extinction, inadvertently in most cases but also expertly and designedly. You'd think this would be great time to open up the academic flood gates, to reconfigure how and what we know and how we structure our institutions of knowledge gathering and dissemination. Likely, given our already established vectors of power, this isn't to be, at least not yet.



I know now I made the right choice to study philosophy rather than design research. It isn't really even a legitimate philosophy program - I'll receive my PhD, I hope, in Media and Communication. I'm thankful for Ken, again, for posting his slides on how to do research since my institution expects us to learn how to do this ourselves.



To finish, I've always loved this excerpt from Roberto Unger, which begins his 1975 book Knowledge and Politics. I think it might be relevant, but maybe not:



"In its ideas about itself and about society, as in all its other endeavours, the mind goes from mastery to enslavement. By an irresistible movement, which imitates the attraction death exercises over life, thought again and again uses the instruments of its own freedom to bind itself in chains. But whenever the mind breaks its chains, the liberty it wins is greater than the one it had lost, and the splendour of its triumph surpasses the wretchedness of its earlier subjection. Even its defeats strengthen it. Thus, everything in the history of thought happens as if it were to remind us that, though death lasts forever it is always the same, whereas life, which is fleeting, is always something higher than before."



For the time being, I don't think the PHD-DESIGN will justify my time, as I have way more reading in my area to do, to be distracted by dysfuntional discipline-building. But I'll check back from time to time.





Baudrillard, Jean, Sylvère Lotringer, and Ames Hodges. The agony of power. Los Angeles, CA; Cambridge, Mass: Semiotext(e) ; Distributed by MIT Press, 2010. Print.



Unger, Roberto. Knowledge and Politics. New York: The Free Press, 1975. Print.





-----------------------------------------------------------------

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager