On 06/12/2014, at 23:53, Don Norman wrote:
> I have often said that Engineers tread heavily into territory that
> psychologists fear. This is the same phenomenon.
-- snip --
> I cringe every time I hear of Maslow's hierarchy, or oversimplified views
> of personality or what simple measures of skin conductivity or facial
> expression tell us about people's emotional states.
>
What Don expresses here is one problem we should all be aware of,
when we try to cross boundaries.
But behind it there is another problem, which, IMHO, is also a source
of recurring misundertandings.
This reminded me of similar problems I've read about, in papers on
the effort to make sense of the plethora of theories in creativity research.
Does the following ring a bell?
> DEEPLY ROOTED BARRIERS INHIBITING COLLABORATIVE THEORETIC INTEGRATION
>
> When the research terrain is extremely broad and complex, as it is in the domain of creativity research, the problems facing interdisciplinary teams are exceedingly difficult. Some of the most persistent difficulties have to do with metaphorical influences on thought, root-metaphorical world views, and philosophical positions.
>
> In his contemporary theory of metaphor, Lakoff (1993) illustrates the influence of metaphor on abstract thought. Contrary to classical theories of language, which confine metaphor to lan- guage processes and deny it a role in reasoning, Lakoff argues that metaphor "structures our everyday conceptual system, including most abstract concepts" (p. 204). In support of his theory, Lakoff offers examples of the ways in which metaphor shapes abstract concepts such as argu- ment, change, causation and purpose. For instance, the "argument as war" (p. 244) metaphor encourages theorists to undermine and attack each other's theories instead of collaboratively syn- thesizing them. Abstract concepts such as change, causation, and purpose are central to many the- ories of creativity so, if Lakoff' s theory of metaphor has merit, the thoughts and communications of theorists are metaphorically shaped at the implicit level. This becomes particularly important in collaborative theory building processes because theorists tend to root themselves in one of sev- eral metaphorical world views.
>
[1]
But metaphor has another bearing on these recurring discussions.
Usually there are different epistemological levels at play in these
debates, though not acknowledged or explicit.
It is often the case that someone presents a metaphorically-inclined
argument, to counter a scientifically-inclined argument, or vice-versa.
What I mean but "metaphorically-inclined" is that some arguments
can't be taken literally. This type of argument offers some alternative
perspective on the subject at hand, but doesn't include any
mechanism for verification [2]. It follows that this type of argument
cannot be countered, though some might present valuable insights.
On the other hand, some arguments of this type are also, as Wolfgang
Pauli said, "not even wrong". And that's really dangerous: bestwoing
scientific character onto metaphorically-inclined theories/arguments,
or otherwise mixing episthemological levels.
That's why some of these discussions will never end.
Terry's prediction power is not so impressive, if it predicts that havoc
will ensue after a short vague remark prone to be interpreted as a
categorical denial of a well-defined position.
Maybe it would be helpful if we tried to refrain from shooting short
bursts of vague metaphorically-inclined replies that are prone to
misinterpretation.
Best regards,
References:
==========
[1]
Ambrose, Don. “Unifying Theories of Creativity: Metaphorical Thought and the Unification Process.” New Ideas in Psychology 14, no. 3 (1996): 257–67.
[2]
Kozbelt, Aaron, Ronald A. Beghetto, and Mark A. Runco. “Theories of Creativity,” In The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity, edited by James C. Kaufman and Robert J. Sternberg, 20–47. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
PS:
===
I would like to ask everyone to please keep in mind that your world
view is not necessarily shared by the people you are trying to
communicate with.
Also note that your world view includes regional slang and local politics,
none of which are necessarily common or interesting to your fellow
list subscribers.
==================================
Carlos Pires
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
-------------------------------------------------------------
Design & New Media MFA // Communication Design PhD Student @ FBA-UL
Check the project blog:
http://thegolemproject.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|