sure,
chuck,
what goes on in someone's mind shapes what they say or do.
(actually not everyone is so sure of that. much of what people say precedes their knowing what they said, but this is another conversation.)
when you say you are interested in constructing a theory of design thinking, i invite you not to confuse the theory (which resides in language use and communication with others) with the thinking it theorizes. since you do not have access to other people's thinking - unless they tell you what they think -- i guess you theorize your own thinking.
also, i invite you not to confuse neuroscience, the study of the nervous system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience), the interactions among neurons, including their perturbations by environmental condition, with how a designer's thinking affects a design. one can acknowledge that neuronal activity is going on while designers do their work, but what neuroscience can observe and theorize is worlds apart from what designers have to do to be designers.
there is an additional problem with relying on neuroscience. any science explains how things work. designing means proposing something that changes how things work. i have yet to see a theory that undermines its own explanatory mission.
klaus
-----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 Charles Burnette
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 8:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Design Thinking is not design article
Klaus,
I couldn’t agree with you more on all you said except for your last point.
I firmly believe that what goes on in a thinker’s mind shapes what they say and do and how they think even in the act of doing or making. I think Design Thinking hasn’t been thought about enough. Many use the term to mean anything they want it to mean; what happens in art schools, a methodology that they can exploit, etc. Few design researchers have taken up the challenge to try to understand some of the knowledge neuroscience has developed and just put the words in some category they find useful. Many years ago, as you know, Irving Goffman helped us understand how people frame their conversations. That was just opening the door to a deeper understanding of what goes on in the mind during social interaction. I feel we need to oil the hinges of that door and open it to the new findings of how the brain works. When I talk about design thinking I am trying to construct a theory. I have also applied it in design studios, classrooms, workshops, group dynamics, etc on projects of many kinds. I am as devoted to my interests as you are to languaging as communication. Someday they will both come together.
Thanks for your thoughtful remarks.
Chuck
> On Nov 20, 2015, at 3:24 AM, Klaus Krippendorff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I am suggesting to stop getting high on the mentalist concept of design thinking and instead work toward improving our design discourse, research, theories, methods, and practices by which the extraordinary role of our profession on the 21st century can be advanced.
Charles Burnette
[log in to unmask]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
