Dear Lubomir,
I was also going to stay away, but I could not resist. I just wanted to say
that I fully agree with what you wrote with the exception of the last
paragraph. I think trying to define design and its boundaries is almost an
impossible, if not a futile act. It is one of these concepts like
"society", "power" or "social". You will not find two sociologist that
agree on the definition of a "society". But still, sociology is alive and
well. What is worse, if you ask a political scientist or an anthropologist
or an economist, you will get wildly different definitions of a society.
In 1950s and 1960s (and before), there was a frenzy in the sociology of
professions about defining what a profession is, and about trying to find
out what differentiates a profession from an occupation. It was a hopeless
enterprise. In 1980s, sociologist left these arguments and turned their
attention to a more interesting question "what are the circumstances in
which people in an occupation attempt to turn it into a profession and
themselves into professional people?" (i have taken this quote from Everett
C. Hughes, in fact he made this comment in 1963 but nobody paid attention
till 1980s).
Similarly, I think it might be more fruitful to understand under which
conditions different individuals self-label themselves and whatever they do
as design. Because regardless of what we say, and regardless of how the
word "design" evolved in different languages, many different groups will
continue to self-identify as designers and see their activity as designing.
Sincerely,
ali
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|