Dear all,
I pose my question/s in response to the conversation on human centered design, and Jerry's post bringing in environmental ethics:
> Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:16:21 -0700
> From: diethelm <[log in to unmask]>
>
> What if conservative returned to meaning“caring about the future,” and choosing and taking actions that minimized the affordance of unintended consequences?
>
> Human-centered design always sounds a little backwards to those like me who have spent many years in the trenches and folds of environmental ethics. Eco-humanistic design perhaps, leaning toward a more bio-centric perspective; empathetic and informed bio-citizen design
>
> -- snip --
Jerry raises an issue which is front and centre for me. While UCD may be a step beyond technology driven design, in practice UCD doesn't really afford enough space for human or other forms of diversity, even if the intent may be present. The limitations of the scope are thus (I suggest) only a step less problematic than a tech-driven perspective. That step is important, but I really do think we can do better.
I am currently trying to articulate a research program building on Alfred North Whitehead's notion that all things are at once discrete and universally interconnected. My thinking is that design's tendency to focus on, or prioritize a discrete thing (f.x. the human) is what has led us to the many challenges we are now facing. The idea is to develop new ways of practicing design that better account for and respond to the duality that Whitehead speaks to.
I keep coming back to: Ecologically Entangled though I'm not yet convinced it's a good name for a research program or book on advancing both theory and practice, because it will probably only speak to scholars and practitioners who already agree with me. The question is how to have a better reach?
This brings me to my question/s—for list-members at different career levels, with perhaps divergent priorities, who I hope might bring very different perspectives:
1. from your (diverse) perspectives, what do you consider are the current frontiers of design research? (the things PhD students and others could be focusing on, to challenge the status quo)
2. can anyone suggest key texts that might help me better unpack the thing/everything duality in a way that can speak to (and/or): (a) those like Jerry, who are already oriented in that direction, (b) those who are still arguing passionately and convincingly about the need for more human-centered orientations in design, (c) those who remain technology-focused, (d) anyone else out there who might be interested in understanding how humans and our collective ecologies might thrive moving forward, rather than simply survive, in particular through design actions that afford both individual and universal/planetary+ flourishing?
I feel like the individual/universal schism is somehow reflected in the tensions that arise between aesthetic and pragmatic concerns, the rather sticky (if highly problematic) binary oppositions posited at times between human/nature or body/mind, as well as between tech-driven, human-centered and ecologically entangled design
thanks in advance,
Danielle
--
www.daniellewilde.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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
