|
J.
Restrepo
H.H.C.M. Christiaans
A. Rodríguez
Delft University of Technology & Eafit University
The finality argument on design methods:
A theoretical approach from the social sciences
In
spite of the fact that research on design methods is relatively new in
scientific environment, there has been a proliferation of design methods
and models, ranging from prescriptive to reflective, looking for a way
to rationalize the design process. Such methods and models, which have
attempted to define design as information-processing, pattern-recognition,
problem-solving or decision-making activities, and have been considered
to be weak and reductionistic or to have failed to provide a good paradigm
of the problem. Design should be considered in all its magnitude, as a
set of teleological, purposive-rational actions that follow a goal, goal
that is commonly considered –inaccurately– in the prescriptive
methods, the designed object itself.
Objects are configured with the objective of producing certain desired
states of the world, states that respond to human needs and aspirations,
beliefs and values (Blasco 1997, Kamenetzky 1992, Max–Neef 1992,
Restrepo 1999). At the same time, design processes are organized from
the idea of obtaining a product (object) that possesses the capacity of
producing such aimed states, among other conditions.
Even though the methodics have the apparent finality of obtaining a solution
conceived as an object, its second order finality underlies in the object’s
finality –the finality of the finality–
Design procedures, methods and methodics should then go beyond the finality
of configuring an object. They should respond to second order purposes,
it is, to the end-goals of the aimed objects and thus to biological, psychological
and socio-cultural aspects.
However, current design methodics used in industrial design, mostly taken
from mechanical engineering –Pahl & Beitz, Hubka, Rodenacker,
Köller, VDI-2222, Jones, Ullman, etc.– are sets of prescriptive
methods that start from the idea that there is a problem to be ‘solved’
and an object to be ‘produced’ serving as the solution. The
subjacent idea is that there is a black box to be configured. This could
be enough for certain design situations, but using these methodics makes
difficult the management and inclusion of important contextual information,
such as users’ cultural background.
This work attempts to discuss some aspects of the complex set of what
is called here contextual information. An epistemological review of some
of the basic concepts is presented and the arguments of finality and intentionality,
as well as the basis of human needs and aspirations theory are discussed.
A critical analysis of some of the current design methods and research
methods is addressed. Next, a framework that is intended to explain how
contextual information (should flow) flows is introduced. At the end,
as a conclusion,
← back |  download 92 Kb pg109.zip
|
|
