A Grecian paradigm shift: the construction of a design theory

Abstract

Design education has to change, because the discipline of design is changing. This paper deals with some of these changes and the reasons why they are deemed to be necessary, in order to move on to the more focused and more interesting aspects, namely: 1] ‗design thinking‘ is a myth (as claimed by Donald Norman), and we need to ask ourselves if what we mean by ‗design thinking‘ is an exclusive domain of the discipline; 2] if Norman‘s argument is valid, then it would follow that design as a stand-alone discipline is also a myth, since most of the efforts of design researchers and practitioners today cannot be accommodated within a domain-independent area, but are increasingly influenced by, and indeed motivated by, socio-technical concerns that need the inputs from a range of knowledge fields outside the scope of traditional design disciplines. This paper will therefore 3] present an argument for a theory of design knowing that explains the different uses of the terms ‗design thinking‘ and ‗design process‘, a change in focus that decentres the product and moves it to the periphery of design research, while constructing a framework for thought that contingently centres the focus of purposeful design action on the observer of contextual observations, i.e., a theory of design knowing that utilizes second order cybernetics and radical constructivism. Using the insights of Protagoras and Aristotle, this initial ‗Grecian Turn‘ will be shown to lead to a re-appraisal of the fundamentals necessary to innovative design thinking.