Presentation on theme: "Policy, research and design as different language games Prof.dr.ir. Taeke M. de Jong chair Technical Ecology, chair Regional Design, assignment Methodology."— Presentation transcript:
Policy, research and design as different language games Prof.dr.ir. Taeke M. de Jong chair Technical Ecology, chair Regional Design, assignment Methodology University of Technology Delft, Faculty of Architecture T.M.deJong@bk.tudelft.nl http://team.bk.tudelft.nl T.M.deJong@bk.tudelft.nlhttp://team.bk.tudelft.nl
Conditional methodology A1 VERSCHIL wordt voorondersteld, A2 VERANDERING vooronderstelt een soort verschil, A3 VERBAND duur in verandering, A4 AFZONDERING ongebondenheid in verband, A5 SELECTIE continuiteit in afzondering, B1 VERBRUIK verschil in selectie, B2 REGELING verandering in verbruik, B3 ORGANISATIE verband in regeling, B4 SPECIALISATIE afzondering in organisatie, B5 REPRODUCTIE selectie in specialisatie, C1 NIEUWS reproductie van informatie, C2 ZEKERHEID geregeld nieuws, C3 AFFECTIE georganiseerde zekerheid, C4 IDENTITEIT specifieke affectie, C5 INVLOED gereproduceerde identiteit.
Diversity as a hidden supposition risk-cover for life precondition of –communication –trade, economy –possibility of choice for future generations uniqueness of individual and context quality of human living So, ‘average’ is useless where exceptions survive: in ecology, evolutionary theory, management and design science.
Ecological tolerance demonstrating diversity as a risk cover for life
Diversity as a first condition The intellectual challenge of this century is to handle diversity –instead of generalising it by statistical reduction. Generalising research has diminishing returns –what could be generalised is generalised in centuries of empirical research. Problems left are context sensitive problems –object of design: generating study.
Ideal contents of a context sensitive Study Proposal 1.OBJECT OF STUDY AND ITS CONTEXT 2.MY STUDY PROPOSAL 3.ACCOUNTS
1 OBJECT OF MY STUDY AND ITS CONTEXT 1.1. Object of my study: frame and grain 1.2. Probable future context: field of problems > 1.3. Desired impacts of my study: field of aims > 1.4. My designerly references: field of means 1.5. My portfolio and perspective: field of abilities
Subtracting futures Field of problems = Probable - Desirable Field of Aims = Desirable - Probable
Explicit future context protects your study against judgements with other suppositions about the future context raises the debate about the robustness of your study in different future contexts raises a ‘field of problems’ instead of an isolated ‘problem statement’ by subtracting desirable futures from the probable ones makes your study comparable to others concerning comparable contexts
2 MY STUDY PROPOSAL 2.1. Location or other future context factors 2.2. Motivation or programme of requirements 2.3. Intended results 2.4. Intended contributions to science 2.5. Intended planning and organogramme
3ACCOUNTS 3.1. How did I meet criteria for a study proposal > 3.2. My References 3.3. My Key words to find back what any principal wants to know in my proposal
Criteria for a study proposal A. Affinity with designing B. University latitude C. Concept formation and transferability D. Retrievability and accumulating capacity E. Methodical accountability and depth F. Ability to be criticised and to criticise G. Convergence and limitations
Operations (functions) y= f(x) intuitive: f(x):= associated with x conditional: f(x):= possible by x set-theoretical: f(x):= part of x, encloses x, without x... logical: f(x):= if x, not x... mathematical: f(x):= x+x, x 2... causal f(x):= caused by x temporal: f(x):= preceded, followed by x spatial(formal): f(x):= near to, contiguous to, surrounded by x... structural: f(x):= connected with x, seperated from x... combinations: a box of boards connected by nails: box(boards, nails)