The Metaphysics of Design

The paper is concerned with beginning to lay a basis for a more comprehensive model of designing, one that can overcome the abyss between the conceptual limitations of purely professional designing and wider instincts of design capabilities. The qualifier for today is that such a model of designing has to establish a structural relationship to the artificial. The approach in the paper has been to reach back into the last time such projects were attempted in the late 1960s/1970s, and to use as a moment Herbert Simon’s propositions on design and the artificial developed in The Sciences of the Artificial. These propositions were never fully thought through by design. This is in part perhaps because of the difficulty of thinking design in its professional moments in relation to Simon’s theses on the artificial. As will be seen below, in several respects these propositions severely challenge the limits of professional thinking in design. At the same time, does Simon’s proposition that design and the artificial are essentially identical (the one dependent upon the other) ground design more deeply than we have previously thought? Does this in turn offer an objective basis on which a more comprehensive model of designing, embracing both practice and capacity, can be constructed? This is the wager the article explores. It makes no definitive claims. Its aim is to ask the question.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
DIID
Published
2024-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30682/diid8424c
Primary Topic
Design Education and Practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Metaphysics of Design

Clive Dilnot
DIID
Design Education and Practice
article

The Metaphysics of Design

Clive Dilnot
article en

Abstract

The paper is concerned with beginning to lay a basis for a more comprehensive model of designing, one that can overcome the abyss between the conceptual limitations of purely professional designing and wider instincts of design capabilities. The qualifier for today is that such a model of designing has to establish a structural relationship to the artificial. The approach in the paper has been to reach back into the last time such projects were attempted in the late 1960s/1970s, and to use as a moment Herbert Simon’s propositions on design and the artificial developed in The Sciences of the Artificial. These propositions were never fully thought through by design. This is in part perhaps because of the difficulty of thinking design in its professional moments in relation to Simon’s theses on the artificial. As will be seen below, in several respects these propositions severely challenge the limits of professional thinking in design. At the same time, does Simon’s proposition that design and the artificial are essentially identical (the one dependent upon the other) ground design more deeply than we have previously thought? Does this in turn offer an objective basis on which a more comprehensive model of designing, embracing both practice and capacity, can be constructed? This is the wager the article explores. It makes no definitive claims. Its aim is to ask the question.

DIID(84)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Design Education and Practice
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.