Great questions Paul ... What's wrong w/ Gray matter? And by that I mean, aren't we all smart enough to distinguish the gravitational affinities of a discipline from its edges that have lots of blur? Blur is great IMHO. It enables us to learn and advance as practitioners and as a discipline that much more.
But understanding the core is also important. Maybe your core lies elsewhere? THAT's OK! but that doesn't mean that each of the disciplines and practices you mentioned don't have their own distinctive core either. I don't want to argue the exact (where does this end or that begin) definitions of all the pieces you mention above. I concentrate on my world, which is interaction design and I look at how communities of practice and educational disciplines define themselves. I do caution your argument though b/c it leads down the slippery slope of, "Isn't it all just "D"esign?" and I feel that that approach does a lot of damage to practice and education. I think we also need to consider different people's perspective in a conversation like this one. What are the goals and motivations of the definer. Heck, I'm not immune. The biggest areas that force me into semantic debates again and again are education and career path. The other secondary area is around my perferred areas of practice which has put me in direct contact with industrial design centered practices, which after being in techie & webbie organizations REALLY put the spot light on design education as a core part of the health and well-being of the design group AND design practice from the point of foundations through studio crit is a core part of that practice. As I said in a different posting, we engage in these debates, to learn from one another and to hash out a strategic direction for the community as a whole. I don't think we are ever trying to say, "If that's been working well for you, but it doesn't fit my philosophy, you better stop and do it my way." If it is working and you and your clients and market are happy ... Then heck! codify it in lots of case studies, explain what value it adds to the whole of the community, and make it public for the world. What are YOUR IDEO method cards? The last point which comes from a private back and forth is that it seems some people are confusing "aesthetics" with "visual aesthetics". In interaction design aesthetics include many points of sensory & behavioral contacts and in some cases include points of no-contact. But isn't that my bigger point. How can we have a discipline where we can even discuss our unique angle on aesthetics unless we actually agree that aesthetics play a core role in what we do? Paul, to your last request about postings that address what you are asking successfully, there are 4 years of this thread, so I don't think I could point you to one posting. I do like Challis Hodge's original graphic on the eco-system of design and technology, which you can find on his blog (challishodge.com). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=23732 ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
