{"title":"Schön和Simon都同意:设计的合理性","authors":"Hans Georg Schaathun","doi":"10.1016/j.destud.2022.101090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Simon and Schön are commonly seen to represent two conflicting views on design method, but this interpretation has been challenged in recent years. In this paper we discuss their differences and agreements in more depth. Both of them agree on a rationality which is distinct from science and its reliance on universal truth. They depend on a practical reason, and what Aristotle calls the calculative part of the soul, which deals with the contingencies of real world problems, and still let us know, and share, truth. One discrepancy remains between Simon and Schön. Simon does not tell us how we identify the changing goals of man. Schön addresses this by invoking the distinctly human power to <em>see-as</em>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50593,"journal":{"name":"Design Studies","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 101090"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X22000102/pdfft?md5=2c8985d2ddce02962f97d934973c6383&pid=1-s2.0-S0142694X22000102-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Where Schön and Simon agree: The rationality of design\",\"authors\":\"Hans Georg Schaathun\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.destud.2022.101090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Simon and Schön are commonly seen to represent two conflicting views on design method, but this interpretation has been challenged in recent years. In this paper we discuss their differences and agreements in more depth. Both of them agree on a rationality which is distinct from science and its reliance on universal truth. They depend on a practical reason, and what Aristotle calls the calculative part of the soul, which deals with the contingencies of real world problems, and still let us know, and share, truth. One discrepancy remains between Simon and Schön. Simon does not tell us how we identify the changing goals of man. Schön addresses this by invoking the distinctly human power to <em>see-as</em>.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Design Studies\",\"volume\":\"79 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101090\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X22000102/pdfft?md5=2c8985d2ddce02962f97d934973c6383&pid=1-s2.0-S0142694X22000102-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Design Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X22000102\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Studies","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142694X22000102","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Where Schön and Simon agree: The rationality of design
Simon and Schön are commonly seen to represent two conflicting views on design method, but this interpretation has been challenged in recent years. In this paper we discuss their differences and agreements in more depth. Both of them agree on a rationality which is distinct from science and its reliance on universal truth. They depend on a practical reason, and what Aristotle calls the calculative part of the soul, which deals with the contingencies of real world problems, and still let us know, and share, truth. One discrepancy remains between Simon and Schön. Simon does not tell us how we identify the changing goals of man. Schön addresses this by invoking the distinctly human power to see-as.
期刊介绍：
Design Studies is a leading international academic journal focused on developing understanding of design processes. It studies design activity across all domains of application, including engineering and product design, architectural and urban design, computer artefacts and systems design. It therefore provides an interdisciplinary forum for the analysis, development and discussion of fundamental aspects of design activity, from cognition and methodology to values and philosophy.
Design Studies publishes work that is concerned with the process of designing, and is relevant to a broad audience of researchers, teachers and practitioners. We welcome original, scientific and scholarly research papers reporting studies concerned with the process of designing in all its many fields, or furthering the development and application of new knowledge relating to design process. Papers should be written to be intelligible and pertinent to a wide range of readership across different design domains. To be relevant for this journal, a paper has to offer something that gives new insight into or knowledge about the design process, or assists new development of the processes of designing.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
