By Indah Widiastuti (2000)
I. Ontological Problem of Defining Esoteric field of Design as action
Which Design
Definition of design is apparently overly broad. There are
two ways of defining scope of design; (1) those which refer to designing
process or human action of design; (2) that refer to theoretical and normative
aspects of design (Rowe: 1988). The first one would be the scope compatible to
notions of Sustainability I discuss here. To be further specific, the core
manner of how designing process doesn’t refer to process of making product, nor
is masterbuilder myth taking control upon the constructed reality, but to concept
of design as mental activities of giving form to a reality (Papanek: 1995). As
a mentalities who dare to externalize his thoughts as a not-end-product in
order to get intelligence in the continuing self-organizing environment.
One problem of defining holistic
lies in the basic structure of scientific tradition applied, on which base the
academic scholar knowledge are established, taught and learned. One fundamental
problem roots down in the very foundation of scientific tradition of
Positivism, which separate material and spiritual enterprises and put humane
aspects out of context. These problems span along general education. This dilemma questions whether science would
ever be enough to bring forward the very ideas of architecture design as action,
and weather new ontological approaches should be advocated, or there should be
meta-theory which could enfold normal science along with other basic way of
thinking.
II. Design Thinking as Approach for Educating and Learning Holistic sense
There are some important points I take from definition
collected by Christopher Jones about Design, which support the mentality
description mentioned above. Alexander basically took design as essential
notified act of finding the right structure (1963), Archer found is as
problem-solving (1963), Asimow found it as decision making, in the face of
uncertainty (1962), and simulation (Booker: 1964). In this sense, design is
directed toward the abstraction of reality and into which new feature are
needed to be implanted without interfering balance of those constructed
reality.
Within design education, the making of knowledge and its
process of learning are hardly separable. Design process is the learning
process itself (Cross: 1981:281 in
Powell). Transformation of knowledge and learning or vice versa is called upon
pattern -making of the incoming data, to get thorough pictures of newly
modified reality. No wonder if design is said to be the knowledge of how much
knowledge is prepared (Cross: in Powell: 1981).
Design contains plural even undefined
aspect of problems. Functionally the relation between object and self is
inseparable within the action of design. (Sachari: 1987:p.25). It bounds
engineering, aesthetics and even spirituality into a whole tacit sense of doing.
It is a hybrid activity. It doesn’t operate on abstract relationships and
independent of historical times as much as in mathematics (Jones: 1987 p.10).
Scientists operate on the physical world as it exist or looked exist, in the
present while design deals with what should exist. This is how design discourses may transcend
science and art, in the case of confirming learning by doing. Designer usually knows many, though somewhat
not much. That designer often mixed up aspects of imaginations, spirituality,
aesthetic and science in creative actions. Therefore it is not too much
surprising that the mind of designers is at least very qualified at mapping
reality.
Expecting designers to design in holistic ways sounds only
sweet on speeches. But it may take all times one could have to comprehend the
essence and consequences/
What one must have found it difficult to accept is that scholarly
academic tradition will never broad enough to convey the notions of holistic design
as expected and describe above. One problematic situation in formulating
knowledge and pedagogical practice for holistic senses is that the subjective,
intuitive and esoteric role of humane enterprises. Subjectivity and intuitions
are usually taken as scapegoat of inappropriateness to meet analytical actions
and creative action. It explain that within Positivist science there has always
been a devoid between science as the discovery of real things and as an
elaborate mental creation designed to make sense of some unperceived or
unknowable reality. (Barrow: 1995. p.2). Consequently the properties of content
and enclosure, subject and object, spirit and body are usually presented as
separated object supplemented to the objective tested scientific perception,
such as ethics. Of course this is one alternative. But of course with one risk
of misinterpretations or even wrongly connected since both enterprises stand on
different language – scientific and ethical. Worse, spirituality, ethic and
morality may be inappropriately brought forward as check-listed procedures and
rituals. The essence gets oversimplified, formal or worse misinterpreted.
All design is goal directed play. There is a sense of
wonder, a feeling of completion in design that is lacking in many other fields.
These senses enrich human beings and provide joyous affirmation of what is
being worked out. The element of joy come from curiosity and playfulness and
delight in learning from trial and error in experimentation; deep need to bring
order out of chaos; compulsion to bring meanings and patterns to a world that seems
random and confused (Papanek: 1995,p.7). Here all human senses, kinesthesia,
haptic muscular sensitivity, and intuition beside cognitive enterprises take
part in learning process. Pedagogical practice therefore should not merely
designed to cultivate skills and ability, to impart a knowledge of facts,
theory and understanding of beliefs but also is designed so as to get
appropriate way of thinking. about the learning process.
The nature of design as human action is more well expressed
within Post-positivist or Complexity science paradigm presenting the arising
significance of creativity and holism in opposition to categorical character of
Positivism (Widiastuti: 1999). This model is corrective to the mechanistic
point of view, which today is broadly criticized for being so simplistic that
somehow ascribed for having caused human alienation to the environment.
Ontologically, Post-positivism science attributes spiritual and aesthetic
abstraction as well as verification (Guba: 1991). He explained that in new
science paradigm, scientific truth is revealed through "holistic abstraction" as well as
"empirical experiment", where both spirituality and aesthetic are
achieved to indicate intelligence through phenomena of abstraction (Guba:
1991).
There are some courses of thought derived from
Post-Positivistic science I refer to explore the way toward the way environment
as ordered and designed field. Anything done or any changes made to the
environment shall be realized as action of changing order. Architecture as an
object of dynamic creation and as designing process is systems, which contain
character of organismic, probable and chaotic (Widiastuti: 1998). (1) As
organismic agencies, designing process is dynamic and amoebic abstraction or
environmental text inhered in the field of contextual existence. Within
designing action the edge of designer thinking and the dynamic of object of
design in progress are blur. And the result of design should be seen as
emergent reality, rather than eternal entities. (2) As chaotic agencies the act
of design are seen as bridging order and chaos (papanek: 1995; Widiastuti:
1998). Designing process is a jump into higher level of environmental order.
Design, as emergent reality is the whole superimposed and multi-layered
conditions, potentials and context of environments. (3) As probability
agencies, designing process are the processing if pattern and information of
environment. Here designing process should account the reformulating of
environments. And within process of reformulation, the status of designed
object is becoming ambiguous. Here designed orientation put environment always
in position of virtual transition.
Whenever students learn natural science, math, humanity
ethics, and art, they should not forget that each subject is one holistically
designed narration. Potential of design thinking for education is actually seen
in some tendency of trend of education. They shall always know what they learn
before beginning to learn and figure out how the lessons interacts with other
discipline at last. Therefore the knowledge shall impose sense of holistic or
sense sustainability without compeling the narration. “Thinking about thinking" is principle of any empowering
practice of education. Instead of objectivity Zohar suggest that education
should leads to teach “Learning the
Impossible (Zohar: 196,p.37). Knowing by doing is the essence (Bruner:
1997: p.xii). Meaning is not inhered within knowledge but is inhered within processes
and events that take place on the self of the learners. What they see is what
they get, what they find is what they learn. There are various and popular
model which offers the holistic educational principles, by maintaining
humanistic approach as: learning by doing; kinship relation among teacher as educator,
and friend; freedom of choice; participatory democracy, cultural diversity and
global citizenship; earth literacy; and spiritual world view. However those ideas rather technical, and the
model gives much space to expand the listing principle. But certain points is
obvious that lessons should not merely cognitive appreciated, but also
aesthetically found and spiritually experienced. Participatory principle should
be derived from this. And that is what design field may contribute to the
education.
Bibliography
1.
Bruner, Jerome: The Culture of Education , London, Harvard
University Press (1997)
2.
Dovers, Stephen R & Handmer, John W; Contradiction in Sustainability, (1999)
3.
Jacques,Robin & Powell,
James A (ed)
(1981); Design: Science: Method; Westbury
House IPC Business Press Ltd
4. Jones, Christopher 2nd edition; Design Methods; Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York(1992
)
5.
Lawson, Bryan; How Designers Think; The Architectural Press Ltd: London (1980)
6.
Papanek, Victor: Green
Imperative, Singapore, Thames & Hudson (1995)
7.
Rowe, Peter: Design Thinking, MIT Press, (1988)
8.
Sachari, Agus; Seni, Desain & Tekologi, Bandung, Nova (1987)
9.
Widiastuti, Indah, Architecture as Complex-Dynamic Systems - Paper presented on
National Symposium of Architecture-"Discourse
of Theory in Architecture Indonesia (Nusantara)", Parahyangan
University; Bandung, Indonesia (1999)
10.
Widiastuti, Indah, Scientific Approach on Local Knowledge of Architecture based on
Paradigm of New Science"- Paper presented on National Symposium of
Architecture-" Traditional Text of Indonesian (Nusantara)
Architecture", "Sepuluh November" Institute of Technology,
Surabaya, Indonesia (1999)
11.
Indah Widiastuti Environmental
Insight in Architecture based on Paradigm of New Science, (1999)
unpublished paper
