Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science

Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science

2001 | Nigel Cross
The paper by Nigel Cross explores the historical and theoretical relationship between design and science, focusing on three main interpretations: scientific design, design science, and a science of design. Scientific design refers to modern, industrialized design that relies on scientific knowledge and a mix of intuitive and non-intuitive methods. Design science is an explicitly organized, rational, and systematic approach to design, aiming to develop a coherent and formalized method. A science of design, on the other hand, is the study of design through systematic and reliable methods, focusing on the principles, practices, and procedures of design. The paper also discusses the challenges and debates surrounding these concepts, highlighting the importance of recognizing the unique intellectual culture of design and the need to avoid importing methodologies from other disciplines. Donald Schön's constructivist paradigm is introduced as an alternative to positivist approaches, emphasizing the reflective practice of design and the importance of trust in the abilities of competent practitioners. The paper concludes by advocating for a disciplined conversation within the field of design, emphasizing the development of domain-independent approaches to theory and research in design.The paper by Nigel Cross explores the historical and theoretical relationship between design and science, focusing on three main interpretations: scientific design, design science, and a science of design. Scientific design refers to modern, industrialized design that relies on scientific knowledge and a mix of intuitive and non-intuitive methods. Design science is an explicitly organized, rational, and systematic approach to design, aiming to develop a coherent and formalized method. A science of design, on the other hand, is the study of design through systematic and reliable methods, focusing on the principles, practices, and procedures of design. The paper also discusses the challenges and debates surrounding these concepts, highlighting the importance of recognizing the unique intellectual culture of design and the need to avoid importing methodologies from other disciplines. Donald Schön's constructivist paradigm is introduced as an alternative to positivist approaches, emphasizing the reflective practice of design and the importance of trust in the abilities of competent practitioners. The paper concludes by advocating for a disciplined conversation within the field of design, emphasizing the development of domain-independent approaches to theory and research in design.
Reach us at info@study.space