Could we understand ‘design’ through its definitions and approaches? Basic attitudes of the 20th century from Herbert Alexander Simon to Wolfgang Jonas

Öz

The article speaks on whether we could discuss design by defining its guiding and distinctive aspects. The examination focuses on basic assumptions and inferences of the 20th century about how design can be described and follows a qualitative method. The qualitative way used is based on theoretical reading and discussion. In this article, the narrative starts from the problem-related attitude of social scientist Herbert Alexander Simon and extends to the information-based perspective of design theorist Wolfgang Jonas. The discussion would contribute to understanding some of the guiding differences and similarities between definitions and approaches to design. The study emphasized that defining and understanding the concepts of design and design processes is complex. They are the product of socio-cultural and artistic combinations, technological developments and mathematical ideas.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Design
• design approaches
• design process
• design activity
• Herbert Alexander Simon
• Wolfgang Jonas

Tanımları ve yaklaşımlarıyla 'tasarımı' kavrayabilir miyiz? Herbert Alexander Simon'dan Wolfgang Jonas'a 20. yüzyılın temel tutumları

Öz

Makale, ayırt edici ve yol gösterici yönlerini tanımlayarak, tasarımın ne olduğu konusunda konuşup konuşamayacağımızdan bahsetmektedir. Çalışma, tasarımın nasıl tanımlanabileceğine dair yirminci yüzyılın başat varsayımlarına ve çıkarımlara odaklanmaktadır ve nitel bir yöntem izlemektedir. Kullanılan nitel yol, teorik okuma ve tartışmaya dayanmaktadır. Anlatı, sosyal bilimci Herbert Alexander Simon'ın tasarım problemi temelli bakış açısından başlamakta ve tasarım teorisyeni Wolfgang Jonas'ın bilgi temelli görüşüne kadar uzanmaktadır. Çalışma tartışması, tasarımla ilgili tanımlar ve yaklaşımlar arasındaki bazı yol gösterici farklılıkların ve benzerliklerin anlaşılmasına katkıda bulunacaktır.Çalışmanın vurguladığı üzere, tasarım ve tasarım süreçlerine ait kavramlarının tanımlanması ve anlaşılması karmaşıktır. Sosyo-kültürel ve sanatsal kaynaşmaların, teknolojik gelişmelerin ve matematiksel teorilerin ürünüdürler.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tasarım
• tasarım yaklaşımları
• tasarım süreci
• tasarım aktivitesi
• Herbert Alexander Simon
• Wolfgang Jonas

Kaynakça

1. 1. Alexander, C. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford university press.
2. 2. Alexander, C. (2002). Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard Univ. Press.
3. 3. Archea, J. (1971). Socio-physical technology: a state-of-the-art report. University of Pennsylvania, Center for Urban Research and Experiment.
4. 4. Archea, J. (1985). Architecture's Unique Position Among the Disciplines: Puzzle-Making vs. Problem Solving. CRIT XV, The Architectural Student Journal. pp. 20-22.
5. 5. Archea, J. (1987). Puzzle-making: What architects do when no one is looking. In Yehuda E. Kalay, (Ed.), Principles of computer-aided design: computability of design, New York: JohnWiley & Sons, pp 37–52.
6. 6. Archer, L. B. (1965). Systematic method for designers. Council of Industrial Design, H.M.S.O.
7. 7. Archer, B. (1979). 'Design as a Discipline', Design Studies, Vol 1, No 1, July 1979, pp.17-20.
8. 8. Beth, T., Jungnickel, D., & Lenz, H. (1999). Design theory. Cambridge University Press.

9. 9. Bonnardel, N., Marmèche, E. (2005). Towards supporting evocation processes in creative design: A cognitive approach. International journal of human-computer studies, 63(4-5), 422-435.
10. 10. Brawne, M. (2005). Architectural thought: The design process and the expectant eye. Elsevier.
11. 11. Broadbent, G., Jencks, C., & Bunt, R. (1990). Sings, symbols, and architecture. John Wiley & Sons.
12. 12. Coyne, R. (1990). "Logic of design actions". Knowledge-Based Systems. 3 (4): 242–257. doi:10.1016/0950-7051(90)90103-o.
13. 13. Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. Springer.
14. 14. Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Zed Books.
15. 15. Eastman, C. M. (1970). On the analysis of intuitive design processes. Emerging Methods in Environtmental Design and Planning, 21-37.
16. 16. Jonas, W. (1994). Design, System, Theorie: Überlegungen zu einem systemtheoretischen Modell von Design-Theorie. Essen: Verl. Die Blaue Eule.
17. 17. Kaplan, S. (1977). Participation in the design process: A cognitive approach. In Perspectives on environment and behavior (pp. 221-233). Springer.
18. 18. Lawson, B. (1980). How designers think: The design process demystified. London.
19. 19. Lawson, B. (2016). What designers know. Routledge.
20. 20. Lawson, B. R. (1979). Cognitive strategies in architectural design. Ergonomics, 22(1), 59-68.
21. 21. Lowe, G. (2002). Quantifying information flow. In Proceedings 15th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop. CSFW-15 (pp. 18-31). IEEE.
22. 22. Lowe, G. (2004). Defining information flow quantity. Journal of Computer Security, 12(3-4), 619-653.
23. 23. Mayer, R. E. (1998). Thinking, problem solving, cognition. Freeman.
24. 24. Petit, E. (2015). Reckoning with Colin Rowe: Ten architects take position. Routledge.
25. 25. Protzen, J. P., Harris, D. (2010). The universe of design: Horst Rittel's theories of design and planning. Routledge.
26. 26. Rowe, C. (1983). Program vs. paradigm. Cornell Journal of Architecture, 2, 8-19.
27. 27. Sağlamer, G. (1982). Mimari tasarımda çözümün tanımı ve nesnel olarak değerlendirilmesi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi.
28. 28. Schüler, R. (2019). Forms, Ideals, and Methods. Bauhaus Transfers to Mandatory Palestine. International Journal of Architectural Theory, 24(39), 11-33.
29. 29. Simon, H. A. (1976). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organisation. Free Press.
30. 30. Simon, H. A. (1979). Models of thought. Yale University Press.
31. 31. Werner, S., Long, P. (2002). Cognition meets Le Corbusier—Cognitive principles of architectural design. In International Conference on Spatial Cognition (pp. 112-126). Springer.
32. 32. Zeiler, W. (2019). An integral design framework for multi-disciplinary design. In Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 31-38). Cambridge University Press.