Individualism encourages designers to be incommunicative, protective of their ideas, and unable to work as a team or involve clients and the community in the process. Design requires effective collaboration. The argument is advanced here that exhortations to collaborate and cooperate are often frustrated by the current commitment within academic and professional circles to the legacy of Descartes. Design as an activity of the individual emerges from both the Cartesian rationalistic tradition and the Romantic countertradition that is focused on spirit and genius. Counter to this assertion of the primacy of the individual is the argument that reason is a product of shared experience. This does not mean that reason is accomplished through conformity to consensus. The inference of conformity can be circumvented by recourse to Gadamer's metaphors of effective historical consciousness and participation in the hermeneutic circle. The conclusion is that the metaphor of the individual as the focus of reason and hence the source of design genius is appropriate in particular contexts, but needs to be seen against other more helpful metaphors of participation and involvement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderC, 1964Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
2.
ArcherB L, 1970, “An overview of the structure of the design process”, in Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning Ed. MooreG T (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 285–307
3.
AxelrodR, 1984The Evolution of Cooperation (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx)
4.
BernsteinR J, 1983Beyond Objectivism and Relativism (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
5.
BevlinM E, 1964Design Through Discovery (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York)
6.
CoyneR D, 1991, “Inconspicuous architecture”Proceedings of Gadamer, Action and Reason: A Two-day Conference on the Application of the Hermeneutic Philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer within the Human SciencesFaculty of Architecture, University of Sydney, Sydney, pp 62–70
CrossN, 1990, “The nature and nurture of design ability”Design Studies11(3) 127–140
9.
DescartesR, 1968Discourse on Method and the Meditations translated by SutcliffeF E (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx)
10.
DreyfusH, 1991Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
11.
EdwardsB, 1979Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain (Jeremy P Tarcher, Los Angeles, CA)
12.
FichteJ G, 1984Wissenschaftslehre (first published 1805; F Meiner, Hamburg)
13.
ForesterJ, 1977The Planning Analyst's Questioning: Toward a Communicative Theory of Design (PURS, Ithaca, NY)
14.
FurstL R, 1969Romanticism in Perspective: A Comparative Study of Aspects of the Romantic Movements in England, France and Germany (Macmillan, London)
15.
GadamerH-G, 1975Truth and Method (Sheed and Ward, London)
16.
HackingI, 1986, “Making up people”, in Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought Eds HellerT CSosnaMWellberyD E (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA) pp 222–236
17.
HeideggerM, 1962Being and Time translated by MacquarrieJRobinsonE (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
18.
IllichISaundersB, 1988ABC: The Alphabetization of the Popular Mind (North Point Press, San Francisco, CA)
19.
Johnson-LairdP N, 1988The Computer and the Mind: An Introduction to Cognitive Science (Fontana, London)
20.
JonesJ C, 1970Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
21.
KolbD, 1984Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
22.
KrumholzNForesterJ, 1990Making Equity Planning Work: Leadership in the Public Sector (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA)
23.
KuhnT S, 1970The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
24.
LakoffGJohnsonM, 1980Metaphors We Live By (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
25.
LyotardJ-F, 1986The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Manchester University Press, Manchester)
26.
MaturanaH, 1988, “Reality: The search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument”The Irish Journal of Psychology9(1) 25–82
27.
MitchellW J, 1990The Logic of Architecture: Design, Computation, and Cognition (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
28.
NewellASimonH A, 1972Human Problem Solving (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
29.
Norberg-SchulzC, 1966Intentions in Architecture (Universitetsforlaget, Oslo)
30.
Plato, 1941The Republic of Plato translated by MacDonaldCornford F (Oxford University Press, London)
31.
Plato, 1965Timaeus and Critias translated by LeeD (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx)
RasmussenS E, 1987Experiencing Architecture (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
34.
RicoeurP, 1974, “The question of the subject: The challenge of semiology”, in The Conflict of Interpretations: Essays in Hermeneutics Ed. IhdeD (Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL) pp 236–266
35.
RittelH W J, 1972, “Second-generation design methods”, OP-1, The DMG 5th Anniversary Report, The Design Methods Group, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA, pp 5–10
36.
RortyR, 1980Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
37.
RuchF LZimbardoP G, 1971Psychology and Life (Scott Foresman, Glenview, IL)
SchönD, 1963Displacement of Concepts (Tavistock Publications, Andover, Hants)
40.
SimonH, 1970Sciences of the Artificial (MIT Press, London)
41.
SnodgrassA, 1990Architecture, Time and Eternity: Studies in the Stellar and Temporal Symbolism of Traditional Buildings, Volume 1 (Aditya, New Delhi)
42.
SnodgrassA, 1991, “Asian studies and the fusion of horizons”Proceedings of Gadamer, Action and Reason: A Two-day Conference on the Application of the Hermeneutic Philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer within the Human SciencesFaculty of Architecture, University of Sydney, Sydney, pp 35–42
43.
SullivanL, 1947Kindergarten Chats (Wittenborn Schultz, New York)
44.
WinogradTFloresF, 1986Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA)
