Title Problem and Paradox in Foundations of Design
Author Rosan Chow
Ken Friedman among many issues, discusses kinds of research. He states that there are basic, applied and clinical research. Two questions come to my mind: First, is this the most constructive way to categorize research, given the stage at which the design research is? Second, what interests does it serve?

If I were to ask "What kinds of people are there?" We could categorize people by race, by ethnicity, by sex, by religion, by nationality, by what kinds of car they drive and by many many different aspects. We know very well that any categorization must focus on a particular aspect for differentiation and necessarily muddles or hides other important and distinctive qualities. And each type of categorization tends to serve particular interests and purposes.

For my second question, I think the category of basic-applied-clinical serves to maintain the status quo.
For my first question, I don't know.

But I do believe that while the basic-applied-clinical approach can be useful, it is only one way of preceiving research. And given the stage we are at, we must allow different ways of perceiving research when we are constructing research programs in design.

Your thoughts?






© 2010 Rosan Chow