Updated from the same essay for “Design Thinking” Alternative Approach on Educating And Learning Sense of Sustainability (17th Inter Schools Conference : SUSTAINABLE CITIES: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT – The Urban Agenda in the Developing World, April 2000, Sheffield) and SENVAR 2000, Surabaya Indonesia
Introduction [1]
Design is conscious and intuitive efforts to impose significant order …It is one of the most basic human drives – both intellectually and emotional – to order, arrange, organize and discipline a seemingly chaotic environment - Generation to come – (Papanek: 1995:p.211)
This paper is not meant to bring forward a robust or practical detail about pedagogical and methodological principle of education but offering a conceptual discussion about a model of learning and educating sense of holistic, and more particularly is for the interest of familiarizing discourse of Sustainability. It is well acknowledged that overcoming environmental problem does not only matter technique and ethic. It also concerns conceptual mind-frame of about man-environment relation, about mind-frame of doing so or way of thinking and doing. Sustainability itself is historical discourse whose issues has been recurring through history. Therefore the matter of implanting notion or sense of holism, stands beyond the discourse of Sustainability. It is about establishing a world-view, rather than modifying technique. For implementing this sense of holism as world view I introduced design discipline as to bridge the act of knowing and the act of doing.
Practically sense of holism in designedly act and sense is not a new thing. It is a characteristic trait that has been by nature or education internalized tacitly by designers as part of its creative force. What made difference was the historical moment that has been representing it as paradigm of Sustainability in late 1980′s-1990′s. The rise of awareness of cultural and social side of architecture’s theory that enhance viewing architecture as a holistic perception, arose discourses of Phenomenology in 1930′s, the importance of Vernacular architecture in 1960′s , and the discourse of Green Architecture in 1985′s. And the most recent dicourse uplifting the sense of Holism is the Sustainability and discourse of Post-Positivism science. In this paper also Post-Positivist science would be exposed as core arguments of how incorporating design thinking could supply ontological base for implanting notions of holistic. Ultimately this exposition tried to promote design thinking as a potential model for cultivating sense of Holism, for the interest of introducing subject of Sustainability.
In the Positivism, sense of holistic in knowledge had been often stumbled on problems of the categorical and mechanistic nature in any of scientific justification. As design is taken as object of learning, in positivist way, designing has been silently separated from its state of part of human reflex. In Normal science tradition or Positivism, knowledge properties of Designing had been generally imparted categorically, into processes and forms of concept, structure, utility, space, and places. And naturally, issues that concerns aesthetics, spirituality and intuitions as prominent property of creativity had been considered unscientific, and therefore were peripherally justified by Positivist traditions. On the other hand the recent Post-positivist paradigm of science showed more generous space to regard esoteric dimension, more imaginative, more chaotic and aesthetic, intuitive, and more complete. Design as a process creative acts and process of obtaining goal, as experience of developing a zero point into something, gain more respect to as model a comprehensive notion of holism. Some thinker even had promoted design as discipline for learning in general.
For this reason this paper tried to highlight design , which is normally taken as as object of learning, as way of learning. This designedly way of thinking is relevant in the study of Sustainability because it promote the notions, value and sense of Holism. And Holism itself has been the core knowledge of creative intelligence in designing, as well as paradigm in Post-Positivism science. There is nothing conceptually new in the preposition regarding sense of holism, design and Environmental issues. But the discourse of this ”Paradigm Shift”" (Kuhn, 1963) in science is a milestone to reform many courses of knowledge buildings including in design knowledge, environmental awareness and ultimately paradigm of Sustainability.
I. Notions in Sustainability
The objects of concerns and scope of works of Sustainability were basically loosely arbitrary. They stand on diverse narration, depending on the historical context, ideological backgrounds and techniques which doesn’t necessarily always call for relations. Recently Sustainability cover historical and compelling multidisciplinary and various themes ideologically that are concentrated in discourses of environmental crisis, global environment awareness, inter-generational natural resources, even also emancipation and empowerment etc. Indeed as outlined by Dovers & Handmer that the notions cover deep and diverse historical roots in energy analysis, classical economics, renewable resources management, and many other (Dover’s & Hander: 1999). Institutionally, Sustainability has been made explicit by some milestone during 1960-1970 environmental issues in Europe and America, followed by the declarations of environmental acts, such as UCN: 1980, Brundtland Commission (1977), and the most recent Agenda 21 (1992) (Steele: 1996). However there are certain homology of issues concentrated in discussion about wilderness, forestry, and Green design.
However, as mostly risked by any historical discourse, once Sustainability,turned into globalized homology it becomes paradoxically imperative, moved silently away from the spirit of emancipation and context that had been promoted at the outset, and ironically ended up in intellectual fashions for any other possible discourses. Some discourse could be so extreme and brought Sustainable back to tha old intellectual fashion of Environmental Determinism in 1970′s and therefore was called satyristically by some critique as Eco-facism. There are also certain discursive fashion that could potentially turn Sustainability contradictory against its noble notions on building awareness to environment. When attached to the concept of development – Sustainable development – the ideas of growth are in fact on the contrary to principle of stable continuity. Here again the perception of stability to describe environment stumbled on assumption of stable environment as mostly believed in positivist science. Dovers & Handmer also posed some contradictions within Sustainability such as the rise of industries labeled after ecological, which are in fact caused more damage to natural resource, whereas the corporate itself run unsustainable and environmental -unfriendly management.
There are also other historical notions steering the discourses of Sustainability. Most Modernism narrations have been always put in opposite to Sustainability so as any technological mastery. In the mean time Postmodernism is always attaches to Sustainability and became universal intellectual fashion toward which issues everybody are compelled to update themselves. Polemics such as Nostalgic-Regionalism, Neo-Vernacularism, Ethnocentrism and Traditionalism is by itself attached upon the issues to support Sustainability and to set against Modernism. Sustainability has been also heralded as contra narrative to consumer culture and deforestation. The 3rd world society is usually pointed to model the way industrialization and Modernism had been naturalized into system of universal education and place very little percentage on study that enhance local knowledge.
Economically Sustainability inevitably has been also commodity packed in academic fashion. The discourse float on academic institution, sometime without any concerns on how it internally establish a frame of doing and behaving for the learner. Revolutionary perspective against environmental destruction often crashed against other typical revolutionary perspective promoted by Post-Modernism such as Deconstruction, Dislocation, Hyper-reality. Here again the perception of stability to describe environment stumbles on general assumption about static environment as inhered in Positivism paradigm. It indicated more a paradigmatic chaos where plurality and paradox, are used more to legitimate practical uprooting of identity and allowing superficial game of signs, than invoking sense of dynamic nature of holistic body .
Other epistemological paradox renders the fact that Sustainability in general discourse could not also escape anthropocentrism, where natures are mostly described as which benefiting human needs. Opposition of human as subject of nature turns out to
be the counter-ideas of principles of holistic sense where human is supposed to be taken equal parts of nature. In this way the notions holistic are not holistic enough since human are always unconsciously put outside the holistic system, and silently and positively assumed as agent of positive changes.
Those notions above prove that Sustainability, as theoretical concepts are historically and ideologically vulnerable. It is also part of global cultural agenda of universal meta-naration. In other hand problems of ecology has been apparent and indeed we need strategic methods to overcome it. One of it is through strategic education. But as a way of thinking it should not be delivered as mere technological innovations, theoretical propositions and ethical rules but maintaining humane enterprises and their perception to the world. We need establishing methods and academic enterprises suitable to cover all human intelligence that develop and compose the nature of holistic way of thinking. Multidisciplinary approaches tend to be alternative approaches to enfold the grip of various discourses, including those, which incorporated beyond-normal scientific explanations. Nevertheless if can than we also have problems on how method, establishing body of knowledge and ultimately, on how the learner could internalize it.
The dilemmatic questions is whether science would ever be enough to bring forward the very ideas of Holism, even by the term of Sustainability? Could there be any meta-theory which could enfold normal science along with other basic way of thinking. One problem of defining holistic lies in the basic structure of scientific tradition applied, on which base the academic scholarly knowledge are established, taught and learned. One fundamental problem roots down in the very foundation of scientific tradition which separate the scientifically-explained enterprise and scientifically-inexplicable enterprises and put humane aspects out of context. These kind of problems has been spanning along history of Western Philosophy on which general scholarly traditions has stood.
2. The Holistic Nature of Design Thinking and Sustainability
Environmental knowledge has a very long history of its theoretical recursions. Even environmental approach in design knowledge had been well recognized enterprising over the history of design and architecture, such as traditional design, Organic design, Community Based Development, Greendesign, and etc. Disintegration within community which somehow destructive environment is also caused by the loosing spiritual or humane quality which signify respect and multiplicity and plural way of thinking. Practically unsustainable behavior start from nitwit ignorance and the losing attachment of human properties and to its enterprises, plotted in self, surrounding and environment. The rise of individual live, consumer culture, poverty, pragmatic environment daily practices, colonizations, abandoned local knowledge are mere expressed consequence of a far deeper problem that contribute to environmental problems. These problems are not only caused by lack of information or knowledge about environment. But about framing self and environment as a unit of design, and how education should introduce the frame.
Considering that environmental problem is quite apparent and could not be responded individually. It should be overcome more holistic mechanism which principally establish a capability to sense a wholeness. The the pedagogy would somehow transcends common scholarly or academic traditions point of view. Using the word of Papanek, I would conceptualise that internally in human self, designing is a mental activities of refining form for a given complexy reality (Papanek: 1995). It is an articulative effort to externalize comprehended order or thoughts. Therefore the close-end-product is not the goal of design. Maintaining intelligence within the continuing self-organizing environment is so. Here I would like to introduce an idea that. Design can bring great benefit to education not just with the education.
Of designers, but with the education of everyone. (Papanek: 1995,p.210).
Which Design?
Design has been always associated with designer and architects or artists. 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 and (2), that refer to theoretical and normative aspects of design (Rowe: 1988). The first one is compatible to designing whichbeyond a process of creating a product, nor is myth of building mastery who as if always in absolute control on designed object as a constructed reality.
Basically, design essentially notify act of finding the right structure (Alexander: 1963), problem solving (Archer: 1963), decision making, in the face of uncertainty (Asimow, 1962), and simulation (Booker: 1964), (in Christopher Jones, 1992). In a context that in design learning, the establishment of knowledge and its learning process are inseparable, or in other words. the design process is the learning process itself (Cross: 1981:281 in Powell). Transformations from the making of knowledge and learning process or vice versa take places simutaneously. No wonder if design is said to be the knowledge of how much knowledge is prepared (Cross: in Powell: 1981). Projecting this on the sense of environmental harmony, designerliness is directed toward abality to conceptualise abstraction of reality which is able to contain new establishments without interfering balance of the systems in the designed world itself.
Functionally the relation between object and self is inseparable within the action of design. (Sachari: 1987:p.25). It comprehends engineering, aesthetics and spirituality as one affair. 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 assesses the physical world as it exist or looked exist, while design assesses the conceptualizing and articulating equilibrium in existence. This is how design discourses may transcend science and art, in the case of confirming learning by doing. Sustainability in terms of the way knowledge is transferred. Sustainability may be practical bridging the substantial science and art with the hard-dealt reality. Sustainability may contain archetypical an apriori premises, but it practically concern contextual medium . In a simpler words, designer is usually acknowledge as knowing many, though somewhat not much, accumulating all properties, spirituality, aesthetic and science, to come up with a singular image or concept in a creative work. Designer mind is meant to be qualified at mapping reality, as designed object.
Design as Social Intelligence
Design doesn’t apply only to they who work design professionals. But also applies to all kind of activities that incorporate creative thinking and doing, such as social, economic, legislators, managers, publicist, applied researchers, politicians. It is applicable for various realm such as market analysis, urban areas, public service, law and the like that incorporate act of modification. (Jones: 1987: p.5). That humanistic view of design indicates that the conceptual preparation of action is its social essence (Gaparsky in Powell: 1981: p.98).
It seems essential that social role for design and the social organization of the design process, that apart from specialist knowledge, humanistic axiology should also be established in the design process framework. (Gaparsky: 1981: p.104). Principally it should encourage the way putting self to fit the environment, socially and objectively, to feel the rhythm of the day, its changes, imbalance or balance and to feel the need of fixing the holism of their environment, either home, neighborhood, and other bigger spatial context. To intelligently find out how parts of environments should interconnected and figures out how to contribute to the holistic performance of self and environments. Therefore Sustainability shall be part of social intelligence.
Design approaches and paradigm of Sustainability are both have the same interest, in dealing with dynamic effort of achieving balance in holistic performance and durability in time. One of its methodological and epistemological character that could cope with concept of Holistic, is the controlling mechanism upon dynamic, uncertainties and Paradox and modes of integration in a system. Design thinking put system in all scale as a designed field of interconnectedness. This outlines characterizes sense essential to creative process. Ephemerality and pereniality become alike options, dependent upon context.
3. Design Thinking as Approach for Educating and Learning Holistic sense
Positives science tradition is not broad enough to contain notions of holistic as described above. Even the design process stumble on methodological and pedagogical problems when it has to be justified scientifically. One problem to formulating knowledge and pedagogical practice of holistic sense in Sustainability would be methods and techniques to verify the properties of the “so called”subjective and esoteric aspects of humane enterprises. This problems roots on the devoid between science as the discovery of real things and as an elaborate mental creation designed to make sense of some vague reality. Consequently each properties is usually presented as separated object, design as knowledge and as practice. The risk of misinterpretations or apparent since both enterprises stand on different language – scientific and non-scientifi (ethical, aesthetic, social, spirituality). Worse, they may be inappropriately brought forward as mere verbal proposition. The essence gets oversimplified, formal or worse misinterpreted.
All design is goal directed endeavors. There are senses essential to its design learning philosophy, such as excitement, playfullness. wonder, a notion of completion which is lacking in many other fields of science. 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 end in cultivating skills and ability, to impart a knowledge of facts, theory and understanding of beliefs but also is designed so as to internalize a way of doing.
Paradigm of design and Sustainability shares the same preferential logic of holism whose epistemological nature has been more well expressed within Post-positivist science paradigm. It is 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. It is true as Egon Guba (1991) maintianed that ontologically, Post-positivism science attributes spiritual and aesthetic abstraction as well as verification. 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 methodological property of seeing environment as ordered and designed field. Principally, it laid on assumption that changes, interferences to system or any modifications made about the environment is action of modifying the order. Designer is agent of modification or modifier. But standing as designer here is practically any participants who contribute modifications. It could be any party of various realm. Environment is here a system with its equilibrium-making property. Environment is stable and active. It is designed because it recurrently acquiring its homeostasis. In my earlier paper I introduce characters of system, process and modifier in the frame of dynamic equilibrium. and as designing process is systems, which are: 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 iss objective states. (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 recurring reformulation of environments. And within process of reformulation, any status of designed object is becoming ambiguous. Here designed orientation put environment always in position of virtual transition or dynamic, the over-layering of eventualities.
In term of Positivism we know two extreme mind-frame on which learning process is working – the logical and the intuitive. Both actually proceeds common sequential scientific verification and learning process. The difference between them is only that the logical property verify and learn by conducting observation and assessment while the intuitive does it by conducting rigorous sensing and articulating. Let see as follows how both could come hand in hand.
As well as in science, abstraction is a learning process within first stage of design. It should principally direct to maintain ability of accumulating and bringing image of fact, knowledge and information. Logical approach may direct observation to any information or data and intuitive approach may direct to sensing the move of field. The second stage, conceptualization, is the early phase of interference to environment, where learning process are directed to ability of conceptualizing the dynamic of changes in environment. Here logical approach would conduct analyzing while intuitive approach would conduct imagining. The rational student may find the truth; the intuitive may find aesthetic and conform-ability. Finally they both may have learned a complete and interconnected features of what they learn. But that ist not yet holistic.
Within Positivist science the intuitive enterprise has not been being considered positively and was categorized outside science, into humanity and artistic domain. Logical enterprise has been considered prime. Post-Positivist science tends to form ontological base that reconciles both logical and intuitive enterprise. Designers in whichever field of practice or thoughts are trained to exercise both logical and intuitive approaches, and therefore they are closer to sense of holistic. Therefore here design knowledge s has the capacity to reconcile both enterprise to form epistemology that could bear the idea of holistic sense.
Diagram 1: Ontological Base of Positivism
Within Positivist paradigm sense of holistic could never be explicated enough, since the model separates the nature of subjectivity from his ontological paradigm (see diagram 1).
Diagram 2. Ontological-base of Post-Positivism Science.
On the other hand sense of holistic are explicated more completely within of Post Positivist paradigm, since it tend not to Clear-cut the difference between objective and subjective aspect of natural event and natural object (see diagram 2).
“Thinking about thinking” is principle of any empowering practice of education. Other than principle of objectivity, as similarly suggested by Zohar suggest, education should lead learner to atain capacity of “learning the impossible (Zohar: 196,p.37). Aesthetic, participatory reflex, the feeling or notion of fullness should be taken as significant and essential supplement to cognitive appreciation as this is what design field may contribute to the education. Learningby doing is the essence (Bruner: 1997: p.xii). The property of meaning does not lay in the narrative of science or knowledge but inhered within the learning capacity of the learner. The model must enable space to expand the learning capacity and imagination. Even for some simple subject like natural science, e.g. math, humanity ethics, and art, or art, e.g. sculpting, painting, and social activities any normative material should be acompanied by practical things. Metaphor could be used as method to methodologically amalgamate the whole property of the subjectn and the wholesome of idea of the subject, the way a designer conceptualise a design.
In this way sense of holistic frame should be conceived as essential instinct to human thinking and action. Paradigm of design may contribute pedagogical practice for any knowledge, which expect holistic way of thinking. In this way pedagogical practice and learning process within paradigm of Sustainability should be an art of doing, pleasure of making and spiritual experiences of experiencing the world. This should be familiarized by means of the whole enterprises of human intelligence because it is indeed the core of human intelligence. And therefore, let sustainability unfold on this base.
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
