Policy, research and design; different language games Prof.dr.ir. Taeke M. de Jong, The Netherlands chair Technical Ecology and Methodology chair Regional Design University of Technology Delft, Faculty of Architecture

Language games policy (desirable futures) empirical science (probable futures) design science (possible futures)

Probable futures There are more and less probable futures

Probability  chance

Possible futures Anything probable is per definition possible but not everything possible is also probable. The probable future could be predicted. The improbable possibilities cannot be predicted. You only can explore them by design.

Desirable futures Design Empirical research Policy

Obvious and Impossible futures

Problems and aims

Undesired, improbable possibilities Are they relevant as long as nobody wants them?

Unexpected inventions Yes

Changing desires

Field of problems and aims Problems: probable, but not desirable futures Aims: desirable, but not probable futures

Causal and conditional thinking

Conditions for diversity The intellectual challenge of this century is to handle diversity –instead of generalising it by statistical reduction. Generalising research has diminishing returns –what could be generalised is generalised in centuries of empirical research. Problems left are context sensitive problems –object of design.

Diversity as a hidden supposition risk-cover for life precondition of –communication –trade, economy –possibility of choice for future generations uniqueness of individual and context quality of human living average useless in ecology, management and design science

Ecological tolerance

Quality = f(variation)

Ways to study design Preface by Rector Fokkema Within the range of a technical university the object of design – in terms of (urban) architecture and technique – is the design subject that is amongst all others most sensitive to context. The programme of requirements is not only derived from an economical and technical context, but also from contexts hailing from political, cultural, ecological en spatial considerations; on many levels of scale.

Ideal contents of a design related MSc Graduate Study Proposal 1.OBJECT OF STUDY AND ITS CONTEXT 2.MY STUDY PROPOSAL 3.ACCOUNTS to say the principal more than: “I am the best architect and scientist”

1 OBJECT OF MY STUDY AND ITS CONTEXT 1.1. Object of my study: frame and grain 1.2. Probable future context: field of problems 1.3. Desired impacts of my study: field of aims 1.4. My designerly references: field of means 1.5. My portfolio and perspective: field of abilities

Subtracting futures Field of problems = Probable - Desirable Field of Aims = Desirable - Probable

Explicit future context protects your design against judgements with other suppositions about the future raises the debate about the robustness of your design in different future contexts raises a ‘field of problems’ instead of an isolated ‘problem statement’ by subtracting the desirable futures from the probable ones

Object and context

2 MY STUDY PROPOSAL 2.1. Location and other future context factors 2.2. Motivation or programme of requirements 2.3. Intended results 2.4. Intended contributions to design science 2.5. Intended planning and organogramme

3ACCOUNTS 3.1. How did I meet criteria for a study proposal 3.2. My References 3.3. My Key words to find back what a principal wants to know in my proposal

Criteria for a study proposal A. Affinity with designing B. University latitude C. Concept formation and transferability D. Retrievability and accumulating capacity E. Methodical accountability and depth F. Ability to be criticised and to criticise G. Convergence and limitations