One of the great pleasures of reading Richard Rorty is experiencing his precise neglect of nonhuman actors. The man lived in a wordworld of free-floating humans whose sole purpose was conversation. It helps make what I learned from Bruno Latour extra tangible, that what we converse about is rooted as much in our tacit interactions … Continue reading Rorty’s wonderful omissions →

In my view, the problem with Rorty is that he fails to pay sufficient attention to practices outside of language that serve to strengthen or weaken a person’s — or a whole linguistic community’s — conception of truth. Clearly language is very important, but even the most persuasive and cohesive description that fails to describe … Continue reading Rorty’s relativism →

I’m working on a simple framework for aguiding the instauration of individual and collective common sense. Foot: Where have you (and others) stood within the situation, and where are you standing now? Eye: What are you (and others) trying to observe? Hand: How are you (and others) acting on the situation? Heart: Why do you … Continue reading Foot, eye, hand, heart and head →

Over breakfast, an evaporating dream is fortified with a confabulated plot which displaces the dream’s truth, but makes the dream memorable. * Dreams are unintentional, undisciplined, unformed. Sleeping, the mind is permitted to repose in native chaos and to proceed by accident — but chaos is as immemorable as a speech in a foreign language. … Continue reading Self-seeker →

Why do I love design research? First, I love new ideas. Performing design research early in a project generates fresher ideas. Yes, the ideas are better informed, but more importantly, they are better inspired. When we know something we are selectively filtering what seems irrelevant. But what is deemed relevant to any industry gets overcropped … Continue reading Why do I love design research? →