Design as Inquiry Prospects for a Material Philosophy Björn Franke A thesis submitted in partial ful!lment of the requirements of the Royal College of Art for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March, 2016 Royal College of Art 2 Copyright Statement "is text presents the submission for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Royal Col- lege of Art. "is copy has been supplied for the purpose of research for private study, on the understanding that it is copyright material, and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. 4 Author’s Declaration During the period of registered study in which this thesis was prepared the author has not been registered for any other academic award or quali!cation. "e material included in this thesis has not been submitted wholly or in part for any aca- demic award or quali!cation other than that for which it is now submitted. Björn Franke, March 31, 2016 6 Abstract For many, design is the production of useful artefacts. Designing can however also provide a basis for exploration, speculation or critique. "is thesis develops this conception further by providing a theoretical framework for conceiving designing and design objects as a mode of and media for philosophical inquiry. Design is regarded as a material philosophy that explores and re#ects philosophical issues by situating them in the concrete and particular reality of human life rather than in a generalised and abstract realm. Design objects are equipment and media that can be understood in terms of their contextual references and consequences as well as the way in which they mediate human action, thinking and existence, and thus in terms of the worlds that they open up. As media for re#ection they allow one to gain an experiential understanding of these contexts and worlds. Design thus relates to philosophy in terms of ethics and concepts; that is, in terms of exploring possibilities of existence and new forms of thinking. Since design objects can cre- ate new experiences and interactions they can lead to new values and concepts. "ese objects can be used to re#ect on philosopical issues and to thus see the world from a new perspective. "ese new perspectives may be brought about through three approaches: First, through !ctions that render possible worlds experienceable or show the existing world in a new way. Second, through models that serve as tools for understanding and mediation between the general and abstract and the concrete and particular. "ird, through situations, simulations and re-enactments that facilitate a direct and bodily experience of a new per- spective. "ese approaches can make abstract ideas experienceable, as they materialise these issues in concrete situations and thereby allow one to judge them in a real world context, including possible consequences. "e activity of designing is accordingly considered an exploration of philosophical questions that uses design objects both as media for conducting an inquiry and communicating its outcome. 8 But if there is a sense of reality, and no one will doubt that it has its justi!cations for existing, then there must also be something we can call a sense of possibility. Whoever has it does not say, for instance: Here this or that has happened, will happen, must happen; but he invents: Here this or that might, could, or ought to happen. If he is told that something is the way it is, he will think: Well, it could probably just as well be otherwise. So the sense of possibility could be de!ned outright as the ability to conceive of everything there might be just as well, and to attach no more importance to what is than to what is not. —Robert Musil1 1. Robert Musil, "e Man Without Qualities, trans. Sophie Wilkins and Burton Pike (London: Picador, 1995), 10–11. 10 Contents Introduction ⋅ 17 Context and Contribution ⋅ 19 Research Questions ⋅ 21 Methodology ⋅ 22 Outline of the Argument ⋅ 23 Outline of the Chapters ⋅ 24 Chapter 1: Design as Inquiry ⋅ 26 Design as an Activity ⋅ 28 Design as a Field ⋅ 33 Design as Critical Practice ⋅ 38 Design as Inquiry ⋅ 47 Chapter 2: Mediating Technologies ⋅ 53 Equipment and Context ⋅ 54 Media and Messages ⋅ 58 Technological Mediation ⋅ 64 Questioning Technology ⋅ 70 Chapter 3: Design’s Knowledge ⋅ 77 Forms of Knowledge ⋅ 78 Designing as Knowledge ⋅ 83 Knowledge as Answer or Question? ⋅ 89 Design Objects as Knowledge ⋅ 92 Chapter 4: A Material Philosophy ⋅ 99 Conceptions of Philosophy ⋅ 100 Approaches to Philosophical Questions ⋅ 105 Designing as Philosophical Inquiry ⋅ 109 Design Objects as Philosophical Inquiry ⋅ 113 Chapter 5: Tangible !ought Experiments ⋅ 119 Reality and Possibility ⋅ 120 "ought Experiments ⋅ 125 Fictional Design Objects ⋅ 129 Ambiguous Design Objects ⋅ 133 12 Chapter 6: !inking !ings ⋅ 139 Models as "inking "ings ⋅ 140 Models as Concepts and Metaphors ⋅ 144 Role Models and Material Portraits ⋅ 150 Models as Mediating Instruments ⋅ 156 Chapter 7: Staged Situations ⋅ 163 Philosophical Situations ⋅ 163 Staged Situations as Forms for Re#ection ⋅ 167 Simulations as Forms for Re#ection ⋅ 171 Re-enactments as Forms for Re#ection ⋅ 176 Conclusion ⋅ 183 Design as a Material Philosophy ⋅ 183 Approaches for a Material Philosophy ⋅ 186 Prospects for a Material Philosophy ⋅ 189 Illustrations ⋅ 193 Bibliography ⋅ 269 List of Illustrations and Tables Figure 1. Superstudio, Life/Supesurface, Nomads, 1972. Figure 2. Superstudio, Life/Supesurface, Happy Island, 1972. Figure 3. Marijn van der Poll, Do Hit Chair, 2000. Figure 4. Peter Eisenman, House I–IV, 1968–1971. Figure 5. Peter Eisenman, House V–X, 1972–1982. Figure 6. Peter Eisenman, House X, 1982. Figure 7. Krzysztof Wodiczko, Vehicle, 1973. Figure 8. Krzysztof Wodiczko, Vehicle, Drawing, 1973. Figure 9. Anthony Dunne, Faraday Chair, 1997. Figure 10. Rem Koolhaas / AMO, Roadmap 2050, Eneropa, 2010. Figure 11. Rem Koolhaas / AMO, Roadmap 2050, Eurogrid, 2010. Figure 12. Natalie Jeremijenko, Feral Robotic Dogs, 2003. Figure 13. Eduardo Kac, GFP Bunny, 2000. Figure 14. Eduardo Kac, Free Alba!, 2001–2002. Figure 15. Arthur Koestler, Bisociation and Operative Fields. Figure 16. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Haus Wittgenstein, 1928. Figure 17. Plato, Analogy of the Cave. Figure 18. Henry David "oreau, Walden Cabin. Figure 19. "omas "waites, "e Toaster Project, Toaster, 2009. Figure 20. "omas "waites, "e Toaster Project, Production Process, 2009. Figure 21. Michael Landy, Breakdown, 2001. Figure 22. "e Long Now Foundation, Clock of the Long Now / 10,000 Year Clock, 1999. Figure 23. "e Long Now Foundation, "e Long Now. Figure 24. NASA, "e Blue Marble, 1972 Figure 25. Norman Bel Geddes, Futurama, Spectators, General Motors Pavilion, New York World’s Fair, 1939. Figure 26. Norman Bel Geddes, Futurama, “I Have Seen the Future,” Pin, General Motors Pavilion, New York World’s Fair, 1939. Figure 27. James Auger and Jimmy Loizeau, A#erlife, 2001–2009. Figure 28. Noam Toran, Accessories for Lonely Men, 2001. Figure 29. Björn Franke, Traces of an Imaginary A$air, Lovebite, 2006. Figure 30. Björn Franke, Traces of an Imaginary A$air, Kit, 2006. Figure 31. Orson Welles, War of the Worlds, 1938. Figure 32. War of the Worlds Monument, Van Ness Park, West Windsor Township, New Jersey, 1988 Figure 33. "e Yes Men, New York Times Special Edition, 2008. Figure 34. "e Yes Men, Dow Does the Right "ing, 2004. Figure 35. James Watson and Francis Crick, Model of Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA), 1953. Figure 36. Raymond Gosling and Rosalind Franklin, Photo 51, 1952. 14 Figure 37. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Duck-Rabbit. Figure 38. Ernst Haeckel, Tree of Life, 1879. Figure 39. "omas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651. Figure 40. Fritz Kahn, Der Mensch als Industriepalast [Man as Industrial Palace], 1926. Figure 41. Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Doomsday Clock, 1947. Figure 42. Cross-section of a Giant Redwood Tree in Muir Woods National Monument, California. Figure 43. Natalie Jeremijenko, Tree Balance, 2005. Figure 44. Michael Brill, Nuclear Waste Warnings, Spikes Bursting "rough Grid, 1991. Figure 45. NASA, Pioneer Plaque, Pioneer 10, 1972. Figure 46. NASA, Pioneer Plaque, Diagram, 1972. Figure 47. NASA, Voyager Golden Record, Voyager 1, 1977. Figure 48. NASA, Voyager Golden Record, Voyager 1, Diagram 1977. Figure 49. NASA, Voyager Golden Record, Image 13, 1977. Figure 50. NASA, Voyager Golden Record, Image 82, 1977. Figure 51. NASA, Voyager Golden Record, Image 32, 1977. Figure 52. Trevor Paglan, "e Last Pictures, 2012. Figure 53. Trevor Paglen, "e Last Pictures, "e Pit Scene, Caves of Lascaux, 2012. Figure 54. Übermorgen, Alessandro Ludovico and Paolo Cirio, Google Will Eat Itself, Diagram, 2005. Figure 55. Übermorgen, Alessandro Ludovico and Paolo Cirio, Google Will Eat Itself, Installation, 2005. Figure 56. Oscar Bony, La Familia Obrera ["e Worker’s Family], 1968. Figure 57. Carsten Höller and Rosemarie Trockel, Ein Haus für Schweine und Menschen / A House for Pigs and People, Inside View, Documenta X, 1997. Figure 58. Carsten Höller and Rosemarie Trockel, Ein Haus für Schweine und Menschen / A House for Pigs and People, Outside View, Documenta X, 1997. Figure 59. Martí Guixé, Food Facility Amsterdam, 2005. Figure 60. Martí Guixé, Solar Kitchen Restaurant, 2011. Figure 61. Don Ritter, Vox Populi, 2005. Figure 62. Shona Kitchen and Noam Toran, Buried Alive, 2004. Figure 63. Shona Kitchen and Noam Toran, Buried Alive, Film Still, 2004. Figure 64. Rod Dickinson, "e Milgram Re-enactment, Film Still, 2002. Figure 65. Rod Dickinson, "e Milgram Re-enactment, Shock Generator, 2002. Figure 66. Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority, Teacher, 1961. Figure 67. Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority, Shock Generator, 1961. Figure 68. Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority, Advertisement, 1961. Figure 69. Rachel Mayeri, Primate Cinema, Baboons as Friends, 2007. Figure 70. Rachel Mayeri, Primate Cinema, How to Act like an Animal, 2008–2009. Figure 71. Rachel Mayeri, Primate Cinema, Apes as Family, 2011. Table 1. Conceptions of Design and Philosophy Acknowledgements "is thesis developed over several years while I was teaching design practice and design the- ory at various universities.