Practice as ‘Research’ Within The Context of Art and Design Academia: A Brief Excursion Into Its Philosophical Underpinnings

Authors

  • Dominique Rio Adiwijaya Bina Nusantara University
  • Anita Rahardja Bina Nusantara University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v6i3.3357

Keywords:

academic research, positivistic paradigm, the paradigm of hermeneutics/phenomenology, art and design, practice-based research

Abstract

Integration of many fields of human endeavor including art and design into academic system is not at all surprising in our modern world that continues to modernize itself in the quest for ever increasing welfare of humanity. The backbone of modern welfare is unmistakably techno-scientific academic research, explaining current expansion of its ‘standardized’ paradigm, regulation and infrastructure without exception into the field of art and design. This is where the problem precisely arises, since their own nature, art and design as ‘creative’ fields, are incompatible with scientific paradigm which emphasizes a uniform reproducibility of research findings. ‘The heart of the arts’, in contrast, is its singularities. The industry actually has recognized the difference by assigning ‘patents’ to technological invention and ‘copyright’ to singular artworks. The question is then how to incorporate such creatively plural fields into uniform academic research system. Fortunately within the past 20 years, there were developments within international art and design academia that came up with a keystone principle called practice-based research. It relies upon philosophical underpinnings of phenomenology and hermeneutics which has been critically acclaimed in showing inadequacies of positivistic (natural science-based) paradigm in understanding cultural phenomena exemplified by art and design. It is the intention of this article to briefly explain this new principle and its philosophical underpinnings in order to let us appreciate its positive contribution for our understanding of art and design. This understanding in turn would allow us to cultivate those creative fields within academic context in a more appropriate way.

 

Dimensions

Plum Analytics

Author Biographies

Dominique Rio Adiwijaya, Bina Nusantara University

Visual Communication Design Department, School of Design

Anita Rahardja, Bina Nusantara University

Visual Communication Design Department, School of Design

References

Borgdorff, H. (2012). The Conflict of the Faculties, Perspectives on Artistic Research and Academia. Leiden University Press, Leiden.

Clark, T. (2011). Martin Heidegger, (2nd ed). Oxford: Routledge.

Dreyfus, H. (2005). Heidegger’s ontology of art. In H. Dreyfus & Mark Wrathall (Eds.), A Companion to Heidegger, pp 407–419. Massachusets: Blackwell.

Gray, C., & Malins, J. (2004). Visualizing Research, A Guide to the Resarch Process in the Art and Design. USA: Ashgate.

Heidegger, M. (1975). The Origin of the Works of Art in Poetry, Language, Thought, pp. 15–87. (Trans. Alfred Hofstadter). New York: Harper and Row.

Krippendorf, K. (2007). Design research, an oxymoron?. In R. Michel (Ed.), Design research now: Essays and selected projects (pp. 67–80). Zürich: Birkhäuser Verlag.

Palmer, R. E. (1969). Hermeneutics, Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

Ramberg, B., & Gjesdal, K. (2013). Hermeneutics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2014, July 28th from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/hermeneutics/

Waks, L. J. (2001). Donald Schon’s philosophy of design and design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11, 37–51.

Downloads

Published

2015-07-30

Issue

Section

Articles
Abstract 418  .
PDF downloaded 297  .