Abstract
In areas of design practice, the paradigm of knowledge has not been clearly articulated, but some of its characteristics appear to include a valorisation of subjectivity; plurality of interpretation; objects that embody meanings; and that which cannot be expressed through language. These values run counter to traditional models of knowledge and research which, through the logic of its special language, value objectivity; singularity of interpretation; experiments that embody theoretical explanations; and concepts that can be coherently argued in words. Thus there is a problem in accounting for research in these areas in ways that will be recognised and valued by the academy. This article presents a sub-group of academic research that is specific to areas of design practice – Practice-based Research – as being problematic, and presents some current debates on the best way of dealing with some results that are considered, in academia, to be non-traditional.
| Translated title of the contribution | The rhetoric of the academy and the limits of communication |
|---|---|
| Original language | Other |
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of the World Congress on Communication and Arts |
| Editors | Claudio da Rocha Brito, Melany M. Ciampi |
| Place of Publication | São Caetano do Sul, Brazil |
| Publisher | Conselho de Pesquisas em Educação e Ciências |
| Publication status | Published - 2009 |