,
16 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
I posted this almost exactly a year ago, and it seems relevant to re-share it now. Craft and Philosophy: jarango.com/2018/03/27/cra… 1/16
TLDR: Craft = how-to and philosophy = why-to. Healthy professional disciplines evolve both. This calls for ongoing discussions between academics, practitioners, and stakeholders. Hosting these conversations is one of the purposes of professional conferences. 2/16
Some further thoughts on this idea... 3/16
Disciplines that intervene in systems with broad social impact (such as information architecture) are especially in need of why-to discussions. The alternative — a relentless focus on unexamined "doing" — can produce serious negative consequences. 4/16
"Move fast and break things" can lead to disaster if the thing that breaks is the social fabric. 5/16
Thus, "why-to" discussions matter. A lot! That said, this doesn't mean they're easy to have. If you want to engage seriously, you have some work to do. The material is dense, and the folks who've been thinking about this stuff use lots of jargon. 6/16
And even after putting in the required work, the conversation may not be for you. The outcomes of these discussions are often not obviously actionable, and you probably have more urgent things to do. Everyone's priorities are different. 7/16
That's OK. You have colleagues who are placing a priority on figuring this stuff out. It's a sign of a healthy discipline. 8/16
(It's also a sign of health that practitioners demand more clarity from these folks, who often have a more academic bent. I see requests to make this material actionable as a recognition of the discussion's importance.) 9/16
What is *not* healthy is to call for these discussions to be shut down or to censure folks engaged in them. (There's a name for this: anti-intellectualism. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-inte…) 10/16
Lots of things in the world are over my head. I assume they make sense to other people. This assumption is justified; I see the results of their work everywhere. For example, there's no need for me to study biochemistry if all I need is to take medicine. 11/16
Opting out of in-depth discussions about your discipline is OK. Nobody will think less of you. Most of us don't need to know how medicine is made to find it useful. 12/16
That said, I do wish more of my fellow practitioners would engage in reflective discussions about our discipline. I don't expect everyone will grok the jargon (some of it is over my head too!), but getting the gist is important. 13/16
So here's a practical suggestion if you want to get into it... 14/16
After #IAC19, I revisited @TaoRuspoli's documentary BEING IN THE WORLD, which makes some of the framing concepts for @danklyn and @resmini's talk more accessible. It clarified some of these ideas for me. Perhaps it can help you too? imdb.com/title/tt151519… 15/16
Namaste. 16/16
