Explicating concepts in reasoning from function to form by two-step innovative abductions

Abstract The mechanism of design reasoning from function to form is suggested to consist of a two-step inference of the innovative abduction type. First is an inference from a desired functional aspect to an idea, concept, or solution principle to satisfy the function. This is followed by a second innovative abduction, from the latest concept to form, structure, or mechanism. The intermediate entity in the logical reasoning, the concept, is thus made explicit, which is significant in following and understanding a specific design process, for educating designers, and to build a logic-based computational model of design. The idea of a two-step abductive reasoning process is developed from the critical examination of several propositions made by others. We use the notion of innovative abduction in design, as opposed to such abduction where the question is about selecting among known alternatives, and we adopt a previously proposed two-step process of abductive reasoning. However, our model is different in that the two abductions used follow the syllogistic pattern of innovative abduction. In addition to using a schematic example from the literature to demonstrate our derivation, we apply the model to an existing, empirically derived method of conceptual design called “parameter analysis” and use two examples of real design processes. The two synthetic steps of the method are shown to follow the proposed double innovative abduction scheme, and the design processes are presented as sequences of double abductions from function to concept and from concept to form, with a subsequent deductive evaluation step.

[1]  C. Hartshorne,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1935, Nature.

[2]  Yong Zeng,et al.  On the logic of design , 1991 .

[3]  Ehud Kroll,et al.  Design theory and conceptual design: contrasting functional decomposition and morphology with parameter analysis , 2013 .

[4]  Hideaki Takeda,et al.  UNIVERSAL ABDUCTION STUDIO - PROPOSAL OF A DESIGN SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT FOR CREATIVE THINKING IN DESIGN , 2003 .

[5]  TakedaHideaki,et al.  Modeling design processes , 1990 .

[6]  Meng Zhao,et al.  A new model of conceptual design based on Scientific Ontology and intentionality theory. Part I: The conceptual foundation , 2015 .

[7]  A.W.M. Meijers,et al.  Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences , 2009 .

[8]  Kees Dorst,et al.  The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application , 2011 .

[9]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  C-K design theory: an advanced formulation , 2008 .

[10]  Ernest G. Cravalho,et al.  Technological Innovation in Education and Industry , 1980 .

[11]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  Abduction: a pre-condition for the intelligent design of strategy , 2007 .

[12]  N. Cross Designerly ways of knowing , 2006 .

[13]  Benoit Weil,et al.  Steepest-first exploration with learning-based path evaluation: uncovering the design strategy of parameter analysis with C–K theory , 2014 .

[15]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  The Problem of Induction , 2005 .

[16]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design , 2014 .

[17]  Sridhar S. Condoor,et al.  Innovative Conceptual Design: Theory and Application of Parameter Analysis , 2001 .

[18]  Lauri Koskela,et al.  The Aristotelian Proto-Theory of Design , 2014 .

[19]  Kevin Otto,et al.  Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development , 2000 .

[20]  Jl Jesse Hughes,et al.  Practical Reasoning and Engineering , 2009 .

[21]  L. Magnani CREATIVE PROCESSES IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY , 1995 .

[22]  Pieter Pauwels,et al.  Design Thinking Support: Information Systems Versus Reasoning , 2013, Design Issues.

[23]  C. Peirce,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1936, Nature.

[24]  N. F. M. Roozenburg,et al.  Product design: Fundamentals and methods , 1996 .

[25]  G. Harman,et al.  The Problem of Induction , 2006 .

[26]  Gerhard Minnameier,et al.  Abduction, Induction, and Analogy , 2010 .

[27]  L March,et al.  The Architecture of Form , 2010 .

[28]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[29]  John S. Gero,et al.  Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design , 1990, AI Mag..

[30]  Gerhard Schurz,et al.  Patterns of abduction , 2008, Synthese.

[31]  Steve Caplin,et al.  Principles Of Design , 2011 .

[32]  R. J. Bogumil,et al.  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , 1985, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[33]  Michael H. G. Hoffmann,et al.  Problems with Peirce's Concept of Abduction , 1999 .

[34]  Meng Zhao,et al.  A new model of conceptual design based on Scientific Ontology and intentionality theory. Part II: The process model , 2015 .

[35]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function — Behaviour — Structure Framework , 2004 .

[36]  Sridhar S. Condoor,et al.  Innovative Conceptual Design by Ehud Kroll , 2001 .

[37]  Erik Kaestner,et al.  The Mechanical Design Process , 2016 .

[38]  J. Habermas,et al.  Knowledge and Human Interests. , 1973 .

[39]  Arthur W. Burks,et al.  Peirce's Theory of Abduction , 1946, Philosophy of Science.

[40]  Nfm Roozenburg,et al.  On the pattern of reasoning in innovative design , 1993 .

[41]  H. Takeda,et al.  Abduction for design , 1994, Formal Design Methods for CAD.

[42]  Hideaki Takeda,et al.  Abduction for Creative Design , 2003, Volume 3b: 15th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology.

[43]  Vinod Goel,et al.  Complicating the ‘logic of design’ , 1988 .

[44]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[45]  Brigitte Moench,et al.  Engineering Design A Systematic Approach , 2016 .

[46]  Gerhard Minnameier Abduction , Induction , and Analogy On the Compound Character of Analogical Inferences , 2022 .

[47]  Lorenzo Magnani,et al.  Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology: Abduction, Logic, and Computational Discovery , 2010 .

[48]  Lauri Koskela,et al.  Applying the proto-theory of design to explain and modify the parameter analysis method of conceptual design , 2016 .

[49]  Andy Dong,et al.  The effect of abductive reasoning on concept selection decisions , 2015 .

[50]  I. Niiniluoto,et al.  Defending Abduction , 1999, Philosophy of Science.

[51]  Md. Mamunur Rashid,et al.  On some unique features of C–K theory of design , 2012 .