Wicked Problems in Design Thinking [设计思维中的抗解问题]
内容概要
介绍--设计与博雅科学
设计思维应当作为新时代科技文化背景下的一个博雅科学 ( liberal art ）:
客观上，现如今设计的内涵在被不断扩大，无法被局限在任何单一科学的定义中
19世纪以前，新的知识多通过专业细化得到（凭借更为精密的工具+更专业的思维+精细的界定），比如化学细化为有机，无机等。但如今新的知识诞生往往发生在各个学科综合交叉领域，例如以物理学原理来控制化学变化，以计算机技术来推演生物变异等
设计所面临的问题多数是抗解问题（Wicked Problems), 无法被清晰界定，且永远处于变化过程中，无法通过任何单一科学所使用的知识，技能，范式等进行解决
越来越细化和分化的学科趋势，切断了各学科之间的联系，切断了与实际生活的联系，无法应对这些wick problems。设计正在探索知识的具体整合形式，把理论与实践结合起来达到创新的目的。
Although these subjects contribute to the advance of knowledge, they also contribute to its fragmentation, as they have become progressively narrow in scope, more numerous, and have lost "connection with each other and with the common problems and matters of daily life from which they select aspects for precise methodological analysis".
设计与"目的性活动"
设计作为博雅科学的历史，可以追溯到约翰·杜威《寻求确定性：一种知行关系的研究中》。这本书将"人类认识客观事物的这种运动，当成是科学本身
新旧认知世界（学科）的差异在于：过程的确定性和不确定性，结果的封闭性和开放性，主观目的性的影响程度。他们的根源在于认知思维是植根于专业化还是整合
science, art, and practice. science（自然物质，知识），art（认知思维），practice（实践，影响现实世界的活动），technology是人出于一定的目的，在art（认知）和science（科学）的作用下产生的技艺
知识不再通过旧的模式和固定的自然规律产生，而是通过变化的新认知而产生的。（整合）
技艺是是在科学中自发进行的「目的性活动」，以及生产、技巧或社会和政治行动的技巧。不能将其当成是一种特定类型的产品，而忽略了创造技艺的认知。
目前面临的挑战是需要加深对设计思维的理解，使那些将设计思维应用于显著不同的问题和主题的人之间有更多的合作和互利。在科研工作者和设计工作者之间的交流障碍依旧存在
当科学界和设计界没有形成对设计思维的共识的话，那么设计师有时候不得不退回到原有的传统技巧和工艺语言来为自己的作品辩护
The old center of the universe was the mind knowing by means of an equipment of powers complete within itself, and merely exercised upon an antecedent external material equally complete within itself.
认知世界（学科）是通过本身固有的认知体系和工具自我完善而来，新认知的产生是先前认知的发展，并统一于这个认知世界。
What Dewey describes here is the root of the difference between the old and new liberal arts, between specialization in the facts of a subject matter and the use of new disciplines of integrative thinking.
It would then be seen that science is an art, that art is practice, and that the only distinction worth drawing is not between practice and theory, but between those modes of practice that are not intelligent, not inherently and immediately enjoyable, and those which are full of enjoyed meanings.
Instead of meaning knowledge of how to make and use artifacts or the artifacts themselves, technology for Dewey is an art of experimental thinking.
定位理论
“博雅学科”，是一门思维的学科，可以在一定程度上让任何人来学习。相应的，也应该要有一部分人反复实践设计思维从而获得对其独特洞察力，因为这样才会把学科推进到新的创新应用领域。
设计思维作为博雅科学的开端呈现在“设计师将传统的艺术和科学，应用于一种新的对日常生活经验的问题的研究上。”具体体现在四个领域：符号和传达设计，物质的设计（工业设计），活动和有组织的服务，为工作生活、学习娱乐而设计的复杂系统或环境。
符号和传达的设计（视觉传达）。其包括传统的平面设计，如排版印刷、广告、书籍杂志的装帧印刷、专业插画等，同时也扩展到了摄影、电影、电视和数字传媒。传达设计正迅速发展成一个宽泛的研究领域，通过融合语言和图像的新手段来探讨传达设计中的信息、思想和争论的问题。而这种手段正在转变过去「用书传达」的文化。
物质的设计（工业设计）。这包括产品造型和视觉感知之间关联的传统领域，比如说服装、家具、工具、仪器、机械和交通工具。 同样的，它的边界也已经扩展到了对人机之间物质上、精神上、社会文化关系上的更彻底、更多元的理解。这一领域正在迅速发展为一种对于构造问题的探索。我们需要进入到形状和视觉外观更深入的、更综合的论证阶段，将艺术、工程、自然科学以及人类科学的各个方面结合起来思考。
活动和有组织的服务。其中包括传统的组织工作管理，将实体资源、设备资源和人力资源有效整合进工作流与计划表中，以达到预期或指定的目标。然而，这一领域已扩展到逻辑决策和战略规划的关注范围，并迅速演变为探索在具体场景下如何利用设计思维更好地实现丝滑的体验流程，并让这种经历更加容易感知、有意义和令人满意。这一领域的中心主题是联系与次序。设计师们正在探索日常生活中越来越广泛的联系，以及不同类型的联系如何影响行为的结构。
为工作生活、学习娱乐而设计的复杂系统或环境。这包括了传统的系统工程、建筑学、城市规划（或者说复杂整体的局部功能分析和再复合时的层级分析）。但这个领域如今也扩大并展现了更多的意识，即表达了统一任意平衡和良性运作的整体的中心观点、思想或价值。目前人类正在维持、发展和整合更广泛的生态和文化环境，在需要的时候塑造环境，在必要的情况下适应环境。而这个领域也越来越关注探索设计在这个过程中的角色。
这四个领域指向人类经验中的某些客观性，同时如今的设计师在这些领域中的工作也为人类的体验创造了一个框架。这些领域相互关联并且平等，任何一个都不应该被优先考虑。例如，符号、实物、行为和思想的一个次序可以被视为从「混乱的部分」到「有序的整体」的一个上升梯度。符号和图像是反映我们对实物的感知的经验片段。而实物又可以成为行为的工具。在复杂的环境中，一个统一的观念或思想把符号、实物和行为组织在一起。但是，我们没有理由可以证实部分与整体的次序必须是上升的而不是下降。毕竟零件和整体有很多种类，并且可以用多种方式加以定义。根据设计者希望如何探索和组织经验，整个序列可以合理地被视为一种从混乱环境到统一符号的下降梯度。事实上，符号，实物，行为和思想不仅是相互关联的，它们也互相渗透与融合，吸收当代的设计思维与令人惊讶的次序，从而诞生创新。这些领域暗示了设计的历史与当今的脉络，以及指向未来设计的方向。
如果不想把设计思维当成创新上一系列的巧合，那么理解「类目」和「定位」之间的区别是很重要的。「定位」的边界给思考提供了一个情景和方向，但是应用到一个特定的情境可以产生对这种情况的新的感知，因此就会产生一种新的可待测试的可能性。然而，当设计师概念中的「定位」成为「类目」上的思考时，那结果可能是对早期创造物的矫饰模仿，而这种新发明不再与新情况下特定可能性的发现相关。设计师会把想法强加到这个场景中，而不是从这个场景的特殊性和新的可能性中发现一些好的想法。
设计师探索符号、实体、行为和思想之间的新关系的能力象征着设计不仅仅是一门高度专业化的职业，更是一门新的博雅学科。
For example, the sequence of signs, things, actions, and thought could be regarded as an ascent from confusing parts to orderly wholes. Signs and images are fragments of experience that reflect our perception of material objects. Material objects, in turn, become instruments of action. Signs, things, and actions are organized in complex environments by a unitying idea or thought. But there is no reason to believe that parts and wholes must be treated in ascending rather than descending order. Parts and whole are of many types and may be defined in many ways. Depending on how a designer wishes to explore and organize experience, the sequence could just as reasonably be regarded as a descent from chaotic environments to the unity provided by symbols and images. In fact, signs, things, actions, and thoughts are not only interconnected, they also interpenetrate and merge in contemporary design thinking with surprising consequences for innovation. These areas suggest the lineage of design's past and present, as well as point to where design is headed in the future.
The ability of designers to discover new relationships among signs, things, actions, and thoughts is one indication that design is not merely a technical specialization but a new liberal art.
设计的「抗解问题」理论
许多不同的线性模型：设计过程分为两个不同的阶段：定义问题和解决问题。定义问题是一个分析过程，设计师在其中确定问题的所有元素，并指定成功的设计解决方案必须具备的所有要点。解决问题是一个整合的过程，在这个过程中，各种需求相互结合并相互平衡，产生一个最终的方案并进行执行。
两个明显的弱点：一，设计思维和决策的实际过程不是一个简单的线性过程；二、设计师所提出的问题在实际中并不适用于任何一种线性分析和整合的模型。
Rittel 提出一个观点：大多数的设计师解决的问题是「抗解问题」。 Rittel 认为「抗解问题」是一类“很难被架构的「社会系统问题」，其中的信息是混乱的，许多客户和决策者的价值观冲突，整个系统的结果难以预料，并让人十分困扰。”
设计思维中存在「确定性」与「不确定性」之间的关系。设计思维的线性模型是建立在 “问题可以被定义” 这个条件的基础上的。而设计师的任务是精确识别这些条件，然后计算解决方案。相反，「抗解问题」这种观点表明，几乎所有的设计问题都存在一个根本的不确定性。
设计师往往从一般和特殊这两个层面研究他们的研究主题。在一般这个层面上，设计师在思考一个关于产品或人工制品本质的想法或「基础假设」的时候。形成的观点可能是与「自然」相对的 「人工」。在这个程度上说，设计师就有了一个对设计的本质及其适用范围的大局观。事实上，回顾大多数设计师的行为，他们会更乐意从整体的角度来去解释的设计的研究主题。这些解释经过发展和充分展现后，会变成设计的哲学或者是哲学的初步形态，存在于设计的诸多子领域中。他们为每一位设计师提供了一个基本的框架来理解和探索设计思维的物质、方法和原则。但从任何自然、社会或人文科学的那种程度来说，这样的哲学并不能等同于设计的科学。原因很简单：设计基本上与特殊有关，而特殊没有「科学」一说。
在实践中，设计师从应该称为「准主题」的主题开始。而准主题藏在于具体情况下的问题中。出于具体情况的特定的可能性，设计师必须构思出一种设计，引导出某种特定的产品。
「准主题」不是一个准备被确定的待确定的主题。它是一个不确定的主题，需要被特殊化和具体化。例如，客户的需求说明往往没有给出具体的设计主题的定义或者特定的设计应用。他们只提出了一个问题和在解决这个问题时要考虑的一系列问题。但是在某种情况下，客户又会非常详细地指定要计划中的产品的特定特性。这种情况往往是因为老板，企业高管，或项目经理试图完成关键任务——把问题和限制条件转化成产品具体功能特性的「基础假设」。事实上，很多人都试图排除掉「抗解性」。然而，即使在这种情况下，特定特征的概念可能通过讨论和论证而被改变。
通过使用「定位」来发现或创造一个「基础假设」，设计师建立了一个与科学艺术有关的知识的原则，用来确定这种知识在特定环境下有多大作用，同时不必马上将设计局限到其中任何一个学科中。
实际上，指向特定产品的「基础假设」是一种「相关性原则」，指导设计师去收集所有可用的描述产品最终应该是如何被规划的相关知识。
但是设计师的「基础假设」或「相关性原则」是否表明产品本身是一个确定的主题呢？答案涉及到一个设计思维和生产或制造活动之间的区别，这个区别非常关键但往往被模糊掉。一旦产品被构思、计划和生产，它就可能成为任何一门科学艺术（历史、经济学、心理学、社会学或人类学等）的研究对象。它甚至可能成为新的人类生产的科学（我们不妨称它为「人工科学」）的研究对象，可以直观理解各种人造物的性质、形态、和使用方式。但在所有这些研究中，设计思维的活动很容易被遗忘，或者被直接简化为最终产生的产品。设计师面临的问题是在知道结果之前就去设想和计划不存在的东西。而这样的问题往往是在面对「抗解问题」这种存在「不确定性」这样背景下发生的。
设计的历史不仅仅是一个物体的历史。这是一个设计师们反复切换研究主题视角的历史，具体对象的构思、计划和生产都是这些观点的表达。可以进一步说，设计史的历史是记录设计史学家们把什么当成主要设计主题的历史。
However, some critics were quick to point out two obvious points of weakness: one, the actual sequence of design thinking and decision making is not a simple linear process; and two, the problems addressed by designers do not, in actual practice, yield to any linear analysis and synthesis yet proposed.
As described in the first published report of Rittel's idea, wicked problems are a "class of social system problems which are ill-formulated, where the information is confusing, where there are many clients and decision makers with conflicting values, and where the ramifications in the whole system are thoroughly confusing. "
Design problems are “indeterminate” and “wicked” because design has no special subject matter of its own apart from what a designer conceives it to be.
The subject matter of design is potentially universal in scope, because design thinking may be applied to any area of human experience.
But in the process of application, the designer must discover or invent a particular subject out of the problems and issues of specific circumstances.
On a general level, a designer forms an idea or a working hypothesis about the nature of products or the nature of the humanmade in the world. This is the designer's view of what is meant, for example, by the “artificial” in relation to the “natural.”
In actual practice, the designer begins with what should be called a quasi-subject matter, tenuously existing within the problems and issues of specific circumstances.
Out of the specific possibilities of a concrete situation, the designer must conceive a design that will lead to this or that particular product.
A quasi-subject matter is not an undetermined subject waiting to be made determinate. It is an indeterminate subject waiting to be made specific and concrete. For example, a client's brief does not present a definition of the subject matter of a particular design application. It presents a problem and a set of issues to be considered in resolving that problem. In situations where a brief specifies in great detail the particular features of the product to be planned, it otten does so because an owner, corporate executive, or manager has attempted to perform the critical task of transforming problems and issues into a working hypothesis about the particular features of the product to be designed.
Placements are the tools by which a designer intuitively or deliberately shapes a design situation, identifying the views of all participants, the issues which concern them, and the invention that will serve as a working hypothes is for exploration and development. This helps to explain how design functions as an integrative discipline. By using placements to discover or invent a working hypothesis, the designer establishes a principle of relevance for knowledge from the arts and sciences, determining how such knowledge may be useful to design thinking in a particular circumstance without immediately reducing design to one or another of these disciplines. In effect, the working hypothesis that will lead to a particular product is the principle of relevance, guiding the efforts of designers to gather all available knowledge bearing on how a product is finally planned.
In short, Simon appears to have conflated two sciences of the artificial : an inventive science of design thinking which has no subject matter aside from what the designer conceives it to be, and a science of existing humanmade products whose nature Simon happens to believe is a manipulation of material and behavioral laws of nature.
One could gofurther and say that the history of design history is a record of the design historians' views regarding what they conceive to be the subject matter of design.
设计与技术
设计也有工学，它体现在每一个新产品的计划与规划上。这种计划反映了设计师的思考以及他们努力以新的方式去整合知识来适应特定的情况和需要。从这个意义上说，设计是一种新兴的实践推理和论证的新学科，由设计师们引导着二十世纪的几个主要设计课题——传达、构造、战略规划、系统整合。设计作为思考和论证的力量在于克服仅仅是语言或符号的观念上的局限性。在当代文化中词和物、理论与实践的分离仍然是造成混乱的根源。设计思维中的主题朝着符号、实物、行为和思想的具体相互作用和相互联系的方向发展。每个设计师的草图、工程图、流程图、图像、三维模型或其他产品提案就是这种论点的一个例子。
博雅教育能够帮助人们意识到中心论点是如何贯穿于设计行业使用的许多技术方法的。不同的模式可能互相补充地论证在人类经验中到底什么场景和规划才是“有用” 。作为一种技术文化的学科，设计指向了一种新的关于产品现象的看法。这种现象必须对人类经验中人造物的本质进行更深入、更全面的论证。这一论点综合了三条线索：设计师和制造商关于他们产品的想法；产品的内部运作逻辑；以及人们去用产品的欲望和能力（在使用中会呈现出个人与社会价值）。有效的设计取决于设计师整合所有三条线索的能力。但这不是作为一个简单的数学总量相加的孤立因素，也不能作为可以分开研究的独立对象，在产品开发过程中后期加入。
The power of design as deliberation and argument lies in overcoming the limitations of mere verbal or symbolic argument ——the separation of words and things, or theory and practice that remains a source of disruption and confusion in contemporary culture.
Differences of modality may be complementary ways of arguing-reciprocal expressions of what conditions and shapes the “useful” in human experience. As a liberal art of technological culture, design points toward a new attitude about the appearance of products. appearance must carry a deeper, integrative argument about the nature of the artificial in human experience.
This argument is a synthesis of three lines of reasoning: the ideas of designers and manufacturers about their products; the internal operational logic of products; and the desire and ability of human beings to use products in everyday life in ways that reflect personal and social values.
抗解问题十大原则
There is no definite formulation of a wicked problem. 抗解问题并无明确的定义
"The information needed to understand the problem depends upon one's idea for solving it. This is to say: in order to describe a wicked problem in sufficient detail, one has to develop an exhaustive inventory for all the conceivable solutions ahead of time." [This seemingly incredible criterion is in fact treatable. See below.]Wicked problems have no stopping rules. 抗解问题无法被彻底完全解决
In solving a tame problem, "… the problem-solver knows when he has done his job. There are criteria that tell when the solution or a solution has been found". With wicked problems you never come to a "final", "complete" or "fully correct" solution - since you have no objective criteria for such. The problem is continually evolving and mutating. You stop when you run out of resources, when a result is subjectively deemed "good enough" or when we feel "we've done what we can…"Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but better or worse.没有对或错的解决方案，只有好与坏的解决方案。
The criteria for judging the validity of a "solution" to a wicked problem are strongly stakeholder dependent. However, the judgments of different stakeholders …"are likely to differ widely to accord with their group or personal interests, their special value-sets, and their ideological predilections." Different stakeholders see different "solutions" as simply better or worse.There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem. 解决抗解问题时，没有详尽的执行清单
"… any solution, after being implemented, will generate waves of consequences over an extended - virtually an unbounded - period of time. Moreover, the next day's consequences of the solution may yield utterly undesirable repercussions which outweigh the intended advantages or the advantages accomplished hitherto."Every solution to a wicked problem is a "one-shot operation"; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error, every attempt counts significantly. 解决抗解问题的机会只有一次，没有试错空间
"… every implemented solution is consequential. It leaves "traces" that cannot be undone … And every attempt to reverse a decision or correct for the undesired consequences poses yet another set of wicked problems … ."Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan. 「抗解问题」的框架与解决方案都没有一个明确的测试来判断。
"There are no criteria which enable one to prove that all the solutions to a wicked problem have been identified and considered. It may happen that no solution is found, owing to logical inconsistencies in the 'picture' of the problem."Every wicked problem is essentially unique. 每个抗解问题都是独一无二的
"There are no classes of wicked problems in the sense that the principles of solution can be developed to fit all members of that class." …Also, …"Part of the art of dealing with wicked problems is the art of not knowing too early which type of solution to apply." [Note: this is very important point. See below.]Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another [wicked] problem. 每一个「抗解问题」都是另一个“更高层次”问题的征兆（一个局部）。
Also, many internal aspects of a wicked problem can be considered to be symptoms of other internal aspects of the same problem. A good deal of mutual and circular causality is involved, and the problem has many causal levels to consider. Complex judgements are required in order to determine an appropriate level of abstraction needed to define the problem.The causes of a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem's resolution. 抗解问题总是有多个可能的解释，解释则完全取决于设计师的世界观与人生观。
"There is no rule or procedure to determine the 'correct' explanation or combination of [explanations for a wicked problem]. The reason is that in dealing with wicked problems there are several more ways of refuting a hypothesis than there are permissible in the [e.g. physical] sciences."[With wicked problems,] the planner has no right to be wrong. 「抗解问题」解决者没有错误的权利——他们是对自己的行为完全负责的。
In "hard" science, the researcher is allowed to make hypotheses that are later refuted. Indeed, it is just such hypothesis generation that is a primary motive force behind scientific development (Ritchey, 1991). Thus one is not penalised for making hypothesis that turn out to be wrong. "In the world of … wicked problems no such immunity is tolerated. Here the aim is not to find the truth, but to improve some characteristic of the world where people live. Planners are liable for the consequences of the actions they generate …"
