Incompetent

AUT BCT 2015 CTEC500 Integrative Pratice - Multiple Worlds - Team 9

[weareincompetent-blog]

Reflective Statement (Quantitive)

This was a very tough exercise for me, because as much as I wanted to fully take on this role, I struggled to get completely into this character. Thinking in a purely fact and figures way and always trying to find the real world research is always something that I have tried to avoid because I have always found it a bit boring. So that mindset probably didn’t help at all. 

When we first started, I found it slightly easier, because we came up with the idea of love and hate, and so I decided to focus on any statistics I could including this. What I found was relevant and easy to talk about so I thought that I was going to have an easy time. I was wrong again. When we returned to talk about what we had gathered, we started thinking that we would look more into the relationship of love and hate, instead of love hate relationships. This made it more difficult, as there were not a lot of facts about the relationships of love and hate, but mostly there were facts on what parts of the brain were active while feeling love and hate. So thankfully, I had something to look into.

This is where it got tricky. I couldn’t stick with one single thing to look into, because even with the research, it was still limited due to the limited knowledge of the brain. So, I was stuck, and so, I decided that for me to get more knowledge for my quantitive persona, I would need to suggest things to the group which my persona wouldn’t, in order for them to start leaning towards new actions to take which I would be easier for my persona. Which as much as I didn’t want to do, I was stuck and needed something more to show for it. So I failed to stay as my persona, however, it got me thinking. Maybe as a persona who wants to find facts and figure, I would try to talk about and inspire people in my group to take new actions, in order to create my own research. So although I think I broke my persona, I think that in a very lose way, I was sticking to it. 

So in the end, myself and Lara go everyone to bring in 3 items. One which they hated, one which they loved, and one which they loved and hated. From this I was able to look at the relationships my groups had and create my own experiments, however, I struggled again. I was trying to find a way of grouping, and the only way I could think, was what the persons emotional influence was for that object. I am unsure if I was stepping out of my bounds, but again, I started thinking outside of my persona, so I failed yet again. So overall, I believe that I enjoyed the idea of becoming a new persona, however I struggled because my natural thought process is to think about something in many different ways. Even though I usually end up contradicting myself.

So overall, I am happy with this project, because I think that I learnt a lot about my own thought process and about the different disciplines. I think that working with multi/inter/intra/cross disciplinary thinking has helped me to view what I do and work on in a completely different light. An example of this is that I have started looking at my DIY project and thinking what kind of disciplinary thinking am I using? Is it the right kind of disciplinary thinking? Or should I try to think of some other way to think? Should I take on a role in order to see if we can come up with different ideas? I mean, I don’t think I will at this stage, it is a bit late for that, but I am very interested in looking into it for my next project. I really enjoyed this project, and I wish I had actually gotten into it more and tried harder to stick to my persona. Maybe disagree or contradict someone else, in order to create a little bit of conflict, without too much hostility. I am definitely interested to work like this at some point.

George Monro - Quantitive

[weareincompetent-blog]

Reflective Statement - Analytical.

Being a strong analytical thinker naturally, I found that I had to re-approach my disciplinary role, funnily enough, analytically.  I had to re-think what my thinking was. How do I actually analyse things? How does that inform my outcomes? How does it inform me in a group? The most challenging part of this project for me has been trying to suppress my thinking from other disciplinary approaches. What I did find as a result, was that I was able to better understand my different team members’ thinking, and analyse their contribution to the final outcome objectively.  This also made me question where creative thinking fit in to my role as well as other roles. Is creative thinking limited to only certain disciplinary roles or does it only fit in to certain creatively stereotyped roles like theory or qualitative? I found that in working together, we all had to work creatively at some points to piece together our final outcome. We had to imagine and work with our ideas together creatively.  As analytical, I also found I was questioning knowledge a lot. I was careful not to discount ideas from certain team members based on my subjective view and tried to question what made me prefer certain ideas over others. It made me consider a point I learnt from the interrogation project; what is it exactly that leads us in making decisions during a process? I found I tended to calculate what felt the most familiar and successful subconsciously when deciding a way to approach the project, before actually considering what informed my decisions. In this project, I tried to consider what was informing my decisions for the group before deciding on anything, and trying to represent the contributions either equally in the decision I made going forward, or to understand what made one decision stronger than the other, regardless of the disciplinary approach.  So how has producing this final outcome influenced my thinking for the future? I think from this project, I’ve gained a better understanding of how multi/inter/intra/cross disciplinary thinking fits in to the world of “COLAB”. As creative technology students, and eventually practitioners, we should have awareness of our disciplinary approaches and utilise them for our own benefits. When James questioned us about whether we were able to stay within our own disciplinary stereotypes throughout the project today, I realised maybe finding that sweet spot within my own multi-disciplinary approach is the key to thinking as a practitioner. I’m considering that maybe the tension and conflict between everyone Clint was encouraging in our group was because in the conflict of our ideas and approaches we tend to find the most interesting outcomes. The things that are truly creative and unique. If I can find a way to create this conflict and tension within myself by understanding the different disciplinary approaches at play in my head or when working in a group, it could be the key to the creative process for me.

Lara, analytical.

[weareincompetent-blog]

Incompetent. Qualitative’s Reflective Statement

As a Qualitative in our group, a role need to explore opinions and motives for the whole project. Thus, it’s really difficult to just doing any development without connect with other roles in the group because i think find a truly multi-disciplinary way of legitimizing knowledge without marginalizing disciplinary positions, it’s really important to work as a team. Although with different roles in a group, we supposed to investigate the relationship between Love and hate with multiple goals and with the disciplines we each came out co-exist in a context.   

To be honest, i found out really hard to just being qualitative as it own doing this project, sometime I need to cross-disciplinary to gain different things to explore more by doing different ways. Sometimes, I was doing some part of other roles whole I am doing my things. For example, I always reflects on some meta meanings to develop my thoughts and often need to do things to generate new understanding behind my opinions and motive. Maybe our topic of Love and Hate, it’s really hard to separate each roles to faithfully represent only on our disciplinary world view. There’re connection between our roles and it’s really important to understand the disciplinarity by analyses and organize the relationship between different parts of us. 

There’re a few problems I realize while working and finished the project. It’s really hard to equally demonstrates am awareness of problems from more than one disciplinary perspective and especially in our group that although we we were in different roles, our perspective were really similar and not much conflict going on or maybe we just didn’t took our roles as far as we could. Another problem I found out that, it’s really hard to communicate or discuss with any one of them without face to face meeting, it’s really difficult to talk about our projects while in the Internet, while we doing Manifesto and Presentation, I found it really struggle to do without much communication. It’s really effective and productive to discuss with face to face, especially demonstrates the development with our project. 

From a Qualitative, the outcome was quite interesting, based on the relationship between Love and Hate, we came out a new method of thinking for gaining tacit and explicit knowledge through objects. In this project, I have definitely explore the underlying meaning and understanding of Love and Hate. There’re really interesting emotions to study especially every human do Love and Hate so it’s something about me and anyone else. 

i believe The relationship between Love and hate could be Trans disciplinary because Love and Hate are integrated and it can be transcendence of disciplinary boundaries easily.       

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative  

[weareincompetent-blog]

Incompetent Manifesto. Demo Version

Our original, unedited version of our manifesto

[weareincompetent-blog]

Incompetent Final Outcome.

A New method of gaining tacit and explicit knowledge through objects. 

[weareincompetent-blog]

Final, summarised Team manifesto. 

Lara, Analytical

[weareincompetent-blog]

Friday Meeting

Today Steven, Lara and I met to organise the final outcome and presentation. We came to a conclusion that we wanted to keep the idea of using objects and that this was how we created a new way of gaining knowledge. Also finishing our manifesto was on the agenda. We talked a lot about his we could actually show what we had learned and what the best way would could get it across to others. We thought that using a diagram to explain it would be a good idea so we brainstormed some ways in which we could do that. It was quite a challenge to organise our process into an outcome for people to understand. The use of objects to gain tacit knowledge was what we focused on and thought was quite a unique way if learning something. Quinn Trethewey - Theoretical

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love and Hate - Objects

Today for our discussion we all brought three objects. One that we love, one that we hate and one that we both love and hate. Here are the objects each person brought   Lara (analytical): Love: Funny pen   Hate:Tweezers Love and Hate: Mobile Phone

Karen (practical): Love: Camera Hate: Arduino Love and Hate: Money

George (quantitative): Love: Arduino handbook Hate: Fictional novel Love and Hate: Speaker

Steven (qualitative): Love: Anime/Manga Hate: Not knowing Love and Hate: Myself

Quinn (theoretical): Love: Headphones Hate: Blank piece of paper Love and Hate: Pencils I found it interesting just finding out what kinds of things the people and my group loved or hated. Also as we later talked about, how the objects we chose reflected on our personalities and our interests. For example for me the hate for a blank piece of paper links to my love for painting and drawing and a blank piece if paper is something that frustrates me when trying to come up with ideas and compositions. The pencil which I chose for love and hate is also from my love of drawing and the love hate relationship I have with them. They help me out my ideas onto the paper and make art while sometimes I feels like they are working against me when they keep breaking or when I make a mistake. It might just be a scapegoat for my own mistakes. We decided that this idea of using objects to gain knowledge about love and hate or even emotions in general was interesting. So we decided that we were to go away over the next couple of days and ask people if they loved or hated an object. If they didn’t feel either one in particular they had to chose something they hated or loved about it. Quinn Trethewey - Theoretical

[weareincompetent-blog]

The relationship between Love and Hate (Qualitative)

Multidisciplinary of the relationship between Love and Hate in our group. Although we investigate with different perspective but it somehow connected with some way because I think Love and Hate are something tacit so sometime things can be really vague so ways to represent can be some similarity. Moreover, is our project driven towards problem solving? Maybe, because Love and hate is human’s problem in all time, everything realted to love and hate. Personally believed that the Love & Hate we know is just the nonexistent emotions  people created. A person has reasons to Love or hate non-stop, from it own experience or someone else’s, and most of all because of the dependence on their own conscious creation of feeling. Do you have reasons to Love & Hate? Yes. Where? In your head. 

Love and Hate always in our head even though we are not thinking about it. However, come over and think back again, do we really know what’s love and hate, what if I said the love and hate we know it’s just someone else experience or just a formula that conclude by different people, because love and hate are emotions, it’s a tacit knowledge. For example, just like riding a bike, although the outcome was the same, but every ride differently, how could you tell which is the right one and which one is the wrong way to ride, that’s not such thing so do Love and Hate. How I could you tell Love is Love and Hate is Hate just because you or other say so. Maybe it’s but we can’t proof it, Same thing come down to the emotion with love and hate, Jealousy. How could we tell it’s a bad thing or a problem, although it cause problem? maybe just other emotion that create by love and hate. 

After all of the discussion and thinking, I think the relationship between Love and Hate are integrated. Both of them need each other because Love is the complete absence of hate, and in return hate is the complete absence love. Basically, what I conclude with Love and Hate are they’re integrated because the passionate emotions that it’s completely opposite but in the same time it’s connected, it just like day and night, male and female or light and dark. It’s something that opposite but need each other to show their meaning. 

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative      

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love + Hate = ? (Qualitative)

In this past 2 weeks, 5 of us have look in through the relationship between Love and Hate, beside Lara. 4 of us have we own individual methodological roles that we explore the love and hate with different ways and Analytical will effectively organize us and analyses the relationship of parts between us.  As a Qualitative, explore the underlying thoughts, opinions and motives of Love and Hate. According from our group discussion and different thinking from individual roles. I found out 5 of our roles are connected, we although could be separate to do our own thing but things will not be easier than we do something together.  Back to the title what love plus hate? One of the answer is Jealousy. Then this is mean Jealousy is the symbol of the relationship between Love and Hate? We could say that but it’s one of the outcomes that come from the Love and Hate.  

Personally think Jealousy it’s a really normal feeling that come from a person but sometime it could be very dangerous and I think this referred back to a video I discussed about. “ Gudo Nishijima Roshi: On the Balance of Love and Hate” https://youtu.be/_ssUhO8W7pg. 

The thing he mentioned, “Love is dangerous, Hate is dangerous, that’s why we need to equally balance our love and hate. It's a human's duty.” and Jealousy show how unbalance when Love and Hate could be and it proof how love and hate can be really dangerous. Jealousy is sometime we can control and even get rip out most of the time, because we’re human and it’s fine to feel jealous but just need to find a way to fix it because sometime it could turn out a really serious problem. Jealousy it’s an emotion we have that sometime it’s the extreme of love and hate when we didn’t manage to equally balance our love and hate.         

Most of the time, drive Jealousy is because of romance relationship but any other relationship also could be the possibilities and sometime could be sometime we never imagine about. Basically, although it’s normal to feel jealous but as we know, over jealous just not a good thing, it can change a person and could ruin a person’ life or more. 

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative

Reference:

Brad, W. (2009).  Gudo Nishijima Roshi: On the Balance of Love and Hate.[ Youtube Video] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ssUhO8W7pg  

Lisa, F. (2011). What Drives Jealousy?. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/compassion-matters/201109/what-drives-jealousy   

[weareincompetent-blog]

A thing that you Love & Hate about Yourself Survey Result Part.2

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/V35CP7P

As a Qualitative, my role is explore underlying thoughts, opinions and motives. That’s why I use this way to use the things I love & Hate to approached other people’s opinions and thoughts about the relationship between Love and Hate.

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative

[weareincompetent-blog]

A thing that you Love & Hate about Yourself Survey Result Part.1

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/V35CP7P

As a Qualitative, my role is explore underlying thoughts, opinions and motives. That’s why I use this way to use the things I love & Hate to approached other people’s opinions and thoughts about the relationship between Love and Hate. 

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love, Hate and Love&Hate. (Qualitative)

We started to approach the relationship between Love and Hate as a group. We decided each member’s choice 3 things that we love, hate and love & hate. Unexpectedly, we all have something different and the reasons behind from every single one of us definitely were different as well. What’s interesting to me was from the things we choice, it kind of show our personality and life style. As we can see, love and hate are brothers in the same family named Emotions. Thus, People are the slaves of their emotions and we create love & hate, the nonexistent emotions from our experienced so it involved to us mentally so it connected to our personality and what we love and hate can easier reflect ourselves. However, our main focus was into the thing we love and hate because it’s something we tried to explore because there’s an emotion that have love and hate in the same time and it’s the Jealousy. When we show each other the 3 things, interestingly that the things we love or hate have a very clear reason behind but sometime come to the things we love or hate, the feeling can be very complex and vague because something that between love and hate could be the things we care the most although you clearly understand what you frustrated about. Another things I realize when we discussed the things, when come to love people can easily manage to explain why and really obvious that it has a strong relationship with our life but come down to the things we hate, it may around wander around but I supposed we tried to avoid to have one. 

Come back to my 3 things

Love: Manga/Anime

Since the time I know to crawl, anime was already around me and when I know how to read manga was always on my side. Whenever I am happy or sad, they will always be there with me. Most importantly, they teach me many things and inspired me.

Hate: Not knowing?

They are many things I don’t like but can’t really find a thing I really hate, maybe there’re something I hate but maybe I hate it that’s why don’t want remember or just have one in front of my head? 

Love & Hate: Myself

The things I really love and hate in the same time is myself, there’re things I am proud of myself and there’re things I dislike about myself, but we’re human, one of the imperfect. Although, sometime there’re things I hate about myself I will try to change it but after all that’s me, I will still continue being like this, instead hate other thing, it’s better to hate a part of myself because I could change it or I can do something about it by not blaming any other.  

After discuss the 3 things with our group with our own perspective and the nest step we decided so we took the thing we love&hate to experiment with our each role’s way. Then, I made a survey monkey and asked a few different questions and let my friends, peers and shared to the different social media as well. Some of the results were quite fascinating and some just messing around but expected, eventually got some really interesting answer that we can look in through. 

Steven Y Cin Wong - Qualitative

[weareincompetent-blog]

Meeting Reflection. Analytical

Today Steven (qualitative), Quinn (Theoretical) and I met to talk about the final project/outcome as a group, including the presentation manifesto and our findings from the last activity.  Interesting thing to note, was how I noticed the discussion/process of us three was swayed by not having practical or quantitative present. I wonder how different the outcome we came to would have been if everyone was present? I did notice we talked a lot more about the underlying principles of our work as opposed to practically and logically applications of it. After taking an object of our choosing and exploring how and why others loved/hated that object within our own disciplinary approaches we shared what we learnt.  Asking people about a pencil, Quinn found that a lot of people couldn’t give a response about their relationship to the pencil. Quinn loved/hated it because of his love of drawing, his passionate relationship to the object (ooh la la).. but when others without the same passion were presented with it, they saw something completely different, and not as tied up in their emotions.  Steven sent out a quiz to friends, asking about their opinions on love and hate in relation to themselves. He found some interesting points including: - vague descriptions of love and hate. Are people actually familiar with what love and hate mean? - Love and hate aren’t always to do with emotions but also the action of loving and hating - When asked about what they loved about themselves, people tended to focus on their personality or characteristics as opposed to physical attributes, while when asked about what they hated they focused on their physical aspects and not their personality/emotional aspects. This suggests that people love tacit things about themselves more than they love explicit things - is this the same for objects? People truly love the tacit things they know about n object (focusing on experiences with object) as opposed to what they know about the explicit, obvious things they know about it? I changed my love/hate object to a bottle of wine and focused on how I asked people about the it. Instead of asking “what do you love/hate about this?” or “what do you love/hate about this wine?”, I asked “what do you love/hate about this object?”.  I also followed their responses with “why?”, to further analyse their relationship with the object.  People were a lot more welcome to explaining what they loved about the object than they were to what they hated about, although some questioned whether their emotions were at that strength.  People that had a, errr, “closer” relationship to the object, or had a lot of experience tended to have more feedback, with no hesitation around the words “love” or “hate”. So stepping back from the activity, we asked ourselves what singular outcome have we come to as a group? We decided that the main, most common thing we’ve developed from our different disciplinary approaches is a new method of research using objects.  We realised that as soon as we began stepping away from researching using google/internet/scholarly/”hard” explained resources of knowledge and started using objects as a tool to explain the relationship of love and hate, we delved in to a different kind of knowledge, a relational kind of tacit knowledge between the person and the object.  Because Tacit knowledge is something you can't really communicate or explain, we found that objects helped us explore the underlying “iceberg” or knowledge people had in their experience with that object. It took something that was nothing but an object, like a pencil, and opened up what different kinds of  knowledge a person had with that object above and beyond “I use it to draw” or “it’s long and thin and pointy”.  It may not necessarily be a new method to the world, but to us it is, especially in the way we approach creative processes. The idea that an object could unveil so much knowledge is like a gold mine for creative thinking to me.  Lara, Analytical. 

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love and Hate things

To explore the relationship of love and hate, we had to choose one object that we both love and hate, we then discussed why we hate or love that certain object. It was interesting how we showed love and hate into objects, most of us had deeper meaning into why we love and/or hate that certain object, it helped show our passion and our personalities. We also had to pick an object that we both love and hate, all of us thought that we love and hate an object because it can be good and bad, or we need it but we like it. It is interesting to see how different the emotion is, yet it’s somehow relatable and something that we have to work with.

As a group, we decided to go in our separate ways again and pick an object we love and hate and explore it more, with different approach using our own roles, this is to also explore the process of multi, Trans and cross disciplines. The object I chose is money, so what I did is: I personally asked both of my parents if they love or hate money. It was interesting how they answered something different that I expected it to be, I thought they would say they love it because they need it, and they hate it because sometimes it’s not enough, but then, they lectured me instead, about how money is not supposed to be loved nor hate, we just need it. So I guess, what I’m getting from it, is that sometimes love and hate is an illusion, meaning that people think it’s real, while it’s just because they need it, or it can be useful, yet not necessary in life.

Another thing I did; is I asked my dad which object does he love and hate, he thought of it, and then he said his drum set, I asked him why, and he said he loves it because he likes playing with it, he hates it because it doesn’t do what it does, or he can’t play other songs well. This is interesting as while we were having a group discussion about an object that we love and hate, Quin talked about his pencil, and how he loves to draw but hate it when it doesn’t do what he wants it to do, this is interesting because when people are asked to pick an object they love and hate, they would picked an object that relates to their passion, I believe that this is same with humans, just like what Steven picked in which object he love and hate, he picked himself, he said sometimes he hates himself, and sometime he loves himself, it’s because just like every human being, we all have flaws, and we become happy and sad with things at different times. And I was just thinking, if we tend to choose the object we love and hate, that are things that is related to our passion/hobbies or choose an object we just need or choose ourselves because we’re not always happy, does that mean that love and hate together does not actually exist?

Also, while I was talking to Steven on the way back to AUT, I realise that my role as practical can actually cross roles, in this case I crossed to reflective with Steven. In other words, in order for me to gain more knowledge, I don’t just do things, but I also have to reflect on the things I did, to gain a clarity on the knowledge that I just learnt. (Cross-disciplinary?)

-Karen Dane Gamo - Practical -

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love and Hate (Objects)

Our group gathered again to discuss how we would like to explore love at hate and study it further. What we ended up with, is something which I am extremely excited about. We each bought in three objects. Something we love, something we had, and something with mixed feelings. From there we were going to look into how we could use these objects to understand what the feelings of love and hate would be. From this, I was able to understand the following:

4/5 (80%) of us had our object that we have mixed feelings towards, be something which we were slightly dependent on. Showing that we think it is good when it works the way we want, but if it is faulty, then that is when negative feelings come out. 

4/5 (80%) had our Love object be something which brings joy to us without us understanding 100% why that is. An example of this is Lara’s pen. She said that is makes her happy and makes her laugh. Stating that it was just funny. This is showing that the joy which is felt comes from a personal thing. However, 1/5 (20%) had our love object be something which is based on something else. Quinn had his object be his headphones, which is due to the joy of listening to music or videos. So this means his love object is based on other things which is needed to make his object become his love object.

Our Hate objects were very interesting. We had tweezers, a blank page and Arduino as three of them. All showing very different things. Tweezers which showed the pain felt, a blank page to show the feeling of not knowing what to do and Arduino which showed the inner pain of using Arduino.  However overall, we can see that the majority of all instances is due to the personality of the owner. While the objects of hate seem to be things which reflect pain, so therefore many other people can agree with the feeling they get from that object.

George Monro - Quantitive

[weareincompetent-blog]

Love/hate objects. Analytical.

Yesterday we all did a wee show and tell with our love and hate objects.  Lara (analytical): Love: Funny looking pen Love this pen because it makes me unconditionally happy when I look at it.  Hate: Tweezers Hate these because they equal pain when I look at them.  Love and Hate: My phone Love because I need it and it’s super useful, hate it because it’s rubbish quality and always breaks, especially when I need it. 

Karen (practical): Love: Camera Hate: Arduino Love and Hate: Money

George (quantitative): Love: Arduino handbook Hate: Fictional novel Love and Hate: Speaker

Steven (qualitative): Love: Anime/Manga Hate: Not knowing Love and Hate: Myself

Quinn (theoretical): Love: Headphones Hate: Empty piece of paper Love and Hate: Pencils We noticed during the process of finding these things that the things we loved were easy to find and the things we hated were difficult to come across. We found it’s rare to find inanimate things you have strong feelings of hatred towards.  We also noticed the objects chosen were very reflective of the people using them (e.g. Quinn - paper/pencil).  We found it interesting how for the objects we loved and hated, we loved it because we needed them or they brought lots of joy, but as soon as they didn't work, we hated them. Possibly because we were so dependent on their purpose. We found that the strongest level of hate towards those objects had to do with our passion for them - how much we passionately felt about them as parts of our lives.  I’d say doing this activity has been very useful in our search for knowledge so far. Having the same activity, approached an analysed from our different disciplines has given us a lot of perspective and helped to widen the scope of learning possibilities from the use of objects.  From there, we decided to combine a couple of approaches (qualitative and practical mainly) and each pick an object to question 10 x people on, asking: - What do you love about this object? Why? - What do you hate about this object? Why? We’re not too sure what exactly will come from this process, but see potential for a new method of gaining knowledge being discovered. A way of exploring  the tacit knowledge held in relationships between humans and inanimate objects.  It reminds me of what we were posed with in a previous lecture: “Could Integrated Practices be about the agency of both humans and non-humans?” Who says humans are the only things that can provide new knowledge? Maybe the knowledge from inanimate objects is just as valid? Maybe the relationship/connection between human and non-human is also a valid thing worth looking at?  Reminds me of our interrogation of objects. I learnt from that  to consider why I’m doing what I’m doing. What makes me decide how to approach something “creatively”, or approach learning something new?  I wonder whether working from different discipline perspectives as a group balances the biased approach we all had during the process of our object interrogation? Is approaching a decision/process from a synthesis of disciplines the most legitimised approach? Is this possible to do as an individual? Thinking about how we’re working in the disciplinary way of thinking, we’ve shifted slightly through the process of sharing our objects and learning from the activity. 

We initially began the project with a multi-disciplinary approach, all focusing on the same goal, but really working/researching within our own disciplinary methods.  By doing an activity together and analysing it afterwards with our own disciplinary approaches, we went from multi to interdisciplinary, as we moved forward with a synthesis of our ideas and methods of development.  Tomorrow we’re going to come together with our results and discuss the final outcome. I’m going to finalise the group manifesto and we’re going to plan the presentation with an overview of what we’ve learnt in the process. 

Lara, analytical.