I am a researcher. I have publications. It’s hard for me to accept the content of this book. So I’m not going to use a conventional paradigm to describe this book.
According to Wikipedia
Research is “creative and systematic work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge”.[1] It involves the collection, organization and analysis of evidence to increase understanding of a topic, characterized by a particular attentiveness to controlling sources of bias and error. These activities are characterized by accounting and controlling for biases. A research project may be an expansion of past work in the field. To test the validity of instruments, procedures, or experiments, research may replicate elements of prior projects or the project as a whole.
For the first half of this article, I really had no idea what the author was writing about. The author tries to prove that art and design have research value (which I admit) but uses considerable literary devices, contrasts, analogies, etc. Personal opinions from the fifth layer of evidence are the least trustworthy research data. I don’t like to analyze research by playing with words and having an attitude of, “You underestimate the importance of art research.”
I very much admit that the study of art has great value. For example, the relationship between the evolution of art schools and history, art materials and preservation, and the interpretation Angle of art works. As research, regardless of the discipline, we are using rigorous, scientific, and systematic methods to find an answer to a question. Not just words.
THANKS😊