Visual Anatomy of Frame Creation in Abductive Reasoning by way of the Semiotic Square

Abstract

Background Although the importance of dealing with paradoxes in frame creation in abductive reasoning has been discussed in design research (Dorst, 2011, 2015b), a logical approach to deal with paradoxes in problem solving has been lacking. We raise the following questions: If design reasoning is not random, what is a logical method that could be useful for designers to engage with paradoxes in the problem-solving process? What is a logical principle behind the interplay among complex meanings? Methods We attempt to respond to these questions by proposing “the semiotic square” as a logical method to cope with paradoxes in frame creation in abductive reasoning (Greimas, 1987; Greimas & Rastier, 1968). It is assumed that since meaning is grasped in the relations of difference (Floch, 2001; Greimas, 1983; Greimas & Rastier, 1968), the semiotic square involving contrary, contradictory, and implicative relations may be useful to deal with complex meanings in design reasoning for problem-solving. We present the analysis of a design case based on the semiotic square with a diagram. We attempt to describe a logical principle behind the interplay among complex meanings in frame creation in abductive reasoning by use of the semiotic square. Results The analysis of a design case shows that it is in the logical relations of contradiction, contrariety, and implication that working principles, paradoxes, themes, assumptions behind concrete practices from the problematic situation, and proposals for design solutions may be arranged and better grasped. We found that using the semiotic square in frame creation in abductive reasoning may facilitate the logical development of reasoning about the potential possibilities of design directions because a given meaning may be expanded upon the semiotic square. Conclusions Using the semiotic square in problem-solving does not produce the solution directly, but it might help materialize the abstract process of frame creation in abductive reasoning. By following a logical path of the semiotic square while questioning the logic behind “WHAT + HOW = VALUE” (Dorst, 2011) and abductive reasoning that infers possible preconditions (WHAT + HOW) for the consequence (VALUE), one might find a simpler and easier way to deal with complex meanings from the problematic situation than managing the process without it.