BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Rojek-Adamek Paulina (Pedagogical University of Cracow)
From Relational Space to Engagement-Designers' Ethics and Responsibility in the Light of Empirical Research
Polish Sociological Review, 2018, nr 1, s. 95-107, rys., fot., bibliogr. 33 poz.
Słowa kluczowe
Społeczna odpowiedzialność, Etyka, Relacje międzyludzkie
Social Responsibility, Ethics, Interpersonal relations
The main goal of this article is to present the contemporary designer's profession in the scope of its personal definition of ethic and social responsibility. In order to deal with, it will be showed some empirical data from own sociological research conducted among Polish professional designers. The opinions have described their attitude to the problem and made possible endeavoured to place collected opinions in broader, relational context of this profession. To bring more clearity to the matter, there will be also presented the definition of design, differentiation of roles undertaken by contemporary designers and their influence on shaping the material environment of human life. (original abstract)
Dostępne w
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach
  1. Best Practice Paper: Model Code Of Professional Conduct For Designers, 1983, Published by the International Council of Graphic Design Associations, the International Council of Societies of Industrial Design, and the international Federation of Interior Architects/Interior Designers (amended in 1987, reviewed in 1997),
  2. Bogunia-Borowska, M., Sztompka, P. (eds.). 2012. Fotospołeczeństwo. Antologia tekstów z socjologii wizualnej. Kraków: Znak.
  3. Baudrillard, J. [1998] 2006. The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: Sage; Polish Edition, Społeczeństwo konsumpcyjne. Jego mity i struktury. Warszawa: Wyd. Sic!.
  4. Bourdieu, P., Wacquant, L. J. D. 2001. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  5. Buchanan, R. 1992, Wicked Problems in Design Thinking, Design Issues 8.
  6. Debord, G. 1998. Społeczeństwo Spektaklu. Gdańsk: Wyd. słowo/obraz terytoria.
  7. Dilnot, C. 1982. Design as a Socially Significant Activity: Introduction, Design Studies 3, July.
  8. Donati, P. 2009. What Does "Subsidiarity" Mean ? The Relational Perspective, Journal of Markets & Morality 12 (2): 211-243.
  9. Durkheim, E. [1957] 1992. Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. London: Routledge.
  10. Durkheim, E. [1984] 1999. The Division of Labor in Society. Polish Edition, O podziale pracy społecznej Warszawa: PWN.
  11. Florida, R. 2002. The Rise of the Creative Class-and How it's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, & Everyday Life. New York: The Perseus Books Group.
  12. Gibson, J J. 1977. The Theory of Affordances, in: R. E. Shaw & J. Bransford (eds.), Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  13. Greenwald, H. P. 2000. Ethics In Social Research, in: Encyclopedia Of Sociology Second Edition, Vol. 2, Edgar F. Borgatta (Editor-in-Chief), University Of Washington, Seattle: Macmillan Reference.
  14. Krajewski, M. 2012. Style życia przedmiotów. Zarys koncepcji, in: A. Jawłowska, W Pawlik, B. Fatyga (eds.), Style życia wartości obyczaje. Stare tematy, nowe spojrzenia. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
  15. Lash, S., and Urry, J. 1994. Economies of Signs and Space. London: Sage.
  16. Latour, B. 1991. Technology is society made durable in: J. Law, A Sociology of Monsters Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Sociological Review Monograph 38: 103-132.
  17. Latour, B. 1996. On Actor-Network Theory: A Few Clarifications, Soziale Welt 47 (4): 369-381, (Accessed: 06/02/2017).
  18. Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling The Social. An Introduction To Actor-Network-Theory. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
  19. Marx, K. [1887] 1951. Capital. A Critique of Political Economy, Polish Edition, Warszawa: Książka i Wiedza.
  20. Niwiński, G. 2007. O Etyce w projektowaniu. Warszawa: Wydział Wzornictwa Przemysłowego Akademii Sztuk Pięknych w Warszawie i Stowarzyszenia Projektantów Form Przemysłowych.
  21. Norman, D. A. 2013. The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. New York: Doubleday.
  22. Papanek, V. 1971. Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. New York: Pantheon Books.
  23. Redmount, R. S. 1978. New Dimensions of Professional Responsibility, The Journal of The Legal Profession 3.
  24. Rittel, H. W J. 1972. On the Planning Crisis: Systems Analysis of the First and Second Generations, Bedrift-sokonomen 8: 390-96.
  25. Rittel, H. W. J., and Webber, M. M. 1972. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, working paper presented at the Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, November.
  26. Simon, H. A., 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial. London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  27. Strangleman, T. 2015. Rethinking Industrial Citizenship: the Role and Meaning of Work in an Age of Austenity, The British Journal of Sociology 66 (4).
  28. Sztompka, P. 2012. Wyobraźnia Wizualna i Socjologia, in: M. Bogunia-Borowska, P. Sztompka (eds.), Fotospołeczeństwo. Antologia Tekstów z Socjologii Wizualnej Kraków: Znak.
  29. Urry, J 1995. Consuming Places. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2002, London-New York: Routledge.
  30. Weber, M. 1978. Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  31. Veblen, T. 1971/2001. The Theory of the Leisure Class, Polish edition, Teoria klasy próżniaczej, translated by Janina & Krzysztof Zagórski. Warszawa: PWN.
Cytowane przez
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu