Tame, Wicked, and Aporetic Problems in Design

Abstract

The article elucidates a type of problem Rittel and Webber did not acknowledge. The underlying assumption about tame and wicked problems is that they are mutually exclusive (any problem can be either wicked or tame but cannot be both or partially wicked and partially tame). Another assumption is that this distinction is comprehensively exhaustive (there can be no other types of problems). My analysis reveals that precisely the opposite stands. By situating a different problem within their distinction, I demonstrate that some problems have properties of both tame and wicked problems and that some problems are neither wicked nor tame but aporetic. Aporia is a perplexing state of mind and an intractable problem consisting of equally plausible but mutually exclusive propositions. It depicts a situation when we discover equally good reasons to think two or more contradictory things. That overcommits us to conflicting theses and prevents us from accepting them jointly. Aporia is either a triggering or a stopping device in an inquiry, or both. The significance of including aporetic problems in the nomenclature of design problems has far-reaching consequences for understanding the nature of design problems and knowledge and design practice.