Design thinking features in post-modern educational literature (Doll 1979, 1986, 1993; Kress 1996; Cope, & Kalantzis 2003) as a construct that purportedly enables educators to prepare students to deal with complexity and „super-complexity‟ (Barnett 1996; 2000; 2003; 2006) when they enter their professions. Although not explicitly stated, post-modern educational literature tends to stress the importance of systems thinking, critical problem solving, cognitive flexibility, abductive and connective reasoning as competences that prepare professionals to also perform optimally within a post-modern cultural situation and in age of information and super-complexity.

In 2010 the University of Johannesburg embarked on the implementation of what it terms its „Learning to Be Philosophy‟ (Gravett, Amory & van der Westhuizen 2008) and institution-wide initiative that attempts to position the University strategically within the higher education landscape of South Africa. I contend that it is a philosophy that stresses “operational performativity” (Barnett 2000:40) in producing a new kind of graduate; one that has the capacity to engage professionally with a world of super-complexity through „being‟. This institutional philosophy, a blend of constructivist and phenomenological theory, argues that learning is authentic or deep when a student embodies knowledge by producing it in complex learning situations. Learning is understood, within the philosophy, beyond the scope of the transmission, consumption, processing of information but in terms of the application of conventional professional wisdom. It suggests that graduates, as professionals, need to be able to be durably adaptable and value learning as a lifelong enterprise (Barnett 2006: 59).

My paper critiques the Learning To Be Philosophy in terms of Barnett‟s (2000: 127 -139) notions of the new university in the age of uncertainty. Drawing on the work of Donald Schön (1990), I argue first, that designerly thinking (Nigel Cross 2008, 2011) is a form of artistry that should play a crucial role in not simply preparing students to perform supercomplexity in their professions but to develop their capacity to show insight into apprehending and producing supercomplexity. I argue that despite the importance of artistry to higher education, it cannot be taught because it is not strictly speaking a „competence‟ but a set of dispositions. My central hypothesis is that design thinking and artistry can, however, be learnt, as an interrelated set of appreciative dispositions that show understanding into the condition of supercomplexity. I argue implicitly that a situational, transformative, durational and dialogical pedagogy is required in order to realise artistry as a graduate attribute. A pedagogy of this kind would demand a radical revision of the traditional functions of the university educator.