By: Nicanor Wong Arch
jnwong@caplima.pe
Summary: What distinguishes the concepts of theory, design, philosophy or ideology of the concept of architecture? Are all these questions earlier in the singular or plural? In the seventeenth century, modern science enters the debate with the traditional open, valid points are brought together with error. The scientific revolution begins with Copernicus and the heliocentric theory, Francis Bacon strengthen science based on experimentation, Descartes influence the mathematical approach Kepler science and scientific laws make the first of the new science. Galileo Galilei formulates theories as the law of falling bodies and the discovery of some planets, Newton's mechanics opens a new era. Meanwhile, Hegel conceives of nature as an unfolding of the idea and Comte - father of positivism - formulates the law of three stages of knowledge: we must refrain from asking for the ultimate causes of things and limit ourselves to formulate laws of observable phenomena . Under this scenario try to figure out if it is valid to speak of theory in architecture. Preface
If the architecture was commonly known as the human activity that transforms nature to shelter from the ravages of nature and basic needs of man. The act of setting up a space that meets the physical conditions necessary for protection against cold, heat or rain, it added more intense the desire for beauty. We try to organize such a setup fee of order, proportion, form and function for this building activity. The legacy of the Roman Pollio Vitruvius Marco in the first century BC in his treatise "On Architecture" is a clear example of this desire.
However, since man is described as "sapiens," probably is in question for reasons beyond the mere fact of building. And the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu (fourth century BC) argued that "four walls and a ceiling are not architecture, but the air left inside." It is thus that the architecture would have as its raw material space.
space, raw material of architecture
The raw material, in Aristotelian philosophy, is called the subject first of corporeal reality, tangible to the senses and subject to change. Furthermore, it should indicate that it is the fundamental principle from which the corporeal body is generated. Finally, the raw material remains in the thing generated. It is called "premium" because There is nothing before it, ie, no subject matter to distinguish it from scratch. The field name "second" is reserved for what is subject to change.
space would be the fundamental principle from which things are generated, ie, the beginning (a quo: to which). It is then that we will be close to a first definition of space as "pure potentiality and uncertainty." This "pure potentiality" is a logical possibility (of reason), but a real ability because "what may be" not become if not through the act of being. Space as known and what is the subject of speculation for its ability intelligible through the senses. Can not exist without the way that makes the act of being a participant.
By "substantially" the principle that makes intelligible beings, whether tangible or intangible (eg what is a figment of our imagination), that is, by which an entity has a certain way of being so.
Now a certain way of being responds to an act by which things are what they are and that act - unitary and real - is what we call a substantial (for example, the house is a living space because has substantially the house). There are also some qualitative ways of being responsive to the accidental forms (following the example above: the house is green.)
be the way that space has an intrinsic principle of unity and organization, differing from mere states of aggregation. The unity of matter and form - hile morphic composition - is a relationship of power and act, together, form the essence or substance of things: an entity that had only way, no matter, would be intangible, such as the ideas.
power of the idea and act, matter and form, it follows that the substantial form is unique to each substance, its essence. Otherwise, the individual substance could have two substantial ways contrary.
be just "the act of the substantial form" being something and not another, allowing the space is known as being more in action. This ability to be - act - is the subject of grading, it can be more or less can be provided with reference to the larger capacity intelligible. The more uncertain, "is" less. We conclude that the substantial form is the principle intelligibility of space.
individuated space
What is likely to know is what exists in reality: the individual space and concrete. Thus, experience tells us that uniqueness is a fact. Moreover, space is common to other properties. So what makes two spaces, belonging to the same function, ie, having something in common, different? The solution lies in the principle of individuation.
The principle of individuation is nothing but the raw material, since the substance is located within a "species." And, as what should be individualized on the substantial level, and not the way (act), it necessarily follows that it must be the raw material. For this, we say that the raw material receives the form and the individuals, constitutes a specific space: this space and not another.
The space is quantified (quantitate signata: quantitatively marked). The raw material is one common principle everything, but the subject is found in each individual entity multiplied. As the shape is common to individuals, it can not file the principle of multiplicity. Therefore, we must admit that is the same stuff but individualized by the amount (quantites). The quantity to be large, the matter determined by "this" space is not "the one" space.
The individual: dynamic and internal structure
Epistemologically, all that is something is marked by a peculiar dynamism and structural patterns. That is, the corporeal existence unfolds following a spatiotemporal patterns caused by its own individual realization.
Features basic space would materially configured: a.
Is potential: has properties and characteristics modified to the extent that is capable of this or that change according to its own internal structure. For example, a timber element is likely to turn to ashes when burned, which does not happen with the metal. B.Es
Quantitative is measurable in its singularity. C.Es
sensitive, capable of being captured by our senses. D.Es
material: is made of something that can be modified. E.Está
subjected to space-time: key dimensions of all that is material. Ranks and is subject to a succession of moments: a before and after.
call this space, individualized and configured the built physically.
I built and systematization
will therefore built it establishes a link of relationship with his surroundings and himself either location, location, situation or position.
By location understand the relationship between the built and the mainland still for the relationship between the location and built around him - the natural and artificial - and by status or position, the internal order of the buildings.
All these qualities make it possible to form a system built. The term comes from the Greek system "Syn" (together) and "histemi" (put, place), namely: what is built is part of a package. It will then, by the quality of relationship that the built up area may be assigned binding rules or principles of his party for the whole individual and the individual all around him.
Is it then the built up area subject to an experimental science? The answer will be positive for their own materiality. In contrast, the philosophy considers systems as occur in nature. Natural entities have a greater degree of "being" unitary structure and dynamism. Moreover, the built up area, while maintaining an individuality, unit is weaker by the dependence of the parties with respect to all: add-ons, all orders and links. Philosophically could be a system in a weak sense.
So far, I have referred only to the characteristics hylomorphic space as if it were self-sufficient and independent. If the key to the understanding of it has been the relationship act as power-to-substantially and raw materials, the key to understanding the built space will not only its essence but its nature.
The nature of space
built by nature in a broad sense can be understood as the set of entities that make up the universe: the cosmos. However, this strict sense of nature is the intrinsic principle of corporeal body activity. This principle is inherent attribute of both matter and form but the form is more "nature" that the matter because the activity comes from the shape. We can therefore conclude that the nature is the principle of actions and passions, and these do not occur spontaneously, but in a succession of cause and effect and, for purposes of this essay are interested discern the cause of dynamic shapes the space.
We are in a position to note that each substance has its own nature, and the substances are formed by matter and how intrinsic causes it (they are within the substance). And with reference to change, we should note that this is a cause that what constitutes Agent in being, and a final cause which moves to action.
define the cause as "that from which something comes in some way." Thus we can consider that the causes are to be are the material cause, formal, exemplary, efficient and final. The five reasons above we can define as follows: "Cause
material: is that from which something is made and remains inherently in the thing made. For example, the wood that makes a cabin. Cause
-formal, is that by which something has a certain way of being. For example, a cabin instead of a totem.
-copy Cause: This is the way devised by the intelligence of the efficient cause. Is distinguished by its character as subjective and rational. For example: the distribution and number of rooms in the cottage. Cause
-efficient: it is that from which change occurs. For example: building the cabin. Cause
-final is that by which something is done. For example, the cabin is built for habitation.
Both the formal cause as the issue would be the special human and social nature of the built space in order to the final cause, which called itself: architecture.
think, build,
live far, the preceding paragraphs have been in order to define the scope of architectural work and its essence. Following this study the actor and his role defined task in order to elucidate the reasons, the knowledge by reason of the root causes of performance as configurator space. A humanized space.
I would stop in two human qualities affected by the actions of the architect: the ability to hold space (habitus) for the user and the action-passion as tools that served the same to reach first. We understand that action
subject passes from potency to act. Therefore, action could be defined as the exercise of efficient causality or feature whose nature is to update an active power. The architect, as an agent of a built up area and the user as a subject patient is subject - in the living - to acquire a perfection, updating a capacity that has (passive power).
that action can be distinguished in both settings - now called design - space, such as possession of the same capacity can be transitive or immanent. The transitive subject moves the patient to perform an action (eg move along a corridor to move from an environment at another), while that the immanent cause and effect remain in the same subject, ie, completes itself (eg the contemplation of the beauty of light to enter through the openings provided in a wall).
The action of the architect to design the living space stems from its specific nature, so that could be said that the work continues to be (operari sequitur esse). Therefore, there would be some resemblance between the action of the agent (architect) and the passion that affects the patient (user) since no one can give what you do not have previously. This became known as the "footprint" of the creator of the work.
Despite all the speculation above, emergency happens a series of developments that require a cause and is derived from the condition of human freedom and the self-sustainability of civic work on the materials used. On the one hand, these complexities may be due to the potential of space as a raw material that can be updated in different ways (eg change of use of a space) and the confluence of causes other agents that update potential in the building complex material: moisture , rust, cracking. These possibilities exist as information stored in the physical structure of matter quantified that, when given the right circumstances, produce new types of organization. This phenomenon reveals a characteristic the physical world: its contingency.
The order think-build-dwelling is a factual nature of the creation of a built up area, from cause to effect. The reason for the architecture will become the teleology of the same. We are only able to tell if it is possible to develop the architectural practice a philosophy and / or theory of it.
Design Theory: necessity and contingency
If we define science as certain knowledge about the causes, the theory will be the series of laws or assumptions used to relate certain order of phenomena.
Since architecture is done on a matter "quantitat signata "is subject to experimental control set out by laws, such as physical laws governing the construction order: coefficients of resistance of materials, construction processes, etc. However, in every process involving many factors which do not repeat the same circumstances. Arguably, there are no laws in the strict sense but a regularity that leads us to think of approximate repetitions.
In this sense, the contingency (the power being) precludes the necessity (he must be). Since the architectural work requires the building industry and building industry of the material world, there would be many types of needs of a relative. Increased dependence
of the subject implies, for the architect, a greater need in the act, which would mean a certain constraint on the freedom of design, an imperfection. Human beings, as the architect of creative design, materiality than exercising true freedom, while institutions held by necessary materials. Nevertheless, the action on the matter is incurred in a design determinism although relative and complex, subject to random factors and human freedom. Properly
can not speak of a theory of design, but multiple theories due to its ownership contingent and random.
Theory of Architecture
Unlike the aforementioned, theorizing about architecture is an attempt to systematize any substantial ways that actualize the raw material in a unique, built and habitable. In other words, is an attempt to understand the reasons for the action of the architect: the exemplary and efficient cause.
The creative role of the architect on the design of the substantial form and its possible identification by the subject will respond, especially, the nature of reasoning. It is of the nature of human intellectual capacity to achieve an intelligible truth from various known certainties confronted. This action is called reasoning: linking propositions creating a necessary causal dependence and the conclusion is reached about the antecedent.
But there are other ways to reach a conclusion through reasoning. The argument is divided into two parts, the first part of general conclusions that suggest a particular new conclusion that is contained within the above from which we started. The second part of the unique facts acquired through sensory experience to reach some general conclusion is called inductive reasoning.
For Aristotle to verify a conclusion had to be complete. Only in this way the conclusion could assume the status universal law.
Since both exemplary and efficient cause are subject to freedom of the architect and the unique social, cultural and technological, architectural theory is presented as a singular variety. Unlike the previous one, is not capable of generating rules but merely to propose explanations that, depending on the premises, can lead to erroneous conclusions, dubious or accurate, but always to a greater or lesser approximation to what we call truth, end of knowledge intellectual.
Thus, what we call theory of architecture, would become a set of systematic knowledge, ordered and coherent issue of causation, agent and final architectural work. As a science, you have two objects of study: the material and formal. The object is the set theoretical material about the architecture while the formal object - look under which studies the physical object - is the inductive mode or logical rational argumentative character used to achieve such knowledge.
Since the human intellect is not free of error in making both assumptions and the process of analysis, comparison and synthesis, the theory of architecture is a breeding ground for criticism, that is, is subject to examination and develop other sets of judgments about process or completion of any theory.
The use of the plural in the theory of architecture can not be "in strict sense of the term" the singleness of its purpose and action taken. Yes would use the plural for all of the findings within a single action: the search for truth or theoretical truth.
Philosophy and Theory of Architecture
The question the why of things is inherent in human reason, although the responses that have been happening are part of a horizon which shows the complementarity of different cultures in which man lives. Despite the changing times and the progress of knowledge, There is a set of principles such as non-contradiction, finality, causality, design of man as free and intelligent subject ... is shared in some way by all. It is as if we had come upon an implicit philosophy where everyone thinks they know these principles. Thomas Aquinas
define philosophy as the knowledge of all things by their root causes acquired by reason. Since philosophy will all things physical object, ie what it is, its purpose is to explain the root causes (especially the material and efficient) and last (final).
The method used by philosophy will also be rational order, starting with the tangible reality through knowledge, investigates for the first and final causes of all that is. The only experience will be useful to check the facts. At this point are the differences and similarities with the theory of architecture: first, in terms of proximity to the sensitive reality. This proximity makes philosophy is - perhaps - less abstract and conceptual theory. While the theory can speculate on other grounds, speculate philosophy - basically - the essence of things that have a living "in re" (in reality close and obvious).
Second, the conceptualization of the architecture has a strong social and be subject to trace the dynamics of history. As philosophy, the progress of the two is not linear nor cumulative. There is progress, setbacks and unattainable peaks that do not necessarily go hand in hand with scientific and technological progress, although there are influences on each other and vice versa.
Sources:
Artigas, M, Philosophy of nature. 4 th ed, EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1998.
Artigas, M, Sanguineti, JJ, Philosophy of Nature, 2 nd ed; EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1989.
Artigas, M: Introduction to Philosophy. EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1990.
Aubert, JM, Philosophy of nature. 6 th ed; Herder. Barcelona, \u200b\u200b1987.
Alvira, T et al. Metaphysics. 7 th ed, EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1990.
Llano, A. Epistemology .. 4 th ed, EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1998.
Maritain, J, General Introduction to Philosophy, Ed University, Freiburg (Switzerland), 1987.
Maritain, J., The order of concepts. Book Club. Buenos Aires, 1967
Sanguinetti, JJ, Introduction to philosophy. Urbania University Press, Rome, 1992.
Sanguineti, JJ, Logic. EUNSA, Pamplona, \u200b\u200b1982.
0 comments:
Post a Comment