By: Nicanor Wong Arch
jnwong@caplima.com.pe
Summary: After the crisis of Western thought promoted by the Cartesian immanentism and French Enlightenment, the concept of architecture is separated from its object, building and technical construction. This essay seeks to clarify the possibility of a systemic unity of architecture from concept down to its base in reality.
Keywords: being, knowledge, reality, systems, concepts, dynamics, causes, meanings, abstraction, essence, nature.
Consider the possibility of knowing the architecture from human reason is a vicious circle because, in any event will be from the same reason the ability to resolve this question. Since the beginning of thought, man himself has questioned the extent to which knowledge can achieve what you want: the truth, the opening of understanding to be. Will be common, after the eighteenth century Enlightenment movement, arguing that truth is a human construct, a ghost in our mind that collectively accept and attribute name and properties.
knowledge and critical
Modern philosophy - from Descartes to Hegel and followers - are characterized by supporting an attitude called "critical" to the point of putting into question any alleged knowledge that has not been validated critically. This model has defeated to argue that the theory of knowledge is a dead discipline. Following
tangentially the Cartesian model, human action to criticize from the Greek "krino" which means to judge, to settle. Try to return to criticism that its original meaning is to pick, choose and - therefore - according to judge one thing to another. Genuine attempt to allay criticism craving knowledge to conform better with the being of things.
criticize our power to hear is just an attempt to fool for how it should be investigated if it is valid cognitive skills if ever we use it to find something? According to Aristotelian philosophy, epistemology or theory of knowledge, framed all questions relating to the possession of being by knowledge, ie the metaphysics of truth.
enough not to accept the fact that it is possible to perceive something external to us without being able to know what they really are. Merely to establish the appearance without affirming or denying that there is a correspondence with the real thing will become in an attitude typical of postmodernism: ataraxia or indifference to everything.
The main arguments used by skeptics are:
"The diversity of opinions and even contradictions: on the diversity of material questions of the universe hold very different views and even found, believing - who holds it - he has reason . This diversity, they argue, is the empirical proof no one can achieve certainty, but only a personal opinion.
-error and illusion that comes from the ambiguity of feelings about our senses to make us think that appearances are real. But not only - argue - The senses are fallible, but also the intelligence to judge, as in the case of dreams, where we confuse dream with reality.
-relativity of knowledge: because the individual values \u200b\u200bwhat he sees from his point of view, was charged with a series of subconscious biases and prejudices to the point that what may be true for one will not be for another. The nineteenth century English poet Ramón de Campoamor, says it best: "In this treacherous world there is nothing true or lies, because everything is under the eye of the beholder."
The strength of conviction of these arguments permeate the objectivity of art and modern science. However they are easy just sophistry to challenge because their shows are not rigorous, but rather attitudes toward life. Believe in it, would be taken as true, at least some "everything is relative" and - thus - would be in a logical contradiction.
The outline of the proposed architecture by Vitruvius in the first century BC, subsequently taken up and rethought in the Renaissance period (centuries XV and XVI) marked with a strong anthropocentric in formal education, expressed already by Protagoras in the V century BC "Man is the measure of all things."
ballast anchor this mistake thinking objectivity with subjectivity. The being of what perceived is independent of perception, ie the essence of reality is not the object being thought: "being" is not limited to "being for man."
Nevertheless, various forms of idealism, will pose the problem of transcendence (excel, surpass, exceed) the knowledge. Is it possible to know different realities to consciousness? The basic foundation of this movement is: you can not substantiate anything that goes outside the limits of our consciousness, since there is no denying that the known - as known - it is something inherent to knowledge. Thus, equating the "being" to "know."
In an attempt to be neutral, the object has its own reality independent of human knowledge. Known is only in our minds but it has a real knowledge has to know something real. Moreover, there would be "objects" of knowledge that are only in the ratio (ratio entities), whether of imagination or fantasy or logical-mathematical properties abstracted from reality as it can be a number, a point or a sphere .
's position on the immanent critics would lead only to generate a set of personal opinions of the debate that, if confronted with a transcendent reality, is doomed to error and the error is not knowledge. Likewise, historical materialism, subjectivism will use to develop what is known as "superstructure" or the postmodern "meta narratives" with the aim of undermining the foundations of the transcendent ontology.
is wrong, too, do not admit that the understanding of "being" of reality in their understanding: univocal, analogous and ambiguous, is exclusively reserved to the univocal, to be truth. Admitting the reality is not to deny the idealism, but more than idealism. In short, there are many ways of being that allow us to maintain that to be truth is founded on the outside and separately the self, and primarily, that is the essence of real things. Both
Protagoras, passing the French Enlightenment to the few contemporary phenomenologists, it is impossible to think that things exist outside of thought, therefore not subject to space or time. In contrast, I argue that knowing is not the measure of reality. As Aristotle says, man's knowledge is to some extent, everything is as well known, but is to be the one that makes the understanding is, because understanding is the knowledge being and reveals the reality.
What is not known to be altered - except that then transforms them knowing - Which is amended is the man. The ability to reason does not alter the reality outside of it, otherwise distort our way of knowing reality.
perception, features and issues already raised
the idealistic argument as to the accuracy that may have little sense and, secondly that of the empiricists in the sense that no one could transcend beyond immanent, one would first speculate on an obvious reality - and therefore unprovable - the fact that we exist as a first intellective act of reason: I am.
In this first act contact the subject and object. For psychology, consciousness is an attribute of being endowed with reason, an act of the intellect.
Although the process of knowledge is not subject to time for purposes of this study will divide it into two categories:
a.Conciencia
sensitive intellectual b.Conciencia
The first is the power that unifies data from different senses (feelings), including common sense, imagination, memory, and the estimate, in what is known as perception or sensation. The collective consciousness is the ability to unify and reflection of sensitive knowledge to intellectual knowledge (making judgments and reasoning) and then the act of volition.
Importantly consciousness, from the branch of psychology, not a mirror of reality but an act performed by the individual cognitive nature. What is perceived as it is aware of an element that sets the living and the common denominator of this action Sherpa creative originality of thought and its unitary character. That is why - in space - is necessary to distinguish a "basic framework" as a whole is part of the living space of the individual's "immediate context" as part of the core subjects of experiences in intimate relationship with the individual.
awareness both self-consciousness, and reality in which we live may have these key features:
"It's dynamic:" It's self
motor unit: in seeking to establish relationships between various objects known
"is subjective: as an operation belonging to a Specifically I
-is intentional: it aims to reveal the sense of reality
awareness of reality, either the core or the next context and understanding by the subject of it is free from error, because the adequacy of perceiving sensations will be the first level of abstraction from sense-knowledge that is devoid of truth because, as I mentioned earlier, being is not known (simple apprehension) and to know the truth.
be the subject of understanding - intellectual knowledge - to find the matching between knowing and being that goes beyond the mere apprehension of the known. That is, the simple apprehension is only the perception of the object and always will be true for the sensitive knowledge. What we know for truth is so explicit in the intellectual knowledge in making judgments and reasoning (compose and divide judgments). That's why what we call as "truth" would be the conformity of knowing in action with the object in the act.
But not only match between object and knowledge but it is essential to reflection. Without reflection, leveling the object with the knowledge and real situation is not as being the object does not end with a power of knowing, that is, the act precedes the power as the cause precedes effect.
While the obvious is unprovable, because there is nothing above that can give the same rationale, the trial is not limited truth in the universe of reality, but in all trials of assertive character that will more or less strength as corresponds with being the object. From the above it appears that the error never occurs in reality the object, but in the view of the subject. And we will see the logical error, system hangs on contemporary architecture and its object.
worth mentioning that, in making judgments, we can not exclude the extra psychic phenomena conscious or subconscious, psychoanalysis pretend to order the conscious activity in the opposite direction, a dynamic in which lower levels of psychological awareness (instinct , tendencies, feelings, memories, fantasies, dreams), inferred directly into the conscious awareness. Unconscious and subconscious and express the absence of conscious relaxation. The philosophical term psychological passed to designate a diffuse psychic zone goes unnoticed and influences human action. The first formulations of the unconscious are made in the late nineteenth century by Janet and Freud. Hitherto all pathologies were based on organic causes. While it is true, still remains as an interpretive hypothesis, architecture and art in America, France and England of the eighteenth century sustain their production on this basis.
social life and its implication in the perception of object
While the human being to become one, needs to be developed in partnership for the acquisition of skills and perfection of its own nature it can not start no education and living with others.
These two components (education and living together) will be challenged by the avant-garde of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. On the one hand we have historical-materialist constructions hold human society as a convention in which men are subjected to admit the force of a ruling class. On the other hand, the positivists would argue that social harmony is the basis of a collective agreement, an agreement to make coexistence possible, "Your freedom ends where mine begins." The reaction in the arts will not wait: on the one hand we definitions like "architecture is the result of a given society and their relations "(Ruiz de Somocurcio, 1979:8), and its opposite" creative activities of artists will not need to have the collective to produce works of art, aesthetics and sociological thinking, which gives absolute value technique all "(Deustua, 1932: 165).
If the elements of society are language, communication and exchange, also the division of labor and authority. When a set of roles are unified under a legitimate organization, legally regulated, we are facing an institution. The social life is structured by institutions and these are the main agents of culture. Careful reader not to confuse these principles of organization with the definitions of social structure of modernity, it attempts to present a comprehensive framework that encompasses all types of social group.
community is understood to exist when there is a good in which all participate and communicate with each other. As the maladjusted man over nature is not transformed, it is necessary to modify it, transform it into bodies and artificial structures according to the different needs of their nature.
is within this field of transformation where nature is modified in a complex structure called the building, a construction made of materials resistant to either live or for other uses. It is a good, not only private community but, since their physical presence will be regulated not only by the institutions and the community's own authority, but she displayed a cultural information.
The building
"The notion of architecture or, properly, as a category with all that that means in terms of incorporation is not, therefore, a priori universal human spirit, not an abstract category that justifies itself . It is a historical category, a historical concept that arises in a particular time of development of society. And comes in a given society. Appears in the historical context that embraces the demands of a social class play - at the superstructure - an ideology, which can endorse and legitimize the social existence of a set of practices and products related to the production of what today constitutes the material basis of architecture as a category "(Lude Urquizo 1986: 12) hold Ludeman from the viewpoint of historical materialism.
In the preceding test this (See: WONG, Nicanor. 2009. Theory of Architecture. Fundamentals from Philosophy. Retrieved November 2, 2009 in http://arkhe-noticias.blogspot.com/) mentioned that architectural fact answers five causal models, where formal cause and copy down the link social order to the final cause: the common good. There also I mentioned that while natural entities have a greater degree of "being" unitary structure and dynamism, building - while maintaining individuality - his unit is weaker by the dependence of the parties with respect to all Aggregation of building elements, styles, and links. From ontology "is" in a weak sense.
The building presents itself as a system, a set marked by contingency and chance for all participants that are grouped into what we call exemplary cause as "the way devised by the intelligence of the efficient cause. It differs from the cause formal by nature subjective and rational. " Well, this "intelligence" is actually a sum of interest and requests: the user, institutions, media, financiers, in working tools, ideas, the architect, builder ...
This complex system (from the Greek syn, together ae histemi: place) of the building as something to build and the building as an entity is a process, ie establishing a staggered series of operations to achieve a particular goal. Emilio Harth Terré sums up the final goal is a social element of man and society (...) its principles are to provide comfort, freedom and security " (Terre Harth, 1976: 33).
As material and social fact, the action of buildings is a process:
-Holistic, in that the building relates to its environment
-Functional: With regard to the activities of the parties in terms of all-Morphogenetic
: in that the whole party and vice versa adjust
-Loop: as establishing regular temporal sequences
Similarly, Vitruvius, separates the building complex process into three main groups:
-construction, characterized by the utility, beauty and firmness of the parties with the whole and vice versa
-The gnomonic, characterized by the relationship of the building with the environment and the cosmos
"The machines, which - like the materials - will be used to erect the building
was thus confirmed that the constructive development, since its genesis to the bill, not only be a sequence of processes but also characterized by:
-The emergence of new, considered the development of something that is potentially present and
-The self-organization, considered the subsequent integration of guidelines into a single entity
Building and Architecture
This process, taken as a whole, it is not possible to explain if it is assumed as a single process: a program to guide the development process and also save some instructions stored in the materiality of whose deployment guidelines dynamics are coordinated.
The building itself to understand that there was a preexisting plan. At the same time, unfolds various developments by the confluence of many factors (human, environmental, materials, earthquakes, etc.). Over time, beyond the conclusion of the work. The complex includes a set of relationships that give rise to new forms.
Strictly speaking, the nature - understood as a principle of operation - the building is inseparable with the essence of it (the things what they are). And the activity of this process and will identify the composition of matter and form (See: WONG, Nicanor. 2009. Theory of Architecture. Fundamentals from Philosophy. Retrieved November 2, 2009 in http://arkhe-noticias.blogspot . com /).
shown that the system is unitary, there are no grounds to substantiate a difference between architecture, construction and building, as there is no cause and effect. I have seen so far helps us to clear the misunderstandings that may arise that true things are said as they relate to intelligence or as they are conceptualized in a definition (lingualism). As we have seen, this statement refers only to the formal reason for the truth.
In the eighteenth century could place the architecture as a concept separate from their work: the construction and its end: the building. This puts serious ontological error follows Velarde "Architecture is the art of building. Who says art and architecture, says construction. Are two key factors with which the man of science and can taste the truth and beauty (...) The beauty is the splendor of truth. In architecture, what is not true, sincere, honest, can not be beautiful. Architecture is an art theater. It is the art of reality itself. "(Velarde, 1933: 5). Worse still are the positions that bind only the architecture as a branch of aesthetics.
The architecture is included within the process, there is still no word as such. It would be another mistake to argue that architecture had not even speculation about it, before the invention of the term. Would fall into a kind of nominalism, where there is no distinction in essence but only names.
Since early man is given the nickname sapiens, we could argue that it raises questions of a philosophical, as its condition, origin, purpose. That is, their cognitive ability is ready for abstract thinking. As a philosophy, just get letters of classical Greece however, there are references to mythical, religious, and magical techniques from earlier civilizations. Apart from the mythic-religious in relation to this dissertation is that these skills are developed with a view to a question, in fact, the myth is a mode of practical knowledge, a way of explaining the past, which presupposes an earlier question Where do we proceed? And with magic, such as figurines of the female character that also implies a practical need to find solutions to the primitive human needs. Is demonstrated that the distinctive character of philosophy with regard to the various systems developed in the Hellenistic period lies that this is a mode of theoretical knowledge, ie, exercised and valued as an end in itself. It is also clear that, before the invention of writing as a transmission system of thought, speech was what we call oral tradition from one generation to another.
is why it is also wrong to argue that early civilizations were unable to talk about architecture, let alone theorize about it. He has no anthropological or archaeological support.
The old buildings found on the planet whether in Africa or the Middle East Europe, including rock art found inside caves in Spain (Altamira) or as menhirs of Stonehenge in England account for a building complex that assumes order - within the unitary system of architecture as such - the previous concept of "architecture", whatever that this has been called by our ancestors.
The confusion of linking architecture (including dissertations on it) to a specific period, as the seventeenth century and early eighteenth century is the product of philosophical speculation rationalists (Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz and others) that will end up sublimating into idealism (Hegel). Idealist rationalism seeks to capture the existence of man through the ideas (Descartes famous phrase: "Cogito ergo sum" I think therefore I am). As Aristotle argued, "nihil est in intellectu quod non prius fuerit in sensu," nothing is in the intellectual knowledge unless he first has been in the senses. So, since being precedes the know, the treatise De Architectura of Vitruvius, or any other manuscript before revealing the beginnings of a systematic theoretical conception of it are based on a "theoretical" knowledge in advance. A chain of cause and effect, by contradiction, can not be infinite but has a beginning: the building.
Then the cognitive process of the architecture (as a whole) is the intelligence and ends in the soul, and that we need to know what is in the knower according to the mode of being of the knower. That is why Aristotle establishes a circle in the acts of the soul, moves to the external reality appetite (desire), which leads in turn to the reality that circular movement began. The transition from the known to the appetitive movement is because nothing is desired if not previously known: no final cause - building - architecture is not.
Sources:
ELMORE, Theodore. 1876. Lessons Architecture. Lima, Government Printer.
DEUSTUA, Alejandro. 1932. The Beautiful in Art. Architecture. Lima. Printing & Advertising.
Miró Quesada Luis. 1945. Space in Time. Lima, Printing & Advertising Company. Harth
Terra, Emilio. 1976. Aesthetic form. Lima, Mejia Baca.
MALDONADO, Carlos. 1969. Footage of Aesthetics and Function of Architecture. Arequipa, spi
Ludeman, Wiley. 1997. Ideas and Architecture in the Twentieth Century Peru. Lima, SEMSA.
VELARDE, Hector. 1933. Concepts and Elements of Architecture. Lima, Imprenta Officers School - Military School of Chorrillos.
Somocurcio RUIZ, Jorge. 1979. Architectural Education. Lima, Centre for Research and Urban Projects. VARIOUS
. 1974. Restructuring Basic Documents of Architecture Academic Program University of San Agustin. Arequipa, Revolutionary Student Front.
QUINONES, Raúl. 1979. Architecture and Historical Analysis. Lima, Offprint, Journal of Architecture.
Ludeman, Wiley. 1986. Reality Architecture as vague. Approaches to a new General Theory, Volume I. Lima, Universidad Ricardo Palma. Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism.
PERRAULT, Claude. 1674. Compendium of Ten Books on Architecture Vitruvius. Madrid, Real Academia de San Fernando.
Alvira, Thomas et al. 1990. Metaphysics. Pamplona, \u200b\u200bEUNSA.
Llano, Alejandro. 1998. Metaphysics. Pamplona, \u200b\u200bEUNSA.
Sanguineti, Joseph. 1982. Logic. Pamplona, \u200b\u200bEUNSA.
STAMPS, Juan. 2006. Unhappy anthropology. Madrid. RIALP.
0 comments:
Post a Comment