How does architecture relate to science

These levels include understanding the surrounding context from environmental, historic, stylistic and infrastructure perspectives; and determining program areas required by users such as interior products, structure, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection, technological and security systems.

If both Art and Science are utilized in creating architecture, how do you find a balance between creative inspiration and structured thought processes?

The orchestration between art and science involves discipline in both the lateral and linear thought processes. Lateral thinking utilizes analogies and links ideas across a spectrum to create something imaginative.

Linear thought is a step by step ideation that keeps us grounded and leads to a specific result. Our firm used this analogy to explore a deeper and more exciting level of design. The brick walls of the exterior of the building are represented inside, as are the exterior light fixtures. A two-story atrium space, bathed in natural daylight through skylights, runs the entire length of the corridor.

At the same time, the linear thinking process was utilized. Through a deductive process of interviewing the owner and other stakeholders, it was determined that a major circulation hall was needed at the entrance of the school that would service the public spaces the gym, the cafeteria, the media center, the computer center, the art room, the music room and the parent room.

This hall also needed to be separated from the main classrooms for security reasons during the day and during after-school hours so that the community could use the public spaces without having access to the classrooms. It is above all, a source of help — artistic help — to pull us out of the mud pit we have fallen into during the last eighty years, by making, following, and copying over simplified forms, only because commercial instincts have robbed the field entirely of the kind of awareness which was needed, for millennia, by the people who made the great buildings of the past, in many cultures, and in many conditions.

This awareness hinges above all, on the processes that are used to make these buildings. To do better, to make places people genuinely like, to make places where people feel at home, it is necessary to have new tools of practice — new ways of creating buildings, new ways of conceiving buildings.

The science I speak of is the bearer of new, more sophisticated techniques of making, shaping and designing. It is something that opens our eyes, as artists, and permits us to do thing we have not dreamed of for decades or generations. This Katarxis 3 issue describes, very simply, a potential for a new beginning in architecture.

I'm extremely pleased that it includes a presentation and discussion of my work over the last three decades. I have spent most of my life trying to make scientific statements about the character of the world which lay a foundation of a new architecture. This case is made comprehensively in The Nature of Order. Because these statements do indeed represent "a new paradigm," it is not going to be easy for them to be absorbed by the scientific community, though I think there is a reasonable chance that it may succeed.

For this reason, I have contributed extensive discussions to this issue, and allowed many pictures of my work to be presented, after what has been a long silence. In the public world of architecture, after the overwhelming reception to A Pattern Language , there has been an almost year long silence from me, with only small snippets of information -- buildings, theory, etc.

With the appearance of The Nature of Order this silence has been broken. I agreed to give Katarxis 3 the opportunity to be one place where the new statement about me and my work was to be seen, unveiled if you like.

That is of course, a very considerable moment for me, and for the more scientific and more human direction in architecture I believe I represent. Throughout my career I have pushed very hard -- virtually alone, it has often seemed -- to put architecture onto a track which is deeply involved with science, new or otherwise, and is also concerned with a way of understanding value as something real, not merely a matter of opinion.

Perhaps better put, though it is more or less the same thing, I have pushed to put architecture onto a track which is rooted in empirical reality — with attention to what is real, and factual, about human beings, buildings, and the way we feel, deeply or not, in the buildings that are made, and the way that buildings serve us. This has inevitably put me at odds with a crippled architectural world-view that is unable to conceive of common human value outside of "personal preference. I began in , with Notes on the Synthesis of Form , the first work that truly looked at architecture from a scientist's point of view, yet moving towards the core and meaning of architecture, not merely technics.

Of course there had been many decades of technical science in architecture, addressing problems of heat, materials, lighting, etc. I am not talking about that, but rather about a vision which allows us to see architecture itself — the deepest problems of architecture — in a scientific way.

In the seventies, I published a series of books, including A Pattern Language , which I believe represented the first really solid achievement linking the core of architecture to the scientific way of thinking. Website by Graphene Themes Solutions. Toggle navigation. Is Architecture Art Or Science?

What do you think? Search keyword. Recent Comments. Categories Articles Uncategorized. Monetti Custom Homes is a member of the following esteemed organizations.