| Show " the first clue that architecture is a phoney discipline it has no language that describes what it is supposed to be doing. Would a chemist say that his discipline is really aerodynamics and vise versa. In the body of knowledge architecture as a distinct discipline has no epistemology or theory of knowledge. To continue: Do animals think of their kingdom as a collection of cities. The natural landscape is one uninterrupted continuum of infinite variety and their is no particular place more or less habitable than another. The word HOUSE: What is a house? A boat houses an airplane houses a train houses. Is an airplane a house is a house an airplane. We don't know - the architect doesn't know. This word is meaningless. The word BUILDING: Anything that is built could be a building. A garbage can is a building. An automobile is a building. If you parked a thousand cars in the middle of the sahara dessert would such a collection of things qualify as a city a collection of buildings? Are airplanes and battleships buildings? The word ENVIRONMENT: If architecture creates environment how should we describe it? Is it a collection of buildings? You see the circular semantics we have here. There is no definition to architecture. The word ENVIRONMENT is simply any place anything. There are no dimensions to some environment somewhere. Machinery reflects mythical geometry which is a different matter entirely. The word SPACE: j ¦ u;:: -40- |
