Ability of Architects to See Autopoietic Environmental Features

Vytautas Petrušonis

doi:10.2478/aup-2021-0005

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Ability of Architects to See Autopoietic Environmental Features

Architecture and Urban Planning

Volume 17 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)

By: Vytautas Petrušonis

Open Access

|Aug 2021

Abstract

This article discusses the way of rating the competency of architects through their ability to recognize the autopoietic properties of architecture in developed urban projects. The following theoretical methods were used: abstraction, analogy, generalization and reasoning. Metalanguage of consideration (opposite to directive metalanguage) embedded in projects displays the fact, that a person is able to recognize such autopoietic features as connotations, memory traces, that are important for continuity of locus cultural identity.

References

1. Varela, F., Thompson, E., Rosch, E. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993. 328 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Ward, D. Silverman, D. Villalobos, M. Introduction: The Varieties of Enactivism. Topoi, Vol. 36, 2017, pp. 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-017-9484-610.1007/s11245-017-9484-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Varela, F. Whence perceptual meaning? A cartography of current ideas. In F. Varela & J. P. Dupuy (Eds.) Understanding origins: Contemporary views on the origins of life, mind and society. Springer, Dordrecht, 1992, pp. 235–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8054-0_1310.1007/978-94-015-8054-0_13
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Maturana, H., Varela, F. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Co, 1980. 146 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8947-410.1007/978-94-009-8947-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Maturana, H., Varela, F. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston: Shambhala, 1992. 269p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Hallowell, R. Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela’s Contribution to Media Ecology: Autopoiesis, The Santiago School of Cognition, and Enactive Cognitive Science. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Assocation, Vol. 10, 2009, pp. 143–158.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Hayles, N. K. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1999. 364 p. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226321394.001.000110.7208/chicago/9780226321394.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Arshinov, V. I., Lepskij, V. E. (Eds). Problemy subjektov v postneklassicheskoj nauke. Moskva: Kogito-Centr, 2007. 272p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Stepin, V. S. Teoreticheskoe znanie. Moskva: Progress Tradicija, 2003. 393 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Mamardashvili, M. Klassicheskij i neklassicheskij idealy racionalnosti. Moskva: Logos, 2004. 288 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Vladiv-Glover, S. What is classical and non-classical knowledge? Studies in East European Thought, Vol. 58, 2006, pp. 205–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-006-9004-510.1007/s11212-006-9004-5
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Schumacher P. The Autopoiesis of Architecture, Volume I: A New Framework for Architecture. New York: Wiley, 2011. 478 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Schumacher P. The Autopoiesis of Architecture, Volume II: A New Agenda for Architecture. New York: Wiley, 2012. 784 p.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Samalavičius, A. Ideology as Geometry: A note on Parametricism and its theoretical foundations. Symmetry: Culture and Science, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2020, pp. 353–364. https://doi.org/10.26830/symmetry_2020_3_35310.26830/symmetry_2020_3_353
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. McKay, G. The Autopoiesis of Architecure Vol. I (review) [online]. misfits’ architecture [cited 5.08.2020]. https://misfitsarchitecture.com/2018/07/29/the-autopoiesis-of-architecure-vol-1/.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Petrušonis, V. Methodological Perspectives of Evaluation of Cultural Heritage in The Context of Changing Scientific Paradigms. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3846/20297955.2012.67977210.3846/20297955.2012.679772
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Petrušonis, V. Conditions for a dialogue of local community and genius loci. Architecture and Urban Planning, Vol. 14, Issue 1, 2018, pp. 70–74. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2018-000910.2478/aup-2018-0009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Petrušonis, V. Urbanistinė renovacija ir kultūriniai archetipai [online]. Spec.lt [cited 05/10/2018]. https://www.spec.lt/straipsniai/urbanistine-renovacija-ir-kulturiniai-archetipai.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania. Description of filling in the form of the act of the immovable cultural heritage assessment council (approved by the Director of the Department of Cultural Heritage under the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania in 12/10/2020, order No. Į-272), = Nekilnojamojo kultūros paveldo vertinimo tarybos akto formos pildymo aprašas, in Lithuanian, [interactive], accessed 02/12/2020. https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.404018/asr
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Minister of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania. Description of the criteria for the assessment, selection and determination of the level of significance of immovable cultural property (approved by the Minister of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania in 4/10/2016, order NoĮV-150), = Nekilnojamųjų kultūros vertybių vertinimo, atrankos ir reikšmingumo lygmens nustatymo kriterijų aprašas, in Lithuanian, [interactive], accessed 02/12/2020. https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.254663/asr
Search in Google Scholar Back to article