Passive Architect

By the end of the second class I realized I needed to buff up on my architectural academic knowledge. Books by Vitruvius, Corbusier, and Louis Kahn are going to be my starting blocks.

~

 ~

We discussed Jeremy Rifkin’s Architects of the Mechanical World View in his book Entropy.

Jeremy Rifkin talks about Entropy, the gradual decline into disorder. There are two ways, historically, in which people make decisions he states. Before the ‘mechanical world view’ Rifkin argues that decisions were made based on the afterlife. Societies’ thoughts were altered when they began to be influenced by Bacon’s Novum Organum, Decartes mathematics, and Newton’s ‘tools of how to unravel nature.’ People began to think that gaining an understanding of nature to provide food, shelter and a more consistent living standard allowed them to make more selfish decisions. Humanity launched into a prosperous life that involved ‘controlling nature.’ These thoughts progressed to become more materialistic with Locke and Smith’s beliefs. The idea that man should acquire unlimited resources is deeply rooted in what society believes today -300 years of trying to make our natural resources profitable for personal gain.

Society now knows more about the earth’s limit of materials and what effect the extraction and refinement of these resources have on the health of our world. Did we humans understand nature’s natural order, and try to grow with that? On a global scale, I don’t think so. We grew with a  limited view and based our decisions on economic benefit.

Let’s examine how prosperous our world is and what technology we use to supplement expiring practices with energy and material use. Humans understand how to use wind and the sun for electricity.  We practice permaculture; that variety of food and a balance of flora and fauna is better than monocrops and overgrazing. According to the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI – June 2014) about 80% of the world has access to food, sanitary shelter, education, and other quantifiers of a plentiful life. Aristotle argued ‘prosperity becomes a barrier to happiness.’ Bill McKibben writes in Deep Economy that people don’t need to make more than 30K a year -that this income provides sufficiently all that is necessary. (Published 2007, comparing U.S. salaries tbc) The question of how to help the 20% of underprivileged people and how much is enough for wealthy individuals remain. How do the wealthy continue growth and should we provide for the 20%? Who’s role is it to look globally to evaluate when enough is enough for some when others still do not have a good quality of life.

The discussion was engaging, and lasted over an hour and  a half. We debated why we (humans) believe what we believe. What governs us? What do we know now that needs to change in order to survive? What is personally important, versus what is important for our world? It was interesting to hear from the generation ten years younger than me.

The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future by Bill McKibben

The second class became more familiar to me. I was asked to sit in front of the class to lead the discussion on Philosophy for Laymen, a piece by Bertrand Russell, with the other graduate student in the class. What I wrote:

Russell defends the merit of philosophy. He says we must find out ‘how to best utilize our own command over the forces of nature.’ As an architect I read this to suggest I should think from many perspectives to find a solution to my work. This can be applied directly to design questions within projects, questions about how to practice and even in the way a project may be created.

Before I discover where philosophy leads an architect I must ask what are architects questioning? –Sheltering the world, organizing shelter, the materials we use? Each architect must understand that his or her own upbringing is not exclusive. ‘The knowledge that gives most help in solving such problems is a wide variety of human life’, and we are building for more than the common good of ourselves. We are seeking solutions for the good of the world. Russell speaks of dogmatism, or close-mindedness that is against growth. Philosophy becomes an ethical solution to problem solving. When I start to debate or defend an idea, or bring in another person’s opinion, the exercise often leads me to a new place. There are many instances in practice that I should encourage myself to ask more questions. Do I ask myself to question what a client really wants, or do I question the affects of introducing certain solutions thoroughly? Can I take the time to consider what I think cities (places) need? What’s the benefit? This is what Russell suggests with his solution, ‘the love of wisdom’ –we have to believe answers are out there that are better because we’ve considered the alternative. From those alternatives perhaps something has come out of it that was more encompassing, something that works on many levels as a balanced solution.

‘Philosophy has a theoretical and a practical aim.’ he states. At what point do we find that these solutions must be applied and evaluate the move from the theoretical to the practical? Theory can be a tool during the entire process of work. At some point architects must trust that our critical thinking has pushed solutions to be intuitive. We must flexibly produce the work from which we began to question it and be open to where it goes. Why else would Russell say ‘for the learning of suspended judgment the best discipline is philosophy’?

Reflecting on the topics the vocal class offered later that night lead me into deeper thoughts. I observed the professor and the role he played with the students. We began to debate the truth of details. Is it better to provide shutters on a home that will never be used to protect the windows as simple screw-down models, or use the type with hinges that have the ability to be used? This is called Truth in architecture. The idea has been with me ever since and has made me wonder if I could develop a list of common things that Architects theorize. I went to the Wiki source with this question in mind and found these voices: Derrida, Vidler, Rowe, and Frampton.

When architects want to discuss Pattern who do we look to? Plato and Pythagoras. German biologist and artist Ernst Haeckel painted hundreds of marine organisms to emphasize their symmetry. Scottish biologist D’Arcy Thompson pioneered the study of growth patterns in both plants and animals, showing that simple equations could explain spiral growth.   –Wiki

 Photo above from The Savoia