Week Review "Architecture, Ethics and Technology"
In the first chapter of this book, "Architecture and the question of Technology", we are introduced with an observation of the nature of art and technology in time which in the end are synthesized in relation to architecture. Throughout the first chapter of the book, there is expressed a sense of the philosophical movement of Phenomenology (which focus on the physical individual experience). Alberto Perez-Gomez, one of the authors of this book, is himself an architectural theorist who supports the above mentioned philosophy and manages to convey it in his writing on art and technology.
At the beginning of his argument, the author aims to clarify the main knowledge misgivings, which he shall later explain in detail, regarding the nature of technology as well as the universality of instrumental thinking. It is exactly this mode of thinking which tends to generally oversimplify terms during discussions, thus reducing a complex matter of issues regarding cultural meaning, social and political relevance, to the merit of technical efficiency vs. aesthetics.
Following in the footsteps of instrumental thinking, there is always a need for control which eventually translates into power. So, achieving a means of developmental thinking it arrives at a solution of "creating" such a world that it can fully control. This process referred to as the "will to power" is consequently transformed into the "will to will", the essence of modern science. The author is in a way hinting at a vicious circle effect in which todays science seems to have been stuck in. As he also mentions in his own words "the mission of technology", where what ought to have been a means to a goal has become the goal in itself.
Consequently, the author moves on to explain the evolution of technology, starting from its shared common ground with art, to the separation of the two finalizing in the status they hold today. In his statement "Because the essence of technology is nothing technological, essential reflection upon technology and decisive coming to terms with it must happen in a realm that is, on the one hand, akin to the essence of technology, and on the other, fundamentally different from it. Such a realm is Art", the author suggests a different medium which holds close relations in its origin to technology but is however entirely different from it, in order to better understand and utilize the potential of this technology especially in relation to Architecture so to make one step further form the previously mentioned vicious circle. An analogy could be made between this theory with that of the Schema generating from the French philosopher Gilles Delleuze. In his theory, the Schema (differently referred to as the Imagination) is the third unattached medium standing in homogeneity between the 'Intuition' and the 'Understanding' which makes it possible to conceptualize Architecture.
Furthermore, when explaining the development of technology, the author explains how the term Techne used to explain both art and technology as a nonuniform one. However there are two main events which concluded the final division between the two in history; The Objective division, and The Abstract division.
The first one refers to the founding of universal mathematics (through trials of metaphysics and mechanics on the study of movement) which substituted "logic" and transformed Techne into modern technology.
The second one refers to Descartes philosophy on the Experimental Dialogue (as well as his controversial saying "I think; Therefore I am;) which opened up a ton of possibilities of invention and was thus the origin of modern technology.
Lastly, after having described the phases art and technology went through in history, the author tries to bring it all together in terms of architectural thought, where he mentioned the use of technology in calculating structures as well as the development of systems. He does however mention and analyze how because of the modern European culture, the public sector became quite anonymous and unattached to the private sector. It is thus easier to implement certain technological ideas in the public sector rather than the private one. Because of such a gap between the systems produced and the real world there rises the question of how to bridge the gap and what should adapt to what?
We should therefore try to understand the very nature of our current civilization with its ambiguity and tension resting between technology and the being of the world. The author nonetheless adds that we ought to also understand the tension and ambiguity which are in fact essential characteristics in the world we live in.
As a conclusion, I believe the book was very well paced and managed to convey the main ideas throughout, without losing its focus even when diving into detail. The information found in this chapter, or more like the hints of well found information, were quite a treat for a curious mind. It is however true, that the author even though stating a clear and logical observation of the impacts of technology on architecture did not manage to bring up a solution as to what should be the ideal role of technology regarding architecture. He states that in the world we live in, tension and ambiguity are essential, where I would suggest that it is the balanced existence of such tensions which rests in harmony that provides for the living world. And as such it ought to be a balanced existence of both aesthetics and technology for a harmonious architectural creation. Without its "self exceeding" need, technology might not have achieved the state it holds today, but at the same time that only would not have made possible the architectural wonders throughout history.
As Nietzsche says, everyone holds his/her own place in the society, and so different approaches to architecture are important in order for it to evolve multidimensionally.
At the beginning of his argument, the author aims to clarify the main knowledge misgivings, which he shall later explain in detail, regarding the nature of technology as well as the universality of instrumental thinking. It is exactly this mode of thinking which tends to generally oversimplify terms during discussions, thus reducing a complex matter of issues regarding cultural meaning, social and political relevance, to the merit of technical efficiency vs. aesthetics.
Following in the footsteps of instrumental thinking, there is always a need for control which eventually translates into power. So, achieving a means of developmental thinking it arrives at a solution of "creating" such a world that it can fully control. This process referred to as the "will to power" is consequently transformed into the "will to will", the essence of modern science. The author is in a way hinting at a vicious circle effect in which todays science seems to have been stuck in. As he also mentions in his own words "the mission of technology", where what ought to have been a means to a goal has become the goal in itself.
Consequently, the author moves on to explain the evolution of technology, starting from its shared common ground with art, to the separation of the two finalizing in the status they hold today. In his statement "Because the essence of technology is nothing technological, essential reflection upon technology and decisive coming to terms with it must happen in a realm that is, on the one hand, akin to the essence of technology, and on the other, fundamentally different from it. Such a realm is Art", the author suggests a different medium which holds close relations in its origin to technology but is however entirely different from it, in order to better understand and utilize the potential of this technology especially in relation to Architecture so to make one step further form the previously mentioned vicious circle. An analogy could be made between this theory with that of the Schema generating from the French philosopher Gilles Delleuze. In his theory, the Schema (differently referred to as the Imagination) is the third unattached medium standing in homogeneity between the 'Intuition' and the 'Understanding' which makes it possible to conceptualize Architecture.
Furthermore, when explaining the development of technology, the author explains how the term Techne used to explain both art and technology as a nonuniform one. However there are two main events which concluded the final division between the two in history; The Objective division, and The Abstract division.
The first one refers to the founding of universal mathematics (through trials of metaphysics and mechanics on the study of movement) which substituted "logic" and transformed Techne into modern technology.
The second one refers to Descartes philosophy on the Experimental Dialogue (as well as his controversial saying "I think; Therefore I am;) which opened up a ton of possibilities of invention and was thus the origin of modern technology.
Lastly, after having described the phases art and technology went through in history, the author tries to bring it all together in terms of architectural thought, where he mentioned the use of technology in calculating structures as well as the development of systems. He does however mention and analyze how because of the modern European culture, the public sector became quite anonymous and unattached to the private sector. It is thus easier to implement certain technological ideas in the public sector rather than the private one. Because of such a gap between the systems produced and the real world there rises the question of how to bridge the gap and what should adapt to what?
We should therefore try to understand the very nature of our current civilization with its ambiguity and tension resting between technology and the being of the world. The author nonetheless adds that we ought to also understand the tension and ambiguity which are in fact essential characteristics in the world we live in.
As a conclusion, I believe the book was very well paced and managed to convey the main ideas throughout, without losing its focus even when diving into detail. The information found in this chapter, or more like the hints of well found information, were quite a treat for a curious mind. It is however true, that the author even though stating a clear and logical observation of the impacts of technology on architecture did not manage to bring up a solution as to what should be the ideal role of technology regarding architecture. He states that in the world we live in, tension and ambiguity are essential, where I would suggest that it is the balanced existence of such tensions which rests in harmony that provides for the living world. And as such it ought to be a balanced existence of both aesthetics and technology for a harmonious architectural creation. Without its "self exceeding" need, technology might not have achieved the state it holds today, but at the same time that only would not have made possible the architectural wonders throughout history.
As Nietzsche says, everyone holds his/her own place in the society, and so different approaches to architecture are important in order for it to evolve multidimensionally.
Comments
Post a Comment