Construing architecture - constructing philosophy. Meaning and symbolization of architecture and Nelson Goodman's aesthetics
- Autores: Remei Capdevila Werning
- Directores de la Tesis: Anna Estany Profitós (dir. tes.), Víctor Gómez Pin (codir. tes.)
- Lectura: En la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona ( España ) en 2009
- Idioma: español
- Tribunal Calificador de la Tesis: Catherine Z. Elgin (presid.), Gerard Vilar (secret.), Alexander García Düttmann (voc.)
- Materias:
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
- Resumen
This thesis explores architecture and architectural works under the light of Nelson Goodman's aesthetic philosophy with the aim to show that his thought is a useful and fruitful way to analyze the meaning and symbolic functioning of architecture. At the same time, the contrasting of Goodman's thought with actual works of architecture challenges the theory and leads to specifications and revisions in the theory itself. The title of this thesis reflects this double purpose: on the one hand, this work is an interpretation of architecture ("Construing Architecture") and, on the other, a construction or reconception of Goodman's philosophy ("Constructing Philosophy").
Following Goodman, I consider aesthetics as a branch of epistemology and that the main role of works of art and architecture is cognitive. Architectural works are examined from Goodman's theory of symbols and, hence, they are taken as complex symbols with multiple meanings. As symbols, they function within symbol systems and require interpretation. Architecture is here considered as an artistic discipline. When buildings function as aesthetic symbols, they are called works of architecture; otherwise, they are called buildings. Nevertheless, Goodman's philosophy accounts not only for aesthetic, but for any kind of symbolizing.
This thesis is divided in three parts. The first provides a conceptual framework for Goodman's thought and a brief introduction to his philosophy. The second and main part of this thesis discusses Goodman's theory of symbols as applied to architecture. It consists of four chapters, each of them structured in a parallel way and devoted to a mode of symbolization: denotation, exemplification, expression, and multiple and complex modes of reference such as allusion, variation, and style. The third part focuses on the question of identity in architecture and is divided in two chapters. The first deals with the symbolic functioning of plans and their role as architecture's notation, i.e., as one way of establishing the identity of architectural works. The second focuses specifically on Goodman's criteria of identity and contrasts them with several architectural examples. Throughout the dissertation, examples play a crucial role in both proving and contrasting the theory and, thus, reflect Goodman's theoretical conception of examples.
