My point was that architects should not be intimidated by a supposed philosophical master-discourse but must remain the arbiters of architectural value, while looking outward for inspiration and intellectual resources as well as new technological resources that could assist innovation in the context of the societal demands they are confronted by and called upon to address.
The reference to discipline-specific societal demands is crucial.
This is the main task of this essay. While I had not found the time and occasion to respond earlier, I very much welcome the dialogue and want to welcome Graham into our discipline, a discipline that could certainly benefit from more high level theoretical engagement.
Let me posit my preliminary conclusion on both object-oriented ontology and object-oriented architecture right from the start: While I have plenty to criticize, I certainly consider both to deliver a net benefit to architecture and further I consider both to be allies rather than enemies in my increasingly impatient quest for a strategic transformation of the built environment, in line with the specific transformational demands and opportunities of our contemporary post-fordist network society.
Before articulating what I consider to be a constructive utilisation of philosophy within architecture, I want to bluntly state what must be rejected, namely the idea that an architectural approach and its results can somehow be justified, acquire meaning, earn recognition or attain a heightened cultural value by its alignment with a great philosophy.
So the question is: How can philosophy contribute to these results? To productively reflect on the relation between architecture and philosophy requires a mature understanding of its two terms: philosophy and architecture. Philosophy is certainly the more difficult and controversial term and thus in more need for clarification. The best way to start is by identifying a paradigmatic exemplar. This example and my characterisation of philosophy from five years ago emphasizes the gap that separates a loose, open-ended, multi-functional if not anti-functional philosophy from a strict, goal-oriented and straightforwardly instrumental science.
Philosophy in this key does not deliver applicable theories or truths but at most a promise of truths in the form of open-ended thinking tools that can become useful in other disciplines that might adopt and adapt them. The relation of mathematics with science or engineering could serve as a helpful analogy here.
There is no space here to rehearse my arguments put forward in my article from five years ago 8 available on my website. My attitude of patient pragmatism imbued with plenty of methodological tolerance towards abstract experimental philosophical concept-crafting akin to pure mathematical calculi treats contemporary philosophy not only in parallel with pure mathematics, but also, perhaps even more pertinently, in parallel to contemporary art and theorizes their societal function in parallel toowith equal emphasis on their inherent need for degrees of freedom and irresponsibility that would seem reckless in any other arena of intellectual or societal life.
However, the lack of determinate instrumentality in both art and philosophy of the Deleuzian and Harmanian type is in my view an aspect of its latent function: to serve as general mutation chamber and brain storming arena for all societal function systems with manifest functions including architecture.
The open-endedness of these practices comes in degrees, and so does their degree of intentionality and self-awareness. The tolerance society accords to these unavoidably wasteful and thus risky if not paradoxical practices is largely due to a protective mystification. One would hope that philosophy can serve its thus characterized function without self-mystification and without the sense of self-degradation indicated by the use of the handmaiden analogy.
Again, when truth becomes a reservoir for virtual not yet actual means towards practical success, then the strong contrast between our positions dissolves. This seems to echo the point in my earlier article published in tarp in that there can be no question of philosophy somehow exercising mastery over architecture. Architectural design remains a creative act that might be inspired by philosophy but should not be thought of as being legislated by philosophical concepts.
Object-Oriented Cult: A Slightly Skeptical View on the Object-Oriented Programming
The relation to science is different: Relevant scientific knowledge should be taken as a legislating, compelling constraint. Not all references and utilizations should flatter a philosopher.
However, as will become clear in what follows below, this pessimism is not warranted. Despite its very high level of abstraction OOO has indeed re-injected a fundamental and valuable concept into contemporary architectural discourse, namely the Deleuzian concept of the virtual. However, OOO re-injects this concept by another name: the concept of the withdrawn, opaque, deep, strange object.
I want to suggest instead, that we must avoid being drawn into full philosophical generality. The spirit and thrust of the OOO concept of the object, in my view, resides in the concept of the virtual: the versatility and fecundity of an object with respect to engaging in multiple new and unexpected assemblages that reveal unexpected capacities.
This virtuality comes in degrees and the general statement that all objects have some of it distracts from the crucial fact that they do not possess it to the same extent. Minimalism is alien to the spirit and thrust of OOO because it is delivering poorly in terms of the production of virtuality.
And to be sure: Virtuality has pragmatic value within 21st century post-fordist network society. As should have become clear by now: pragmatism is compatible with a conception of philosophy that assimilates it to the open-endedness of art, in sharp demarcation against science. Richard Rorty is perhaps the philosopher who has made this option most explicit.
However, this time around I want to argue that we might be more demanding of philosophy and will offer a different paradigm. I am looking for a philosophy that has been elaborated into a theory of society and societal self-transformation that can instruct as much as it can inspire.
This exploration too has to be left for another occasion. In my account philosophy is indeed the meeting ground of professional philosophers like Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze and Harman and those radical innovators like Marx, Mach, Guattari, Maturana, Luhmann and Latour who probe the first principles of all human reasoning and action from within their various specialist domains.
Here is not the occasion to elaborate this any further.Do we critique those women who would modify themselves just to reach those standards? This photograph is a critique of how draconian the rules of society can be. The critique extends into nearly every little crevice and lacuna of our civic life.
Of course, the critique could be made in the other direction. Any critique may be treated as a security issue or an offense against the faith. The reader is recommended to mark off the passages in a copy of the Critique.
Here, however, a new sort of critique was applied to a problem which had but just now been revealed in all its length and breadth. To harmonise B 17 with the real teaching of the Critiqueit must be entirely recast.
Critique of all knowledge, whether a priori or empirical, determination, etc. Now with what divisions of the Critique are the two last questions connected? Advertisement top definitions quizzes related content examples explore dictionary british critique. Take this quiz on the Words of the Day from April 6—12 to find out! Words nearby critique critical volumecriticalitycriticastercriticismcriticizecritiquecritique of pure reasoncrittenden compromisecrittercriuscrm.
Words related to critique criticismcommentjudgmentappraisalexaminationeditorialcommentaryassessmentnoticestudyslapslamexpositionpanrapravereviewflakzappertakedown. Example sentences from the Web for critique Do we critique those women who would modify themselves just to reach those standards?
Who Are the Judicial Activists Now? Edward Caldwell Moore Edward Moore. Try Our Food Word Quiz! Play Now.A style of incompetent programming dominated by ritual inclusion of code or program structures that serve no real purpose.
A cargo cult programmer will usually explain the extra code as a way of working around some bug encountered in the past, but usually neither the bug nor the reason the code apparently avoided the bug was ever fully understood compare shotgun debuggingvoodoo programming.
The practices of these cults center on building elaborate mockups of airplanes and military style landing strips in the hope of bringing the return of the god-like airplanes that brought such marvelous cargo during the war. Hackish usage probably derives from Richard Feynman's characterization of certain practices as "cargo cult science" in his book "Surely You're Joking, Mr.
Jargon 4. Both communism and OOP rely on the concept of classes. Both generate a lot of fanaticism and overuse this notion. That might be not an accident A data structure is a structure, not an object. Only if you exclusively use the methods to manipulate the structure via function pointers if you're using C and each method is implemented as co-routine, then you have an object. Such an approach is typically an overkill.
OO zealots make mistake typical for other zealots by insisting that it must be used for everywhere and reject other useful approaches. This is religious zealotry. And please remember that Dark Ages lasted several hundred years. I often wonder why object oriented programming OO is so popular, despite being a failure as a programming paradigm. It is still advertised as the best thing since sliced bread, despite the fact that is rarely used in Web programming, which is the most dynamically developing application area and many of those programs are based on LAMP stack with PHP as "P" in it and that means no OO at all.
Is it becoming something that is talked about a lot, but rarely practiced? Or is it a "for profit" cult? If you read books considered to be "OO classic" the distinct impression that one gets is that "king is naked".
And the authors are weak and semi-illiterate in computer science demagogs promoting particular dogma for material gains conferences, books, position within computer science departments, etc. BTW the level of corruption of academic researchers in XX and XXI centuries is unprecedented and there are a lot of example when academic departments in major universities promote junk science. Just look at economics department and neo-classical economics. As universities are captured it has huge staying power despite of this.The Leibniz-Clarke correspondence is cited by referring to author-letter-section e.
All translations are by the author of this entry, unless otherwise noted. He writes:. In this one pithy sentence, we find a list of many important early modern questions concerning space.
Is it a substance in its own right, a property of some substance, or perhaps neither? Is it somehow dependent on the relations among objects, or independent of those relations? What is the relationship between space and the mind?
And finally, how do these various issues intersect with one another? The passage from the Inaugural Dissertation hints at five distinct questions or issues concerning space and time. First, there is the question of the ontology of space and time considered within the framework of what Kant would regard as the dogmatic metaphysics of the seventeenth century. This framework might suggest that if space and time are to exist, or to characterize the physical world, they must be considered either substances in their own right, or else properties of some substance.
Neither option seems particularly attractive. Space and time seem distinct from substances because they are causally inert, causally inaccessible—their aspects or properties cannot be altered by interacting with any other substance—and imperceptible. However, it is also difficult to think of space and time as properties of any substance, for then they would presumably be dependent on that substance for their existence.
If we regard them as dependent on any contingent substance, it seems that we would be committed to the idea that space and time could fail to exist, or could disappear, depending on the happenings of that contingent substance. One might think instead that space and time depend on the one necessary substance, but this obviously raises a host of other issues. To think of space and time as properties of God is potentially to regard God as spatiotemporal, which is verboten from the point of view of many seventeenth-century thinkers Janiakchapter five.
A second topic arises if we consider the ontology of space and time independently from the substance-property metaphysical framework, viz. Leaving aside questions about ontology, there is a distinct—or at least potentially distinct—issue regarding space and time: what is the origin of our representation of space and of time? This third issue arises from the sense in the early modern period that our idea or representation of space and time must somehow be importantly distinct from our idea or representation of ordinary physical objects.
Many believed that space and time are causally inert and therefore imperceptible—how then are we are able to represent space and time at all? Few are willing to deny that we have a representation, not merely of spatial and of temporal objects, but also of space and time themselves, so there is a genuine puzzle lurking here.
The fourth topic follows on the heels of the third: what is the content of our idea or representation of space and time? Alternatively, we might be able to consider the origin of a representation as providing us with a clue as to what its content might be. In the case of space, there may be reason to think that the content of our representation must somehow reflect what we know about space from Euclidean geometry.
The fifth and final topic is closely connected with the third and fourth, and indeed, connects all four previous topics with one another: what is the relationship between space and time, on the one hand, and the human mind, on the other? This question obviously cries out for clarification.
It may be that some kind of dependence is suggested by the origin—or by the content—of our representation of space and time or perhaps by these two jointly.
But Kant also seems to think that a view recognizing the dependence of space and time on the mind might offer advantages in addressing the ontological problems mentioned above.The role of criticism is not to split, but rather to bring matters together in an assembly. I propose that the critical call of architecture is often hidden in plain sight in works that camouflage themselves under seemingly disengaged positions, and which, upon closer inspection, act as resources of architectural imagination.
I propose that the critical call of architecture is often hidden in plain sight in works that camouflage themselves under seemingly disengaged positions, and which, upon closer inspection, act as resources for architectural imagination. To cut through a body — architectural or otherwise — is to dissect and unfold the intricate layers of fabric that make that body. Moreover, it is the very act of critiquing that becomes fertile ground for the imagination.
Saul Steinberg spent the first nineteen years of his life in Bucharest, the capital of his native Romania, where he entered the university studying philosophy and letters. In he left for Milan to study architecture at the Regio Politecnico. In Italy, Steinberg built a reputation as a cartoonist for Bertoldoa humor newspaper that welcomed young artists and writers.
Byhe was sought by the police as a stateless foreign Jew with no rights to remain in Italy. On April 27, he turned himself in and was taken to the Italian internment camp of Tortoreto in the province of Teramo. After six weeks of internment, he managed to obtain the necessary visas to fly to Lisbon and board a ship to New York in transit to the Dominican Republic, for which he had a residency visa. He stayed for a year in Ciudad Trujillo before getting a US visa.
A particular feature of his art is its structure, which constructs a narrative specific to architectural works. Similar techniques of representation have been used in the past as a way to display ruins or demonstrate the multiple layers of a building. We see the steps leading to the entrance, the main door, ornate windows each framing one or more residents watching over the street. There is, however, little or no interaction between them; even when more than one person inhabits the room, people are hardly looking at each other, seemingly avoiding eye contact or communication.
The cracks in the floor slabs allow mice and insects to colonize the unseen parts of the building. The tension between the cat in the basement and the hidden mouse about to emerge from a hole in the floor constructs a more vivid, if amusing, interaction than among humans.
The anonymity of these distant objects hovering above the private rooms heightens the sense of alienation already present in the interior scenes, where people appear to be lonely even when sitting together at the table.
He writes down a word and then cancels it. Then he puts down a second word and cancels that one too. He goes on and on cancelling. The real pleasure is the invention. The cracks and the mice are cracks and mice. However, the latter do not simply populate, but also gradually erode the flesh of the building. People crammed in tiny spaces have their own stories to tell, but far from exhausting them, the drawing invites the viewer to construct and complete them.
Kant’s Views on Space and Time
The spectrum of the big city penciled on the rooftop of the building haunts the lives inside the building, rendering them insignificant. Though different, people look alike. However, despite its fullness, it remains empty because there is no real life inside. Almost literally cutting open the building, the drawing evokes the Late Renaissance tradition of Andreas Vesalius, who in the sixteenth century published an anatomical treatise The Edifice of the Human Body roughly at the same time as Sebastiano Serlio published an architectural one The Seven Books of Architecture.
Both treatises were showing the making of a body — human or architectural — and the architectural section became an anatomical dissection that revealed what was hidden behind the surface, the unseen strata of our bodies.Critique is a method of disciplined, systematic study of a written or oral discourse.
Although critique is commonly understood as fault finding and negative judgment,  it can also involve merit recognition, and in the philosophical tradition it also means a methodical practice of doubt.
In philosophical contexts, such as law or academics, critique is most influenced by Kant 's use of the term to mean a reflective examination of the validity and limits of a human capacity or of a set of philosophical claims. A critical perspectivein this sense, is the opposite of a dogmatic one. Kant wrote:.
We deal with a concept dogmatically But we deal with it merely critically if we consider it only in reference to our cognitive faculties and consequently to the subjective conditions of thinking it, without undertaking to decide anything about its object.
Later thinkers such as Hegel used the word 'critique' in a broader way than Kant's sense of the word, to mean the systematic inquiry into the limits of a doctrine or set of concepts.
This referential expansion led, for instance, to the formulation of the idea of social critique, such as arose after Karl Marx 's theoretical work delineated in his Contribution to the Critique of Political Economywhich was a critique of the then-current models of economic theory and thought of that time.
Further critique can then be applied after the fact, by using thorough critique as a basis for new argument. The idea of critique is elemental to legal, aesthetic, and literary theory and such practices, such as in the analysis and evaluation of writings such as pictorial, musical, or expanded textual works.
In French, German, or Italian, no distinction is drawn between 'critique' and ' criticism ': the two words both translate as critiqueKritikand criticarespectively. Even authors that believe there might be a distinction suggest that there is some ambiguity that is still unresolved. Social critique has been further extended in the work of Michel Foucault  and of Alasdair MacIntyre. Critique as critical theory has also led to the emergence of critical pedagogyexemplified by Paulo Freirebell hooksand others.
Let us also remind ourselves of the fact that throughout the eighteenth century, which Kant, in Critique of Pure Reasonlabeled "in especial degree, the age of criticism" and to which our use of "critique", today remains largely indebted, critique was above all critique of prejudice and established authority, and hence was intimately tied to a conception of the human being as capable of self-thinking, hence authonomous, and free from religious and political authorities.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. For other uses, see Critique disambiguation. Not to be confused with Critic. Main article: Critical theory.
Oxford English Dictionary 3rd ed. Oxford University Press. September Subscription or UK public library membership required. Sonderegger eds. Authority control GND : Categories : Aesthetics Criticism. Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history. In other projects Wikiquote.
Look up critique in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. Library resources about Critique. Resources in your library. Wikiquote has quotations related to: Critique. GND : Craft specific questions that reflect the learning outcomes and key concepts you have identified for your critique. Consider the following types of questions. Named for Socrates ca. Socratic Questions can be used to address unproductive responses during critiques.
Instead of rushing to provide your knowledge or opinions, prompt students to elaborate on their responses. Ask Socratic Questions to direct energy away from the teacher and back to the students themselves.Locke, Berkeley, & Empiricism: Crash Course Philosophy #6
Below are examples of generic questions in five of the Socratic Questioning categories. Closed-ended questions Does it work? Do you like it? These questions do not rely on key concepts. These questions provide no support for students who need to hear instructors model the correct use of new vocabulary and key concepts.
Open-ended, broadly-worded questions What do you think? What about the color? What can you say about the object? Any comments? What works? These may be useful for inviting students into a discussion about art, but as critique questions they are broad, and will likely only elicit useful comments from students who have already mastered the material. Focused questions about key concepts Which areas use saturated colors?
What types of lines are used? Can you describe the creases? What words describe the gesture? These questions direct students to look for key concepts within the work. These questions are especially helpful for ESL students because they model the correct use of key concepts. These questions also prompt students to use key concepts in their answers.
Questions that probe the relationship among concepts How does the color reinforce the intended narrative? These questions will encourage the most complex responses. These questions model the correct use of key concepts and require that student articulate the relationship among those concepts.
Socratic Questioning Named for Socrates ca. Could you put that another way? What is your main point? What do you think is the main issue here?