TWO WAYS TO STUDY CULTURE
The following plates show a comparison of two ways to study culture.
Evidently these aspects are still closely combined in the early states of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Architecture and Art, ontology (worldview, philosophy, religion) and constitution form a unity.
- The conventional structure of the humanities. Any outlook on cultural conditions is apriori fragmented into disciplines. Fairly arbitrarily accumulated dated sources produce heterogeneous and culturally differentiated images
- The method of the 'Anthropology of Habitat and Architecture' (or Evolution-Theory of Settlement). It works with the evolution of human constructive capacities and its impacts on architectural forms. Most important is the concept of 'semantic architecture'.
- Its primary toposemantic conditions allow increasingly extensive territorial control and spatial orientation and
- its structuro-symbolic potentials provide a model
- for the perception of natural form (analogy of categorical polarity)
- for aesthetic perception (pro-portion)
- for environmental articulation (up and below, heaven and earth)
THE CONVENTIONAL DISCIPLINARY STRUCTURE OF THE HUMANITIES
ARCHITECTURE AND HABITAT CONCEPT OF CULTURE
(Evolution of Settlement)
Please note: the following scheme is purely structural. Temporal conditions are neglected. Contrasting with the disciplinary concept of culture based on narrow historical methods (above), it shows the new methodological procedure. Constructive behaviour and its technical, formal, structural, territorial, semantic, social and cognitive characteristics leads to what the Eurocentric disciplinary apparatus distinguishes as disciplines and corresponding considerations (yellow points).
For a more accurate scheme which reflects time conditions see:
Back to homepage