EXP3--mashup

Something as important as architecture cannot be founded upon arbitrary bases. We would prefer an architecture that is consistent with human feeling, and in which design decisions are based on observation and empirical verification. Ornament and function go together. There is no structure in nature that can be classified as pure ornament without function. In traditional architecture, which was more tied to nature, such a separation never existed. The bottom line is that buildings have to provide good, healthy environments for human beings, and to inflict the least possible damage to the Earth’s ecology. Note that it is only after separating what has qualities of “life” from what does not that we have a body of examples from which to extract the sought-for geometric rules.The breakdown of the human adaptation of architecture can be traced to the forced conceptual separation of ornament from function, a relatively recent occurrence in human history. It is only in 20th-century architectural discourse that people began to think of ornament as separate from function.

Levels of scale

Strong centers

Thick boundaries

Alternating repetition

Positive space

Good shape

Local symmetries

Deep interlock and ambiguity

Contrast

Gradients

Roughness

Echoes

The void

Simplicity and inner calm

Not-separateness

a set of 15 properties that all structures that we perceive to have “life” possess.

Nikos Salingaros. "Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 13" 30 May 2015. ArchDaily. Accesed 24 Jun 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/636876/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-13/>

Nikos Salingaros. "Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 14" 13 Jun 2015. ArchDaily. Accesed 24 Jun 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/642086/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-14/>

Nikos Salingaros. "Unified Architectural Theory: Chapter 11" 02 May 2015. ArchDaily. Accesed 24 Jun 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/626429/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-11/>.