This paper provides answers to one of the most commonly asked questions in architectural education, which is about the lack of coherence resulting in the separation of theory and practice in architecture, by exploring philosophical concepts and assumptions. A look into Aristotle’s views about practice and theory reveals a new meaning of “practice," dimensions of which have been beautifully demonstrated in the concept of “phronesis” or practical wisdom. Gadamer’s analysis of phronesis shows the importance of his view in understanding the relation of the universal and the particular, ergo the relation of theory and practice. Understanding practice as a concept that relies on deliberation and decision corrects our assumption of practice as the mere application of theoretical knowledge, and makes the particular situations in which we, architects, need to make deliberation and decision, a critical point to seek “the relation of theory and practice.” A deep understanding of dynamic situations in the architectural profession suggests that we need an alternate definition for theory, practice, and their relation. If we insist on the familiar meanings of practice and theory and on the application of theoretical knowledge, we can never bridge theory and practice. However, if we deeply understand the dialectics between theory and practice and between the universal and the particular that exists in moments of deliberation and decision, we can finally say that we have filled the fracture between theory and practice.
جستجوی کلمه کلیدیNone