Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- J. C. Berendzen (2008). Institutional Design and Public Space: Hegel, Architecture, and Democracy. Journal of Social Philosophy 39 (2):291–307.Habermas's conception of deliberative democracy could be fruitfully supplemented with a discussion of the "institutional design" of civil society; for example the architecture of public spaces should be considered. This paper argues that Hegel's discussion of architecture in his 'Aesthetics' can speak to this issue. For Hegel, architecture culminates in the gothic cathedral, because of how it fosters reflection on the part of the worshiper. This discussion suggests the possibility that architecture could foster a similar kind of intersubjective reflection. To make his thoughts more pertinent for current debates, Hegel's views are adapted to fit three contemporary secular institutions.
Similar books and articles
This paper is about how to give human-like powers to complete agents. For this the most important design choice concerns the overall architecture. Questions regarding detailed mechanisms, forms of representations, inference capabilities, knowledge etc. are best addressed in the context of a global architecture in which different design decisions need to be linked. Such a design would assemble various kinds of functionality into a complete coherent working system, in which there are many concurrent, partly independent, partly mutually supportive, partly potentially incompatible processes, addressing a multitude of issues on different time scales, including asynchronous, concurrent, motive generators. Designing human like agents is part of the more general problem of understanding design space, niche space and their interrelations, for, in the abstract, there is no one optimal design, as biological diversity on earth shows.
This paper is about how to give human-like powers to complete agents. For this the most important design choice concerns the overall architecture. Questions regarding detailed mechanisms, forms of representations, inference capabilities, knowledge etc. are best addressed in the context of a global architecture in which different design decisions need to be linked. Such a design would assemble various kinds of functionality into a complete coherent working system, in which there are many concurrent, partly independent, partly mutually supportive, partly potentially incompatible processes, addressing a multitude of issues on different time scales, including asynchronous, concurrent, motive generators. Designing human like agents is part of the more general problem of understanding design space, niche space and their interrelations, for, in the abstract, there is no one optimal design, as biological diversity on earth shows.
No categories
different spaces and places, therefore construct the way in which architecture
operates in Western society. The use and occupation of architecture also ...
Prologue -- Thinking about architecture -- Language and architecture -- Intertextuality and metaphor -- Derrida on architecture -- Other spaces -- Derrida and radical practice.
Nearly every major philosophy, from Plato to Hegel and beyond, has argued that democracy is an inferior form of government, at best. Yet, virtually every contemporary political philosophy working today - whether in an analytic or postmodern tradition - endorses democracy in one variety or another. Should we conclude then that the traditional canon is meaningless for helping us theorize about a just state? In this paper, I will take up the criticisms and positive proposals of two such canonical figures in political philosophy: Plato and Hegel. At first glance, each is rather disdainful, if not outright hostile, to democracy. This is also how both have been represented traditionally. However, if we look behind the reasons for their rejection of (Athenian) democracy and the reasons behind their alternatives to democracy, I believe we can uncover a new theory of government that does two things. First, it maps onto the so-called Schumpeterian tradition of elite theories of democracy quite well. Second, perhaps surprisingly, it actually provides an improved justification for democratic government as we practice it today than rival theories of democracy. Thus, not only are Plato and Hegel not enemies of modern democratic thought after all, but each is actually quite useful for helping us develop democratic theory in a positive, not negative, manner.
Given the contemporary complexity of cities, landscape and society, urgent social tasks call for an integral, multidisciplinary approach. Rietveld Landscape’s strategic interventions focus and use the forces of existing developments and processes. This design method creates new opportunities for landscape, architecture, the public domain, ecology, recreation and economic activity.
The discussion about relations between research and design has a number of
strands, and presumably motivations. Putting aside the question whether or not
design or “creative endeavour” should be counted as research, for reasons to do
with institutional recognition or reward, the question remains how, if at all, is design
research? This question is unlikely to have attracted much interest but for matters
external to Architecture within the modern university. But Architecture as a
discipline now needs to understand research much better than in the past when
‘research’ was whatever went on in building science, history or people/environment
studies. In this paper, I begin with some common assumptions about design,
considered in relation to research, and suggest how the former can constitute or be
a mode of the latter. Central to this consideration is an understanding of research
as the production of publicly available knowledge.
Ethics, architecture and philosophy -- Architecture, ethics and aesthetics -- Architecture and culture -- Experiencing architetcure -- Writing on 'the Wall': memory, monuments and memorials -- Building community: new urbanism, planning and democracy.
This paper explores the complex relation between Hegel and Habermas. Centring the discussion around the key themes of philosophy, modernity and political philosophy, it argues for a gradual re-approachment of Habermas towards Hegel. In the final section on critical theory, it takes up the question of the spirit of this theory to offer a more trenchant critique of Habermas' theoretical short-coming from this perspective.
Discussion of J. C. Berendzen, Institutional design and public space: Hegel, architecture, and democracy
|
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.

