Designing the City of Reason

Foundations and Frameworks

Ali Madanipour

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781134103980
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: Urban Planning & Landscaping

With a practical approach to theory, Designing the City of Reason offers new perspectives on how differing belief systems and philosophical approaches impact on city design and development, exploring how this has changed before, during and after the impact of modernism in all its rationalism.

Looking at the connections between abstract ideas and material realities, this book provides a social and historical account of ideas which have emerged out of the particular concerns and cultural contexts and which inform the ways we live. By considering the changing foundations for belief and action, and their impact on urban form, it follows the history and development of city design in close conjunction with the growth of rationalist philosophy. Building on these foundations, it goes on to focus on the implications of this for urban development, exploring how public infrastructures of meaning are constructed and articulated through the dimensions of time, space, meaning, value and action.

With its wide-ranging subject matter and distinctive blend of theory and practice, this book furthers the scope and range of urban design by asking new questions about the cities we live in and the values and symbols which we assign to them.

Chapter 1
Introduction

Many have criticized modernist urban design for its rationalism. Does this mean that cities before and after modernism are cities of unreason? Many have associated reason closely with modern science and technology. Does this mean that the cities that were built before modern scientific and technological advances were irrational? Many have contrasted reason with faith, emotion and experience. Does this mean that no trace of these notions can be found in a city of reason? What is reason after all, and what is a city of reason like? To find answers to these questions, the book searches for a meaning of reason and how it has been applied in city design and development.

Following the failure of the twentieth century to prevent the horrors of world wars and environmental degradation, some sceptics, who had lost all hope in human ability to deliver a better future, have used the word reason as a pejorative term. For them, it symbolized a new dogmatism, characterized by cold and calculating relations, male domination, colonial supremacy, genocide, abuse of natural resources, etc. Does this mean that reason is no longer held as a valuable human capacity? Does it mean that we should abandon it and replace it with something else? Or does it mean that we should redefine it and be aware of its limitations?

The roots of modern urbanism go back for thousands of years. Learning to live in large groups, to think in abstraction, to evaluate instrumentally, to provide accounts, to link up actions, to imagine and implement new orders and hierarchies, to practise geometry and employ it for design and communication, and to develop new technologies have always been present in urban living. Similarly, challenges to these systems of abstraction and order have always existed: by refusing to acknowledge orders and hierarchies, by imagining alternative ways of living, by drawing on the multiple realities of everyday life, by providing alternative accounts and meanings, and by celebrating raw energies rather than calculated representations. It is the combination of these diverse trends that has created cities.

In this study, I have searched for possible connections between reason and the city. There are many references to reason and rationality in a variety of disciplines. In search of clarity, I have tried to find out how the experts in the study of reason, i.e. philosophers, formulate it. As Michel Foucault explains, ‘the central issue of philosophy and critical thought since the eighteenth century has always been, still is, and will, I hope, remain the question: What is this Reason that we use? What are its historical effects? What are its limits, and what are its dangers?’¹ At the same time, I have been interested in the way reason is manifested in the social world of the city, particularly in urban space. The connection between abstract ideas and material reality, however, could only be made through social and historical investigation. Through social and historical accounts of how abstract ideas emerged out of particular concerns and cultural contexts, how they were applied in practice, and how they were interpreted, we can see the relationship between reason and city building. Two main sources of information and analysis, therefore, will help this search: the history of city design and development, where different approaches and forms can be found and compared, and the history of philosophy, where reason has been a key concept. The book, however, will not be a work of history, nor will it provide practical advice for specific design problems; it addresses the contemporary urban society and space.

This work draws on a number of key concepts: accounts and connections, dynamic multiplicity, scales of abstraction, and public infrastructures. Reason is reflected in connected thought and connected action, and in providing and accepting accounts that attempt to justify these connections. Dynamic multiplicity refers to the notion that the best way to study a phenomenon is through its process of growth and transformation,² from a variety of perspectives,³ within a particular context.⁴ It also means that action should draw on multiple values and forms of reasoning (theoretical, practical and productive), rather than solely resorting to a single basis. Furthermore, for a better understanding of urbanism, it is important to approach the city at the intersection of its physical and social dimensions. Abstraction, which is manifest in the way words, images and other symbols are created and used, lies at the heart of knowledge and communication. ⁵ It takes place through scales, and moving up and down this scale (towards more abstract or towards more concrete) is only possible through interpretation. Such interpretation, which is and always should be open to questioning,⁶ not only by alternative interpretations but also by sense and experience,⁷ is based on analysis and synthesis,⁸ developed and expressed through collective symbolization,⁹ which relies on public infrastructures of meaning. These public infrastructures are collections of common symbols, formed of deeply rooted implicit conventions, explicit formal agreements, and the physical objects that embody and reproduce them. Scales of abstraction and public infrastructures of meaning, therefore, are mutually interdependent.

Reason is the capacity to deal with complexity, so as to break it down to manageable pieces, then reconstruct it in an intelligible way, hence controlling its complexity to a level deemed graspable by the human mind, so that it can be expressed in words. Reason is the human faculty that, through intuition and calculation, makes judgements about, and provides accounts for, what to believe and how to act. In doing so, it engages in connected thought, in a process of analysis and synthesis, drawing on intellectual foundations that are made of systems of common symbols. The main pitfall has often been the temptation to close this process to outside influences, turning it into a purely intellectual exercise, developing syntheses without taking notice of the diversity of life experiences and the need of this diversity to be expressed, rather than be limited within a rigid and predetermined straitjacket.

The use of reason is an interpretive process that, as Descartes reminds us, is formed of analytical and synthetic stages.¹⁰ To understand the world, we subdivide it into small pieces and assign them with symbolic value. These pieces have social and psychological meanings, from splitting sounds into syllables through to segmenting time, space, meaning and value to measurable units. The next phase is synthetic, in which we reassemble these pieces to constitute new things, in a new cycle of interpretation, in ways that our minds can understand. The synthetic process is often what builds our material world, using as its building blocks the measurable units that our interpretive endeavours had produced. These interpretive and constitutive processes reflect, and shape, part of our biological make-up, social conventions and power relations. Through this process of segmentation and reconstitution, we construct concepts, which form our knowledge, and objects, which form our material world.

A set of problems emerge when the analytic and synthetic processes are confused and overlapped. The logic of analysis is fragmentary; we subdivide phenomena into smaller pieces to understand them. However, if we apply this analytic logic to the process of design and development, which is a synthetic process, we only create fragmented processes and fragmented environments. The logic of synthesis, on the other hand, is constitutive, bringing different pieces together to produce complex concepts, objects and environments. If we apply synthetic logic to the process of analysis, however, we will mystify phenomena rather than clarify them. Another set of problems emerges when we treat these cycles of analysis and synthesis as closed and exclusive, only open to experts or elites. This generates power imbalances, as some have the power of stamping their interpretation, imposing their will on others, who are alienated from this process. Those who are excluded find the resulting concepts, objects and environments as alien and abstract, far from their own experiences and concerns.

Yet another, but related, set of problems is linked to the normative nature of rationality. We call something rational to approve of it, but we are not entirely clear on what basis we have arrived at such a normative notion. How do we judge that conclusions follow premises through connected thought? Is it merely compliance with our social conventions or personal preferences that would give us the main criteria? These problems indicate shortcomings that should be questioned and potentially be corrected. Rather than rejecting reason altogether, i.e. denying the human ability to analyse and synthesize or the necessity of connected thought and action, we need to be critical of where these abilities are not used appropriately.

This work is part of a continuous process of research into urbanism.¹¹ It has investigated the social significance of urban space, the nature of urban design process and some of its key themes such as neighbourhoods and public spaces, the dynamics of the agencies involved in urban transformation and its impact on disadvantaged social groups.¹² A key thread running through this work is a critique of the processes that carve up the urban space into polarized fragments, and an argument for mending the socio-spatial fabric along the fractures. This book will now explore the theoretical bases of these fragmentary processes, investigating whether reason tends only to fragment and analyse, or also to regroup and synthesize, and whether it favours any particular source of authority in this process.

The book is organized in two parts: foundations for belief and action, and frameworks that make city design and development possible. Part I investigates our changing foundations for belief and action, and their impact on urban form. Trust in science and technology has taken over from supernatural beliefs, but it is confronted by challenges that nature and society pose. For most of history and in most cultures, supernatural foundations have shaped social organization and urban form. Believing in numerous embodied gods or in a single disembodied God has had direct implications for the way cities have been structured and shaped (Chapter 2). The Renaissance shifted the centre of gravity to humans and their intuitive reason, envisaging the universe as a mechanical clock and the humans at the centre of the world. This changed the urban form into a humancentred geometry designed by a single designer (Chapter 3). The Industrial Revolution expanded the productive capacities of the scientific age, to the extent that productive reason took centre stage, at the expense of other forms of reasoning. Since then, new technologies have generated multiple and disengaged geometries (Chapter 4).

These attempts to master society and nature, however, created consequences and critical reactions, showing that narrow functionalism could not be sufficient for complex societies. Sense and experience challenged the supremacy of reductive science, in search of expressive freedom. Humans were part of nature, not outside it. From biological impulses to global environmental changes, natural forces could not be ignored; so the city was either abandoned, or made more colourful (Chapter 5). Humans were also part of society, not outside it, showing the limits on the autonomy of embodied and embedded humans. So the challenge was how to design and manage democratic cities that address stratification, diversity and the social consequences of globalization (Chapter 6).

Based on these foundations, public infrastructures of meaning are constructed, which include social conventions as well as physical environments. Part II deals with these public infrastructures, and their construction through analytic and synthetic stages of reasoning, and their implications for urban design and development, focusing on the problems of time, space, meaning, value and action.

Time has been segmented into units and recomposed in a temporal order, with abstract notions and social routines to shape our urban landscape and daily lives. The age of speed intensifies this process, but the lived time of individuals has its own dynamism (Chapter 7). Space has also been segmented and measured, according to public standards, and assigned monetary and functional value. Thinking about space generates abstract methods of thought. But segmentation creates fragmentation and alienation, which are at odds with the experience of lived space (Chapter 8).

While some deny the presence of value in scientific knowledge and rational conduct, it is inherent in all thoughts and practices. City building may be dominated by consideration for exchange value, creating abstract landscapes, but use value is another side of the coin that is, and needs to be, taken into account. Symbolic value of places gives them meaning and significance beyond use and exchange (Chapter 9). A sign of reason is the need to give and receive convincing accounts of our beliefs and actions, which is a process of communication: using words, gestures, images and objects as symbols of communication. Despite its normative nature and its shortcomings, communication is the key to building public infrastructures of meaning (Chapter 10). Action was segmented through the division of labour, and reconstructed in the form of hierarchical social orders. Practical reason deliberates for the best course of action, and so employs both competition and collaboration in making these decisions. However, calculative, instrumental reason is not enough (Chapter 11).

Some of the key themes of the investigation are then brought together (Chapter 12), to offer an overall account of how cities have been designed and developed on the basis of certain foundations for belief and action; how these foundations have been intertwined with the development of public infrastructures that shape urban society and space, through segmentation and reconstruction of time and space, meaning, value and action; and how changing circumstances and individual experiences challenge and change these foundations and frameworks. It argues that different forms of reason, theoretical, practical and productive, are needed in design and development of the city, employing the dynamic multiplicity of perspectives and processes, rather than relying on a static, narrow definition of reason from only one perspective and only one form of reasoning; that regard for society and nature should be integrated in any such reasoning; and that the shape of a city of reason can never be finalized, as a living city constantly changes and evolves in new directions. Connected thought and connected action are often the main reflections of rationality, but these connections are, and should be, complex and multi-layered, rather than simplistic and rigid.

Part I
Foundations

Chapter 2
City of temples

Supernatural foundations

All cities are, in a sense, cities of reason: creations of intelligent human beings engaged in purposeful action. Since the dawn of urban living, the use of human intelligence is evident in building magnificent palaces and temples, as well as humble houses, irrigation systems, defensive walls, etc. They exemplify continuous attempts to employ the best available technology and the most innovative ideas to provide spaces best fit for their intended purpose.

The bases on which humans have relied to justify their work, however, have changed through the ages. The process of justification has involved giving an account for the beliefs that people have embraced and actions that they have performed. It has always been important for humans to be able to construct a narrative, to provide an account for what they believe in and what they do, mainly due to the social and linguistic nature of human societies. They have often constructed these accounts on some foundation, in search of a solid basis to provide, and accept, an account. Part I investigates the changing nature of these bases, from supernatural to scientific and technologic, the challenges posed by the material and social worlds, and their implications for urban form.

For most of the history of cities, the main ground for belief and action has been a metaphysical one. In this chapter, we see how looking for a higher order of things has created close linkages between spiritual and temporal, which was echoed in the shape of cities. While many have contrasted reason with faith, we see how the two were intertwined in city building from early on. The source of a supreme order may have changed through millennia, but searching for the certainty of a higher order has not.

While a distinction may be held in general between reason and faith, there are some areas in which they overlap and are intertwined. By looking at some historical patterns of city building, this chapter will show how supernatural foundations have been a part of a continuous pursuit of certainty and knowledge. This search has taken different forms, including believing in numerous embodied gods, in a single disembodied God, or in a confident interpretation of human reason. Whatever its form, it has indicated a search for a reliable source of authority, which could provide the necessary but elusive certainty and security that people have always sought. This certainty has provided a public infrastructure for communication and a basis for the development of many subsidiary beliefs and actions.

Gods in the city: connecting the natural and the supernatural

The western civilization is commonly identified to be drawing on two sources of influence: biblical and Hellenic. The biblical world with its religiosity, absolute monotheism and moralism; and the ancient Greek world with its enlightenment, promotion of human beings, and discipline of mind and intelligence, were two strands that were combined and reflected in Christianity.¹ These two strands also influenced the Islamic civilization, which used both these ingredients, although in different proportions.² In turn, these two sources of influence, biblical and Hellenic, owe their development to the ancient Mesopotamian civilization.³ From its rise around 5000BC, the sparsely populated region of small agricultural villages grew within three millennia to a population of hundreds of thousands, many with specialized occupations, living in large cities with rich economies and magnificent architecture.⁴ As Bottéro puts it, ‘It is a wellspring to which, directly or indirectly, the Greeks and the authors of the Bible all went to find the source of their own civilizations, before giving birth, through them, to our own.’⁵ It is in ancient Mesopotamia that cities were born, that writing, reasoning and religion originated, where history as a whole, and the civilization of the land in particular, started. This civilization evolved out of the encounter between the Sumerians, who came from the southeast and were the leaders of the nascent civilization, and the Akkadians, who came from the northwest and later engulfed the Sumeri...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Designing the City of Reason
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Acknowledgements
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Part I: Foundations
• Part II: Frameworks
• Notes
• Bibliography