Volume 12, Issue 4 (12-2024)
JRIA 2024, 12(4): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Feyzollahzadeh K, Mozaffar F, Kianersi M. The quest to the spirituality and meaning in the architectural design process. JRIA 2024; 12 (4)
URL: http://jria.iust.ac.ir/article-1-1768-en.html
URL: http://jria.iust.ac.ir/article-1-1768-en.html
Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Science and Technology
Abstract: (889 Views)
The phenomenal world and matter derive its validity and quality from the inner world and spirituality (and meaning). Many consider contemporary architecture is less successful in the emergence of spirituality and meanings compared to the architecture of the past. The question of what spirituality and meaning is and how to realize it in architectural spaces, and as a result, improve the quality of human living spaces, is one of the important concerns in the discussions of the architectural design process. In this paper, meaning and meaning-oriented with emphasis on the relationship between meaning and spirituality; And paying attention to the relationship between meaning and truth, beliefs and values governing human life (effective in architectural design) is desired; Therefore, the word (spirituality) is considered as a closer and more accurate equivalent for "meaning".
The main goal of this article is to understand how to discover and embodying spirituality and meanings in the design process; And as a result, the quality of architectural works is improved. For this purpose, this paper, after an examination of the concept of meaning, explores relevant theories of spirituality and meaning within the field of architectural design and has proposed a framework for understanding the issue of "spirituality and meanings” in architectural design. This framework is presented in the form of eight interrelated and continuous features: spirituality (and meaning) versus tangible and perceptible through the power of reason and thinking; implies a qualitative matter; Being rooted in values; "spirituality (and meaning) in architecture" related to "human meaning"; "spirituality (and meaning) in architecture" related to "context and background features"; spirituality (and meaning) have different levels and degrees; from being the same source of spirituality (and meaning) and form; "ideas" in architectural design originate from " spirituality (and meaning)".
In continuation and along the theories of spirituality and meaning, in order to find answers to three key questions, the research has moved in three layers. Firstly, the origins and foundations of spirituality and meaning in architectural design has been discussed; then, the ways of realizing spirituality (and meaning) and methodological approaches have been addressed, and after that the methods, techniques and tools have been expressed, both for the purpose of discovery and for paving the way for manifestation of spirituality and meaning.The findings of this paper indicate that, subsequent to the primary origin of meaning which is intrinsic to the Divine, secondary origins of meaning can be identified. The first category, comprising universal meanings independent of the design context, arises from the designer's knowledge and definitions in the realms of humanity, existence, and values; as well as the designer's mode of thinking as a system (the designer's intellectual system). The second category, encompassing specific and context-oriented meanings, stems from the characteristics of the problem and the design context. These specific meanings are also perceived under the umbrella of universal meanings, and it is the designer's thinking that plays the most significant role in the process of meaning-seeking in architectural design. Human (as a designer and as a user and audience of an architectural work) has the most important role in understanding, discovering, manifesting and reading spirituality (and meanings); and since human existence has different dimensions (physical to spiritual), different fixed and general aspects (common in humans, general characteristics) and relative and variable aspects (partial, locational, temporal characteristics); The meaning also has a fixed and general nature as well as a variable and relative nature.
Perception of spirituality and meanings is done through the power of thinking, therefore, the quest to the spirituality and meaning in the architectural design process is done through thinking and questioning in these three areas, which in this article is called “inquest of spirituality (and meaning)” has been proposed as a methodological approach. This inquest of spirituality and meaning through appropriate and relevant questions; inspection and redefining effective concepts, and finally formulating and re-framing the problem in the architectural design process, becomes possible. Therefore, "framing" is the second methodological approach and "manifestation", which makes the relationship between spirituality (and meaning) and form clear, is proposed as the third methodological approach. The manifestation of spirituality and meanings has degrees and is relative; And the important point regarding the use of methods, techniques and tools in the manifestation of meanings is that their use is in line with the spirituality and meanings in the situation and context of the design issue.
This research employs a qualitative approach and utilizes logical reasoning to understand the relationship between concepts and analyze data. Consequently, various levels of contemplation regarding the issue of meaning in architectural design have been revealed. This classification and attention to the distinction between these levels, by clarifying the intended meaning, its origins (theoretical foundations), methodological approaches, methods of manifestation, specific techniques and tools, and by explaining the relationships between these levels, provides a stronger basis for moving from the theoretical realm to practice (and avoiding the pitfalls of similar research that gets stuck in theoretical discussions about meaning). Subsequently, logical inferences have enabled the formation of a comprehensive conceptual model of meaning-seeking in the architectural design process, which is presented in the conclusion section.
The main goal of this article is to understand how to discover and embodying spirituality and meanings in the design process; And as a result, the quality of architectural works is improved. For this purpose, this paper, after an examination of the concept of meaning, explores relevant theories of spirituality and meaning within the field of architectural design and has proposed a framework for understanding the issue of "spirituality and meanings” in architectural design. This framework is presented in the form of eight interrelated and continuous features: spirituality (and meaning) versus tangible and perceptible through the power of reason and thinking; implies a qualitative matter; Being rooted in values; "spirituality (and meaning) in architecture" related to "human meaning"; "spirituality (and meaning) in architecture" related to "context and background features"; spirituality (and meaning) have different levels and degrees; from being the same source of spirituality (and meaning) and form; "ideas" in architectural design originate from " spirituality (and meaning)".
In continuation and along the theories of spirituality and meaning, in order to find answers to three key questions, the research has moved in three layers. Firstly, the origins and foundations of spirituality and meaning in architectural design has been discussed; then, the ways of realizing spirituality (and meaning) and methodological approaches have been addressed, and after that the methods, techniques and tools have been expressed, both for the purpose of discovery and for paving the way for manifestation of spirituality and meaning.The findings of this paper indicate that, subsequent to the primary origin of meaning which is intrinsic to the Divine, secondary origins of meaning can be identified. The first category, comprising universal meanings independent of the design context, arises from the designer's knowledge and definitions in the realms of humanity, existence, and values; as well as the designer's mode of thinking as a system (the designer's intellectual system). The second category, encompassing specific and context-oriented meanings, stems from the characteristics of the problem and the design context. These specific meanings are also perceived under the umbrella of universal meanings, and it is the designer's thinking that plays the most significant role in the process of meaning-seeking in architectural design. Human (as a designer and as a user and audience of an architectural work) has the most important role in understanding, discovering, manifesting and reading spirituality (and meanings); and since human existence has different dimensions (physical to spiritual), different fixed and general aspects (common in humans, general characteristics) and relative and variable aspects (partial, locational, temporal characteristics); The meaning also has a fixed and general nature as well as a variable and relative nature.
Perception of spirituality and meanings is done through the power of thinking, therefore, the quest to the spirituality and meaning in the architectural design process is done through thinking and questioning in these three areas, which in this article is called “inquest of spirituality (and meaning)” has been proposed as a methodological approach. This inquest of spirituality and meaning through appropriate and relevant questions; inspection and redefining effective concepts, and finally formulating and re-framing the problem in the architectural design process, becomes possible. Therefore, "framing" is the second methodological approach and "manifestation", which makes the relationship between spirituality (and meaning) and form clear, is proposed as the third methodological approach. The manifestation of spirituality and meanings has degrees and is relative; And the important point regarding the use of methods, techniques and tools in the manifestation of meanings is that their use is in line with the spirituality and meanings in the situation and context of the design issue.
This research employs a qualitative approach and utilizes logical reasoning to understand the relationship between concepts and analyze data. Consequently, various levels of contemplation regarding the issue of meaning in architectural design have been revealed. This classification and attention to the distinction between these levels, by clarifying the intended meaning, its origins (theoretical foundations), methodological approaches, methods of manifestation, specific techniques and tools, and by explaining the relationships between these levels, provides a stronger basis for moving from the theoretical realm to practice (and avoiding the pitfalls of similar research that gets stuck in theoretical discussions about meaning). Subsequently, logical inferences have enabled the formation of a comprehensive conceptual model of meaning-seeking in the architectural design process, which is presented in the conclusion section.
Keywords: Quest for spirituality, Meaning and Spirituality, Spirituality-oriented architecture, Manifestation of Spirituality, Ideation
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
General
Received: 2024/08/16 | Accepted: 2024/12/21 | Published: 2024/12/28
Received: 2024/08/16 | Accepted: 2024/12/21 | Published: 2024/12/28
References
1. ابراهیمی دینانی، غلامحسین. 1394. از محسوس تا معقول. تهران: موسسه پژوهشی حکمت و فلسفه ایران، چاپ اول.
2. ابراهیمی دینانی، غلامحسین. 1395. پرسش از هستی یا هستی پرسش. تهران: موسسه پژوهشی حکمت و فلسفه ایران، چاپ اول.
3. اهری، زهرا. 1383. معنا در معماری غرب- رویکردی پدیدارشناسانه در بررسی تاریخ معماری، فصلنامه فرهنگستان هنر، خیال 10، تابستان 1383
4. ایرجی، جواد؛ ویدا نوروز برازجانی. 1399. معنا در معماری معاصر ایران بعد از انقلاب اسلامی. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه پارس، چاپ اول.
5. بلخاری قهی، حسن. 1390. هویت معنایی و معنوی معماری. نشریه اطلاعات حکمت و معرفت، دی 1390 ، سال ششم، شماره 9، صص 13-20.
6. پاکتچی، احمد. 1387 . آشنایی با مکاتب معناشناسی معاصر. نامه پژوهش فرهنگی، سال نهم، شماره سوم.
7. پناهی سیامک، رحیم هاشم پور، غلامرضا اسلامی. 1393. معماری اندیشه از ایده تا کانسپت. هویت شهر، شماره هفدهم، سال هشتم، تابستان 1393، صص 25-34.
8. پورمند، حسن علی. 1388. معنا در معماری غرب: نگاهی به لایه های پنهان معماری. نشریه کتاب ماه هنر. شماره 127، فروردین 1388.
9. خوانساری، محمد. 1388. منطق صوری. تهران: انتشارات آگاه.
10. خسروپناه، عبدالحسین. 1394. سخنرانی در روز جهانی حکمت و فلسفه، موسسه پژهشی حکمت و فلسفه ایران.
11. سامه، رضا. 1396. راهنمای تدوین پایاننامه برای دانشجویان معماری. قزوین: جهاد دانشگاهی، چاپ اول.
12. رشاد، علی اکبر. 1388. معنا منهای معنا. تهران: سازمان انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشه اسلامی، چاپ اول.
13. رئیسی، محمد منان؛ عبدالحمید نقره کار. 1394. هستیشناسی معنا در آثار معماری. تهران: هویت شهر، شماره بیست و چهارم، سال نهم، صص 5-16.
14. رئیسی، محمد منّان. 1395. معناشناسی متن/ معماری با استناد به آموزههای اسلامی. فصلنامه الهیات هنر، شماره ششم، صص54- 86.
15. رئیسی، محمد منّان. 1392. معناشناسی در آثار معماری برای ارتقاء طراحی مساجد (پژوهش موردی: معناپردازی(از بُعد هندسی و فضایی) در مساجد معاصر تهران). رساله برای دریافت درجۀ دکتری معماری. اساتید راهنما: عبدالحمید نقره کار و کریم مردمی. استاد مشاور: نعمت ا... کرم اللهی، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه علم و صنعت.
16. رئیسی، محمد منّان. 1389. معماری به مثابه متن؛ واکاوی امکان قرائتهای مختلف از یک اثر معماری، هنر و معماری: منظر، شماره 7، خرداد 1389.
17. رئیسی، محمد منّان. 1391. تأمّلی بر بنیانهای معرفتشناختی معماری معاصر، معماری و شهرسازی: آرمانشهر، شماره 9، پاییز و زمستان 1391.
18. شریعتراد، فرهاد؛ حمید ندیمی. 1395. قاببندی مسئله؛ راه طراحانه رویارویی با مسئله طراحی. نشریه صفه، دوره بیست و ششم، شماره 3 (علمی- پژوهشی)، پاییز 1395، ص 5 تا 24.
19. صحاف، محمد خسرو. 1395. معنا در معماری ایرانی. هویت شهر، شماره بیستوپنجم، سال دهم، 1395
20. صدریکیا، سمیه؛ محمدرضا بمانیان؛ و حسنعلی پورمند. 1398. مطالعه تطبیقی کارکردهای تمثیل با رویکرد بیان معنا در معماری ایرانی. نشریه معماری و شهرسازی آرمانشهر، 12(29)، 98-81.
21. عادلی سمیرا و هادی ندیمی. ۱۴۰۱. فرم بهمثابۀ قابلیت؛ زیربنای نظری و چارچوب مفهومی معنای معماری. فصلنامۀ علمی معماری و شهرسازی صفه، سال سیودوم، شماره 96، بهارر 1401
22. عباسزادگان مصطفی، عباس ذکری. 1393. مفهوم معنی و فرایند فهم آن در معماری. هویت شهر، شماره 18، 1393
23. عظیمی، مریم. 1392. رسالۀ دکتری تحت عنوان: روش طراحی "معنا، خیال، معماری" با بهرهگیری از تفکر ناخودآگاه، دانشگاه علم و صنعت، استادان راهنما: دکتر فرهنگ مظفر، دکتر سید باقر حسینی.
24. عظیمی، مریم. 1398. تبیین جایگاه معنا و خیال در فرآیند طراحی معماری. فصلنامه پژوهشهای معماری اسلامی قطب علمی معماری اسلامی، شماره بیست و چهارم، پاییز 1398، سال هفتم.
25. لاوسون، برایان. ترجمۀ حمید ندیمی 1384. طراحان چگونه میاندیشند؟. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
26. کلالی، پریسا؛ آتوسا مدیری. 1391. تبیین نقش مولفه معنا در فرایند شکلگیری حس مکان. نشریه هنرهای زیبا، معماری و شهرسازی، دوره 17، شماره 2، تابستان1391، صص 43- 51.
27. گروتر یورگ. 1987. ترجمه جهانشاه پاکزاد و عبدالرضا همایون. زیباییشناسی در معماری. تهران: دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، مرکز چاپ و انتشارات، چاپ اول:1375، چاپ ششم:1390.
28. گلدار، فاطمه. 1391. طبقهبندی تاریخ معماری در تاریخ نامه معنا در معماری غرب. نشریه صفّه. زمستان 1391، دوره بیست و دوم، شماره 4 (علمی-پژوهشی)، صص 95-106.
29. گوهریپور، مرتضی. 1387. ابعاد مسئله معنا از دیدگاه فلسفی. نامه پژوهش فرهنگی، سال نهم، شماره سوم.
30. فلامکی، محمدمنصور. 1381. ریشهها و گرایشهای نظری معماری. نشر فضا.
31. فلکیان، نرجس؛ حسین صفری؛ و علی کاظمی. ۱۴۰۰. ریختشناسی معماری معنامحور با استفاده از روش چیدمان فضا (مطالعه موردی: مسجد علی اصفهان). نشریۀ علمی باغ نظر، 18(96)، صص29 - 44، خرداد 1400.
32. فلکیان، نرجس؛ حسین صفری؛ و علی کاظمی. ۱۴۰۰. ریختشناسی معماری معنامحور با استفاده از روش چیدمان فضا (مطالعه موردی: مسجد حکیم اصفهان). نشریه نگرشهای نو در جغرافیای انسانی. تابستان 1400، شماره 51، (A/ISC)
33. ملکی، مرتضی. 1396. معنا در معماری(معمای معماری). تهران: انتشارات رویان پژوه، چاپ اول، 1396.
34. موهبتی، مینا؛ مریم لاری؛ بهمن نامور مطلق؛ ابوالفضل داودی رکن آبادی؛ سودابه صالحی. 1398. واکاوی شاخصههای تفکر بصری و کارکرد آن در فرایند تفکر طراحی. نشریه مبانی نظری هنرهای تجسمی، شماره 7، بهار و تابستان 1398.
35. ندیمی، هادی. 1386. پنجره 3، کلک دوست، ده مقاله در هنر ومعماری. سازمان فرهنگی تفریحی شهرداری اصفهان، چاپ اول.
36. نصر، سید حسین. 1375. هنر و معنویت. انتشارات فضا.
37. نقرهکار، عبدالحمید. 1387. درآمدی بر هویت اسلامی در معماری و شهرسازی. وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی، معاونت شهرسازی و معماری، دفتر معماری و طراحی شهری، چاپ اول.
38. نقیزاده، محمد. 1382. رابطهی فضای فکری و آموزش معماری. دومین همایش آموزش معماری.
39. نقیزاده، محمد. 1381. تاثیر معماری و شهر بر ارزشهای فرهنگی، تهران: نشریه هنرهای زیبا، شماره 11.
40. نقیزاده، محمد؛ و بهناز امینزاده. 1379. رابطه «معنا» و «صورت» در تبیین مبانی هنر، تهران: نشریه هنرهای زیبا، شماره 8.
41. نوربرگ شولتز، کریستیان. 1986. ترجمه ویدا نوروز برازجانی. گزینهای از معماری: معنا و مکان، تهران: پرهام نقش، چاپ اول (1393).
42. نوربرگ شولتز کریستیان. 1979. ترجمه محمدرضا شیرازی (1388). روح مکان، به سوی پدیدارشناسی معماری. تهران: نشر رخداد نو.
43. نوربرگ شولتز، کریستیان. 2008. ترجمه مهرداد قیومیبیدهندی. 1386. معنا در معماری غرب، تهران: فرهنگستان هنر جمهوری اسلامی ایران.
44. وینترز، ادوارد. 1996. ترجمه آرش ارباب جلفایی. 1384. معماری معنا و دلالت(در کتاب مبانی فلسفی و روانشناختی ادراک فضا). چاپ دوم، نشر خاک، بهار1384.
45. Abbaszadegan, Mostafa, & Zekri, Abbas. (2014). The concept of meaning and its understanding process in architecture. Hoviyat-e-Shahr, 8(18), 5-12.
46. Adeli Samira, & Nadimi Hadi. (2022). Form as Affordance: The theoretical basis and conceptual framework for the meaning of architecture. Soffeh, 32(96), 21-40. [DOI:10.52547/sofeh.32.1.21]
47. Ahari, Zahra. 2004. Meaning in Western Architecture: A Phenomenological approach to the study of architectural history. Khiyal Journal of the Art Academy, No. 10, Summer 2004.
48. Azimi, Maryam. 2012. Phd thesis under the title: "Meaning, imagination, architecture" design method using unconscious thinking, University of Science and Technology, supervisors: Dr. Farhang Mozafar, Dr. Seyed Baqer Hosseini.
49. Azimi, Maryam. (2019). Explaining the role of meaning and imagination in architectural design process. Journal of Researches in Islamic Architecture, 7(3(24)), 77-91.
50. Bolkhari Ghahi, Hasan. 2011. Semantic and spiritual identity of architecture. Ettelaat-e-Hekmat-va-Marefat, December 2011, Year 6, No. 9, pp. 13-20.
51. Ebrahimi Dinani, Gholamhossein. 2014. From tangible to reasonable. Tehran: Hikmat and Philosophy Research Institute of Iran, first edition.
52. Ebrahimi Dinani, Gholamhossein. 2015. The question of existence or the existence of a question. Tehran: Hikmat and Philosophy Research Institute of Iran, first edition.
53. Falamaki, Mohammad Mansour. 2001. Origins and theoretical tendencies of architecture. publishing space.
54. Fakhimi, Mohammad-Mehdi. 2018. Reinterpreting Iranian architecture (Concepts and examples). Tehran.
55. Falakian, Narges, & Safari, Hossein, and Kazemi, Ali. 2020. Morphology of meaning-oriented architecture using space syntax method case study: Ali mosque of Isfahan. Bagh-e-Nazar Scientific Journal, 18(96), pp. 29-44, Khordad 2020.
56. Falakian, Narges, & Safari, Hossein, and Kazemi, Ali. 2020. Morphology of meaning-oriented architecture using space syntax method case study: Hakim mosque of Isfahan. Negaresh-ha-ye-now-dar-joghraphia-ye-ensani, Summer 2020, No. 51, (A/ISC).
57. Grutter Jörg. 1987. Translated by Jahanshah Pakzad and Abdul Reza Homayun. Aesthetics in architecture. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University, Printing and Publishing Center, 1st edition: 1375, 6th edition: 1390.
58. Goharipour, Morteza. 2017. Dimensions of the problem of meaning from a philosophical point of view. Cultural research letter, 9th year, 3rd issue.
59. Gholadar, Fatemeh. 2012. Classification of architectural history in the history of meaning in western architecture. Soffeh Journal, Winter 2012, Volume 22, No. 4 (Scientific-Research), pp. 95-106.
60. Iraji, Javad, & Nowruz Borazjani, Vida. 2019. Meaning in the contemporary architecture of Iran after the Islamic revolution. Tehran: Pars University Press, first edition.
61. Kalaei, Parisa, & Modiri, Atusa. (2012). Explanation of the role of meaning component in the process of creating the sense of place. Architecture and Urban planning (Honar-ha-ye-Ziba), 17(2), 43-52.
62. Khansari, Mohammad. 2018. Formal logic. Tehran: Aghaz Publications.
63. Khosropanah, Abdul Hossein. 2014. Speech on World Wisdom and Philosophy Day, Iran Wisdom and Philosophy Research Institute.
64. Krippendorff, Klaus. 2006. The Semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL. [DOI:10.1201/9780203299951]
65. Lawson, Brian. Translated by Hamid Nadimi 1384. How do designers think? Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press.
66. Laursen L N, Møller Haase L. 2019. The Shortcomings of Design Thinking when Compared to Designerly Thinking. The Design Journal. DOI: 10.1080/14606925.2019.1652531 [DOI:10.1080/14606925.2019.1652531]
67. Maleki, Morteza. 2016. Meaning in architecture (architectural puzzle). Tehran: Royan Pajoh Publications, first edition, 2016.
68. Mohebati, Mina, & Lari Maryam, & Namvar Motlagh, Bahman, & Davoudi Roknabadi, Abolfazl, & Salehi, Sudabeh. 2018. Analyzing the indicators of visual thinking and its function in the process of design thinking. Mabani-Nazari-e-Honar-ha-ye-Tajassomi, No. 7, Spring and Summer 2018.
69. Nadimi, Hadi. 2016. Panjereh 3, Kelk-e-Dost, ten articles on art and architecture. Cultural and recreational organization of Isfahan municipality, first edition.
70. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. 1995. Art and spirituality. Space Publications.
71. Noghrehkar, Abdul Hamid. 2017. Introduction to Islamic identity in architecture and urban planning. Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Vice-President of Urban Development and Architecture, Office of Architecture and Urban Design, first edition.
72. Naghizadeh, Mohammad. 2003. The Relationship between Intellectual Space and Architectural Education. Second Architectural Education Conference.
73. Naghizadeh, Mohammad. 2001. The influence of architecture and the city on cultural values, Tehran: Honar-ha-ye-Ziba, No. 11.
74. Naghizadeh, Mohammad, & Aminzadeh, Behnaz. (2001). The Relationship between «Meaning» And «Appearence» in expressing art foundation. Honar-ha-ye-Ziba, (8), 16-32.
75. Norberg Schultz, Christian. 1986. Translated by Vida Nowruz Barazjani. A choice of architecture: meaning and place, Tehran: Parham Naqsh, first edition (2013).
76. Norberg Schultz Christian. 1979. Translated by Mohammad-Reza Shirazi (1388). The spirit of the place, towards the phenomenology of architecture. Tehran: Rokhdad-e-now.
77. Norberg Schultz, Christian. 2008. Translated by Mehrdad Ghayumibidhandi. 2016. Meaning in Western architecture, Tehran: Art Academy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
78. Pakatchi, Ahmad. 2008. Introduction to contemporary semantic schools. Nameh-ye-Pajohesh-e-Farhangi, Year 9, No.
79. Panahi, Seyamak, & Hashempour, Rahim, & Eslami, Gholamreza. 2014. The Architecture of thought from Idea to concept. Hoviyyat-e-Shahr, No. 17, Year 8, Summer 2014, pp. 25-34.
80. Pourmand, Hassan Ali. 2009. Meaning in Western architecture: A look at the hidden layers of architecture. Ketab-e-Mah-e-Honar, No. 127, Farvardin 2009.
81. Raeesi, Mohammad Mannan, & Noghrehkar, Abdolhamid. (2016). The Ontology of Meaning in Architectural Works. Hoviat-e-Shahr, 9(24), 5-16.
82. Raeesi, Mohammad Mannan. 2015. Semantics of text/architecture with reference to Islamic teachings. Elahiyat-e-Honar Quarterly, No. 6, pp. 54-86.
83. Raeesi, Mohammad Mannan. 2012. Semantics in architectural works to improve the design of mosques (case study: semantics (from the geometrical and spatial dimensions) in contemporary mosques in Tehran). Dissertation for Phd degree in architecture. Supervisors: Abdulhamid Noghrehkar and Karim Mardomi. Consultant professor: Nematollah Karamollahi, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Science and Technology.
84. Raeesi, Mohammad Mannan. 2018. Architecture as text; Analyzing the possibility of different readings of an architectural work, Art and Architecture: Manzar, No. 7, June 2019.
85. Raeesi, Mohammad Mannan. 2013. A reflection on the epistemological foundations of contemporary architecture, architecture and urban planning: ArmanShahr, number 9, autumn and winter 2013.
86. Rashad, Ali Akbar. 2018. Sense without sense. Tehran: Islamic Culture and Thought Research Institute Publishing Organization, first edition.
87. Sadrykia Somayeh, & Bemanian, Mohammadreza, & Pourmand Hasanali. 2020. A comparative study of function of allegory in expression of meaning (with an emphasis on Iranian architecture). Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, Volume 12, Issue 29, Winter 2020.
88. Sahaf, Seyed Mohammad Khosro. (2016). Meaning in Iranian architecture. Hoviyat-e-Shahr, 10(25), 51-60.
89. Sameh, Reza. 2016. Thesis compilation guide for architecture students. Qazvin: Jahad-e-Daneshgahi, first edition.
90. Shariat Rad, Farhad, & Nadimi, Hamid. 2015. Framing the problem; The design way of facing the design problem. Soffeh, twenty-sixth period, number 3 (scientific-research), autumn 2015, pp. 5-24.
91. Winters, Edward. 1996. Translated by Arash Arbab Jolfaei. 2014. Architecture of meaning and implication (in the book Philosophical and Psychological Foundations of Space Perception). Second edition, Khak publication, spring 2014.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Journal of Researches in Islamic Architecture is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
