Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12 | ArchDaily

11/3/15, 7:10 PM

World

About

Contact

Submit

Advertise

ArchDaily | Broadcasting

the world's
most visited
architecture website
Architecture
Worldwide

Projects

News

Articles

Materials

Interviews

Competitions

Events

Classics

More

Search ArchDaily

Log in | Sign up

Unified
Theory, Chapter 12
BookmarkArchitectural
this picture!

16

MAY

2015

by Nikos Salingaros
News Articles
Unified Architectural Theory
Evidence-Based Design

Bookmark

39

MORE
ARTICLES

Tweet

11

MORE ARTICLES

Bath Abbey. "The eye scans a scene by following regions with high detail... the image is
formed by moving along connected lines, called scan paths. Image Flickr CC user
Matthew Kirkland

MOST
VISITED

installments, making it digitally, freely available for students and architects around the world.

Famous Landmarks
Reimagined with Paper
Cutouts

In Chapter 12, Salingaros concludes his discussion of the physiological and psychological

Architecture News

We will be publishing Nikos Salingaros book, Unified Architectural Theory, in a series of

effects of architecture, demonstrating how ornament can lead to an enriching human

environment. If you missed them, make sure to read the previous installments here.

House in Toyonaka / Tato

Architects

Ornament and Human Intelligence

Selected Projects
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 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

ARCA / Atelier Marko

Brajovic

people began to think of ornament as separate from function: see How Modernism Got

Selected Projects

Square (Mehaffy & Salingaros, 2013).

A key aim of this book is to judge form and structure according to a whole system
comprising the physical setting together with the observer. Any influence the object or place
has on the user is part of its function. But any ornament will certainly also impact the user,
so the actual experience cannot separate any particular aspect as pure function. Our
mechanistic split of what we somehow decide to be function isolated from ornament is true

http://www.archdaily.com/632062/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-12

MOST VISITED
PRODUCTS
Page 1 of 5

Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12 | ArchDaily

11/3/15, 7:10 PM

Facade panel linea

EQUITONE

for simple machines, but is invalid for situations in which humans are involved.

Fiber Cements / Cements

In the process of design, the end product will acquire qualities of life when we go through an
interactive sequence of steps. This approach is very far from the usual satisfaction of a
minimal list of uses and abstract requirements. How do we know that what we are designing
on paper or on a computer screen actually satisfies those uses when built? We dont.

Metal 2.0
Apavisa

Actually, it is only through the re-use of solutions that have been found empirically to be
successful that we can approach some measure of success in our designs.

Porcelain Stoneware
Yet the fundamental lesson is that we cannot presume to know how to satisfy a purely
functional need. A simple function without complexity does not give a good solution.
Failure to take this evolved complexity into account has led to so many presumed functional

TerraClad Ceramic
Sunshade System
Boston Valley Terra Cotta

solutions that immediately proved to be disastrous unusable because they are inhuman.
The search for geometric coherence, through the rules we have discussed at great length in
previous chapters of this book, is what helps us here. Paradoxically to a person raised in the

Ceramics

20th-century mechanistic worldview, the search for coherence and wholeness leads us to a
functional solution that is accurate and not illusory.

In this picture of how successful objects and places are built by paying attention to systemic
coherence, ornament and function are inseparable. It doesnt make any sense to talk about
one and not the other just as in natural forms. Therefore, we need to learn how to design
things that have the quality of life, that possess wholeness. And in doing so, function and

Receive the best architecture, every

day, via email.

ornament develop together, without our having to pay any particular attention to either
category separately.
Examining some outstanding design solutions from the past might reveal some real
surprises. What we thought to be a strictly functional solution could just as easily have
arisen (and probably did) from considering the wholeness of the geometrical configuration.

Daily Newsletter
Fortnightly Materials Newsletter
YOUR EMAIL

SUBSCRIBE

This holds true on every scale, from artifacts, to rooms, to buildings, to urban spaces. They
work and give pleasure at the same time.

The coupling of environmental information with our own participation ties us to our
environment: see Intelligence and the Information Environment (Mehaffy & Salingaros,
2012). It is therefore no surprise that the informational qualities of the environment have
serious consequences on our biological structure. Although still under investigation, it
seems fairly certain that our cognitive abilities are shaped and affected by the type of
information embedded in our environment.

A variety of laboratory experiments on animals show beyond any doubt that the young
raised in more informationally-rich environments develop measurably higher brain capacity
and intelligence. Animals raised in minimalist, information-devoid settings are lowest on the
intelligence scale. These are structural physiological changes that affect intelligence in a
permanent manner.

This effect was finally recognized in 1994, when the Carnegie Task Force issued a report
warning that minimalist environments (among those lacking sensory experiences of all
kinds) could permanently compromise childrens intellectual development. And the type of
information that triggers the tuning of our intelligence is precisely the ordered, coherent
patterns we have described in this book: see The Sensory Value of Ornament (Salingaros,
2003) (available in Spanish here). For human beings, the best evidence comes from
classical music, not art or architecture. Children who study classical music tend to do much
better at school in all subjects.

Our neuro-physiological system developed to handle the specific information presented by

our ancestral natural environment. When humans began making things, our evolved
framework for cognition automatically produced a specific class of objects that reflected a
particular geometric coherence. This was the same natural coherence that formed our
cognition mechanisms in the first place. Our mind therefore extends out informationally into
the physical environment through what we make.

Bookmark this picture!

http://www.archdaily.com/632062/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-12

Page 2 of 5

Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12 | ArchDaily

11/3/15, 7:10 PM

Rolex Learning Center / SANAA. "The Carnegie Task Force issued a report warning that
minimalist environments could permanently compromise childrens intellectual
development". Image Iwan Baan

An interesting clue comes from our paleo-history. There is, at present, a serious debate on
whether or not Neanderthal Man created art and ornament, with many researchers claiming
not. This topic is of crucial importance because our own species, Homo Sapiens, did
produce art and ornament as an essential component of our evolving intelligence and
development. The Neanderthals, by contrast, show no progress in their technology or
culture during their era of about 200,000 years. In the end, we probably killed them off. It is
easy to conjecture that our increased intelligence which gave us our unprecedented
evolutionary advantage is somehow tied intrinsically to our ornamental production.

During the last 50 years, scientists have discovered how we interact with the information
field presented in our environment. For example, the eye scans a scene by following
regions with high detail, differentiations, contrast, and curvature: see The Sensory Value of
Ornament (Salingaros, 2003). Furthermore, the image is formed by moving along
connected lines, called scan paths. The eye-brain mechanism therefore recognizes and
uses the regions of an image with high detail, contrast, and curvature to obtain information.
This finding validates Alexanders Fifteen Fundamental Properties (See Chapter 10 of
Unified Architectural Theory online) and three structural laws of architecture that I proposed
(Salingaros, 1995) (available in Spanish here).

Further research links the way we perceive our surroundings with the way this information is
stored in our brain, and is then used to govern our actions and decisions. Our lives are in
large part governed by these innate mechanisms of capture, integration, and response to
external information. Our instinctive response to forms is hard-wired into our organism.
We come up against a contradiction between the design of buildings and our physiology,
however, starting with the modernist period. It seems that their architects go out of their way
to deny the visual and morphological features required by human cognition and physiology.
Could this be an accident? I dont believe so. Contradiction and elimination of perceptual
coherence is systematic, so it has to be the result of deliberate action.

I wish to develop the thesis that ornament is a primary manifestation of human

intelligence. A false but widely-accepted assumption in architectural discourse for over a
century states that ornament is simply imitative of nature, but thats not true. Ornament
arises as a spontaneous creative act of the human brain. Someone could also create
ornament that imitates nature only visually, but that is a separate matter.

The proof of the above thesis comes from individual neurons that have the specific function
to recognize ornamental components: see The Sensory Value of Ornament (Salingaros,
2003). Everyone knows of the retinal cone cells that react to different color hues. What is
less known is that those same receptor cells are responsible for our ability to see fine detail.
Furthermore, the phenomenon of color constancy links color perception to the brains
advanced computational capacity. We automatically adjust actual color hues under different
light conditions to perceive the natural color only a brain with high intelligence can see
colors.

Even less known outside scientific circles is the existence of a large number of cortical
neurons inside the brain that are triggered only by ornamental elements. These include
specific responses to crosses, stars, concentric circles, crosses with an outline, and other
concentrically-organized symmetrical figures with some complexity. These patterns are
therefore built into our cognitive neural structure. Since those neurons are there for a
reason, we should be stimulating them.

Individual neurons that fire in response to higher patterns of complexity are situated in

http://www.archdaily.com/632062/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-12

Page 3 of 5

Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12 | ArchDaily

11/3/15, 7:10 PM

increasingly advanced (from the evolutionary viewpoint) regions of the brain. The relative
number of pattern-sensitive neurons also increases as we progress from the more primitive
to the more recently-evolved layers of the human brain. This finding correlates the
perception of ordered visual complexity and ornament anatomically with the evolution of
intelligence.

Now we need to describe what happens when this wonderful apparatus for perceiving
geometric coherence in our environment, and generating it in artifacts and structures, is
frustrated. Our body reacts with physiological and psychological distress. Minimalist and
otherwise information-deprived environments lead to depression.

Colorless and featureless environments do not necessarily produce a numbing response,

but can trigger distress with an active feeling of threat. The reason for this active effect is
that minimalist environments trigger signals of our own pathology. There is a group of
diseases that make us experience a normal, informationally-rich environment as if it were a
minimalist environment, which creates alarm: see The Sensory Value of Ornament
(Salingaros, 2003).

For example, macular degeneration and retinal detachment create anxiety because we lose
our image of the environment. Or a cataract makes the eyes lens opaque. These are all
diseases of the eye. Other pathologies occurring within the brain itself give similar signals of
alarm. Cerebral lesions from a stroke or carbon monoxide poisoning can cause visual
agnosia, where a person with perfectly-functioning eyes cannot see because their brain is
no longer capable of recognizing forms and colors. Such agnosic patients cannot
recognize structural coherence.

Another condition of brain damage that mimics a minimalist environment is cerebral

achromatopsia, when patients see only in shades of gray. This condition is far more severe
than regular color blindness, where the number of perceived color hues is reduced by one.
With cerebral achromatopsia, however, everything becomes gray. Organic objects such as
peoples faces and food become repellent because they express death. Those unfortunate
patients live out their lives in a state of despair in a depressing world.

This material is taking architecture into a whole new direction, and people may not be ready
for it; certainly those in the present educational system arent. It is important nevertheless
because it reveals that designed environments have significant effects (either positive or
negative) on users. Obviously, this needs to be part of the curriculum so architecture
students are forced to learn it. Perhaps an effective way to teach these lessons is to apply
this method to build buildings that have positive effects on their users, then architects will
learn from those built examples. Furthermore, within the context of form languages, its
possible to combine this method with the way we are constructing today so as to generate
something interesting that will draw attention.

Order the International edition of Unified Architectural Theory here, and the US
edition here.

Readings:

Christopher Alexander (2001) The Awakening of Space, Chapter 11 of The

Phenomenon of Life: Book 1 of The Nature of Order, Center for Environmental Structure,
Berkeley, California.
Michael Mehaffy & Nikos Salingaros (2012) Intelligence and the Information
Environment, Metropolis, 25 February. Reprinted as Chapter 7 of Design for a Living
Planet, Sustasis Press, Portland, Oregon (2015).
Michael Mehaffy & Nikos Salingaros (2013) How Modernism Got Square, Metropolis, 19
April. Reprinted as Chapter 3 of Design for a Living Planet, Sustasis Press, Portland,
Oregon (2015).
Nikos Salingaros (1995) The Laws of Architecture from a Physicists Perspective,
Physics Essays, Volume 8, pages 638-643. Revised version is Chapter 1 of A Theory of
Architecture, Umbau-Verlag, Solingen, Germany, 2006; reprinted 2014, Sustasis Press,
Portland, Oregon and Vajra Books, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nikos Salingaros (2003) The Sensory Value of Ornament, Communication & Cognition,
Volume 36, No. 3-4, pages 331-351. Revised version is Chapter 4 of A Theory of
Architecture, Umbau-Verlag, Solingen, Germany, 2006; reprinted 2014, Sustasis Press,
Portland, Oregon and Vajra Books, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Cite:
Nikos Salingaros. "Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12" 16 May 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 3 Nov 2015.
<http://www.archdaily.com/632062/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-12/>

http://www.archdaily.com/632062/unified-architectural-theory-chapter-12

Page 4 of 5