On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:21:43 +0200, Yodan Rofè <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I feel the same about
>the Social Logic of Space, and although not contributing,&nbsp; I have
>enjoyed most of the discussions on this list, except Rui&nbsp; "flaming". 
In
>the end they are also counter-productive, because although he may have
>reasonable criticism, his way of writing, and his abusive and cynical
>remarks make one delete or ignore the messages.

Describing the steps that scientific theory goes through, the famous 
geneticist J.B.S. Haldane said...

Four stages of acceptance: 
1) this is worthless nonsense; 
2) this is an interesting, but perverse, point of view; 
3) this is true, but quite unimportant; 
4) I always said so.

So I guess that these reactions represent a substantial progress -we're 
now in step 2.

All the best,
Rui




</p>
><p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><br>
></p>
><p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;">Yodan Rof&egrave;<br>
></p>
><p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;">Ben Gurion University
>of the Negev</p>
><p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><br>
></p>
><p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 
0pt;">&#1510;&#1497;&#1496;&#1493;&#1496; Didem Kilickiran:<br>
></p>
><blockquote
> cite="[log in to unmask]"
> type="cite">
>  <pre wrap="">Hi,
>
>First of all - Reem, thanks for your email. I think this will force 
people to
>think twice before sending a message to the mailbase.
>
>I have been particularly uncomfortable reading Rui's emails for long
>time now. Since he does not mind 'attacking' people overtly, I don't
>mind mentioning his name now, although I may also be violating the
>rules by doing this. I think messages like his do not serve for
>anything other than confusing people's minds - especially of the
>students who try to learn space syntax. Criticisms are always welcome
>in the academy, and in the mailbase, of course, but only when they are
>done properly, and 'solely' for academic reasons. If there is a
>disagreement on something, say the definition of axial lines, I would
>expect an academic discussion with clear explanations and references.
>Attacking people and disgrading their work surely does not belong to
>any category of discussion we could call academic or scientific.
>
>Coming to Rui's last question:
>
>I was a student of space syntax for some time. And it was only after I
>read the Social Logic of Space that I decided to do my PhD at the AAS
>in the Bartlett. Although I had read a lot of social theory before
>that book, the Social Logic of Space was the first book that gave me a
>clear idea about the spatial logic of social organisations, and the
>social meaning of spatial configurations, from the micro scale of the
>house to the large human settlements like cities. The value of the
>book is that it presents a throughly interlocked understanding of
>space and society - the theory that is presented there can be taken as
>a social theory as much as a spatial one, unlike many other theories in 
the
>field. And only after that book,
>and the courses I took at the AAS, that I could read and understand,
>and also critically reflect on, many social and anthropological
>theories, and even publish in these areas, although I am trained an 
architect.
>Since then, I have advised many of my students who are interested in the 
social
>theories of space to read the book, particularly the theoretical parts, 
and they
>all came back to me saying how much they benefited from it.
>
>What I mean to say is that one could never reduce the Social logic of
>space to a book on 'spatial analysis', and space syntax to just a method 
among
>others. It is a thoroughly interdisciplinary theory of space that is
>presented in the book, and I guess its impact was much more important in 
the
>80s, when the idea of space as something relational was just starting to 
be
>theorised in many disciplines.
>
>And please do not think that AAS students just take whatever they are 
taught as
>easy recipes without questioning, without doing research (and I don't 
think
>directing students to google or amazon would be a good idea Rui! - don't 
worry,
>we know better sites where we can do academic research). Just to answer 
your
>question referring to my own experience, and also to the experiences of 
other
>AAS students whom I had the chance to know - we were hardworkers, and we 
were
>very excited about our research, so much so that we did not only read
>everything we found on spatial theory or analysis, and even philosophical 
texts
>on space, but we also devoted much of our social time to discuss about 
space
>syntax and many other theories of space. This may surprise you, but I can
>honestly say that I had no problem at the AAS in questioning Space Syntax
>either - on the contrary, I was encouraged to do that, along with other
>students, and we were appreciated a lot by people teaching there AS LONG 
AS
>WHAT WE SAID MADE SENSE academically and scientifically. I suggest you to 
read
>Theo Michell's thesis to understand what I mean - just an example among 
others.
>
>I must say that I have no idea about the papers you have published so 
far. The
>above is just an answer to whatever you have written to the mailbase 
recently,
>and a criticism of the approach you have adopted in doing that. But even 
if I
>had read your papers and did not agree with you, I would write my 
criticism in
>a way to make sure it would be instructive and beneficial to everybody 
else -
>i.e. not a waste of time.
>
>
>All the best,
>Didem Kilickiran.
>
>----------------
>Didem Kilickiran
>Middle East Technical University
>
>  </pre>
></blockquote>
></body>
></html>