Dear Ziad,
With all due respect to your views, my statement that space syntax is not a
social theory can be substantiated.
I do not claim to be a social scientist -had I wished to become one, I would
have studied for a PhD in Sociology, or Economics.
What I do claim is that the inflation of statements in this field has
reached levels that can be (to use your metaphor) compared to the current
"credit" crisis -for example the space syntax group has published
practically nothing over the last 7 years... yet, there's always someone
ready to "teach you a lesson"...
When I look for social science theories of the city, I read the likes of
Paul Krugman, who happens to have received this year's Nobel price in Economics.
Now whether space syntax should be used as an oracle to understand the world
and make it a "better place"... well, I didn't study for a PhD to become a
missionary :)
BR,
Rui
___________________________________________
Dr. Rui Carvalho
School of Mathematical Sciences
Queen Mary, University of London
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, UK
http://www.ruicarvalho.org/
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:22:53 +0000, Ziad Aazam <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Dear Dr. Carvalho,
>
>I thought you decided to leave this list, Dr. Carvalho; what brought you
back? Space syntax must have some undeclared attraction for you. Not that I
do not appreciate the challenge you advocate here; in fact I salute you for
posing it single handedly. 'Keep it up.'
>
>To discuss your scientific views is one thing, which is well received; but
to declare your ignorance of the social side of the theory while asserting
its irrelevancy based on 'citation' inference is unacceptable. Space syntax
has not set out to advance graph theory, but to address real world problem
using graph theory. 'Correct your perception.'
>
>As an architect who is concerned with building the real world, the one that
has 'real people' in it not numbers, I find space syntax an empowering tool
for understanding the built environment. You may shred the 'Social Logic of
Space' to pieces, out of ignorance or informed opinion, but the fact remains
that interpreted evidence revealed by space syntax has shown a potential for
making the real world a better world. 'I know it works.'
>
>Dr. Rui, tell your friends physicists that they 'now' can look in
architecture to understand society, because space syntax has made it
possible to make this social artefact a field for scientific exploration.
'This is not a trivial matter.'
>
>Finally, the real world is a better place when intelligent minds like yours
are more 'inclusive' rather than 'exclusive' of the others. The world can no
longer tolerate nor afford creating a powerful 'class' that acts in its own
rational self-interest. The global financial collapse is a case in point.
The fact that this list is largely silent on the social side of space syntax
is not indicative of society's irrelevance to the numbers you adore most.
>
>Ziad
>
>Ziad Aazam
>PhD Researcher
>[log in to unmask]
>www.spacewriting.wordpress.com
>Welsh School of Architecture
>Cardiff University
>Bute Building
>King Edward VII Avenue
>Cardiff CF10 3NB
>Wales U.K.
>
>Tel: +44(0)29 2087 4430
>Fax: +44(0)29 2087 4623
>>>> Rui Carvalho <[log in to unmask]> 26/10/08 9:03 AM >>>
>The correct term is line graph -google for it. It's a classical problem in
>graph theory to find it:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_graph
>
>Mike's notation may have been unfortunate, but it did for space syntax what
>no other core space syntax paper it: physicists started reading about it.
>What Mike points out, basically, is that space syntax can indeed be reduced
>to this idea.
>
>And my point is he is 100% correct in that!!!
>
>Now, Alan, I'm afraid that physicists look for social science theories is
>social science, not in architecture -so my challenge is still on!!!
>
>Where are the papers that quote the SLoS for anything but this almost
>trivial idea (which, by the way, no one knows whether it works or not!)
>
>Rui
>
>___________________________________________
>Dr. Rui Carvalho
>School of Mathematical Sciences
>Queen Mary, University of London
>Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, UK
>http://www.ruicarvalho.org/
>
>RuiOn Sat, 25 Oct 2008 23:04:31 +0100, Alan Penn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Rui wrote:
>>
>>> I will be very pleased if anyone can show that there is more to
>>> space syntax than the "dual graph" (which, incidentaly, is not dual).
>>
>>Thanks to Rui for pointing out - quite correctly by the way - that
>>whilst the edge vertex dual of the axial graph gives the node graph,
>>the dual of the node graph is not the axial graph. The reverse
>>transform requires something like a clique reduction (with all the
>>difficulties that this involves). It is for this reason that in order
>>to keep things simple one needs to think of the axial graph as primal
>>and the node graph as the dual. It is a pity that a number of papers
>>have been published with misleading terminology in this regard.
>>
>>Oh, and of course there is more to space syntax than the graph - there
>>is a theory of society. Start by reading the Social Logic of Space to
>>find out more.
>>
>>Alan
|