Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Deriving the multidiscipline axioms from Metaphor and Thought’s evidence (C)

All below collages are created by Christina  Fez-Barringten
Deriving the Multidiscipline axioms from Metaphor and Thought’s Evidence Deriving the multidiscipline axioms from metaphor and thought’s evidence (C)
Metaphoric axioms affecting many disciplines” (C) [2]
By Barie Fez-Barringten
www.bariefez-barringten.com
bariefezbarringten@gmail.com

Abstract:
Twenty eight dominant axioms and 54 sub-dominant axioms (total of 82) are evidence of the case that architecture is an art resolved that architecture was the making of metaphors because it (architecture) made metaphors, personified by metaphor stasis’ two technical and conceptual dimensions.  Both are valid separately and even more usual in combination.  But how do these two work, and, how does this knowledge benefit design, use and evaluation of built works? The axioms were derived by examining Andrew Ortony’s Metaphor and Thought’s evidence and works by Paul Weiss, William J.J. Gordon and the Yale lecture series titled architecture as the making of metaphors. . Prior monographs were steeped in deductive reasoning since there was no new information (evidence) pertaining to metaphors. Therefore the previous articles included analyzing and explaining the syllogism:
  • Art [G] is the making of metaphors
  • Architecture is an art [G]
  • Therefore architecture is the making of metaphors.
Without evidence we could do little to reason why art [G] is the making of neither metaphors nor why architecture is an art.
Since 1967 I proceeded to analyze the presumptions and find its many applications. This new information by Andrew Ortony first published in 1979, provides evidence to support inductive reasoning and to this end each axiom is its own warrant to the inferences of the above syllogism and the answer to question of why metaphor is the stasis to any of the syllogism’s claims and implications.
Biographical note: (88 words)
Columbia University coursework in behavioral psychology under Ralph Hefferline and others in voice Linguistics, Bachelor’s of Fine Arts from Pratt Institute and Master of Architecture from Yale University where I was mentored in metaphors and metaphysics by Dr. Paul Weiss. For research I founded the New York City not-for–profit corporation called Laboratories for Metaphoric Environments.
In addition to authoring over fifteen published monographs by learned journals I have spent 20 years in Saudi Arabia and have written a book containing pen and ink drawings on perceptions of 72 European cities.
Institutional affiliation:
Global University ;American Institute of Architects; Florida Licensed Architect; Programming Chairperson for the Gulf Coast Writers Association; National Council of Architectural Registration Boards; Al-Umran association of Saudi Arabia, American Society of Interior Designers; and founding president of Architects International Group of the mid-east.

Deriving the multidiscipline axioms from metaphor and thought [1] evidence
Axioms about metaphors influencing many disciplines” [2]

Observations:
Architecture is the making of metaphors is itself a metaphor bridging “architecture” and “metaphor”. Since we are making metaphoric use of both linguistic and conceptual metaphors it behooves us to provide evidence, inferences and warrants supporting this claim; as a resolution this metaphor contains claims that buildings are to architecture as written and spoken vehicles (books, poems, novels, essays and letters) are to linguistics and may be conceived of as conceptual metaphors.

The evidence of language may be varied, macro or micro. We warrant that as mathematics the source can be translated from numbers and formulae so may the observations, assumptions, conditions, operations, ideal and goals be translated into targets and then designs.  As the words of a “play” may spoken to be “played” so a design is expressed when it is constructed. When the constructed work is occupied it is tantamount to the audience appreciating the play. In sheltering,  the building comforts while in being read literature also comforts but the building actually can be inhabited and house inhabitants unique to shelters;  so this is the difference which is neither analogous and the difference which makes the work of architecture unique and not a analogous to literature. Not to leave the comparison off balance a novel may be carried and put on a shelf while a building cannot. Building is occupied in fact while the reader is occupied in mind.
Architecture, the word is itself a metaphor bridging “master” and “builder”: from arkhi- "chief" + tekton "builder, carpenter". Master was a title of citizen ship, authority and high status while builder was all of the skills associated with carpentry where merchant places of business with residences were constructed by carpenters under a master carpenter. The very acts of the architect as the arbiter between owner and contractor and the metaphor of the contract documents bridging ideas to reality are metaphoric.

As words, grammar, phonetics,  literature, dictionaries, and encyclopedias are the vocabulary and tools  of writing and speaking so are mechanical, electrical, plumbing and structural engineering, materials, structural elements, building systems, manufacturers catalogs, history of interiors, history of architecture  (beams, cables, columns, flooring, roofing, wall materials, lights, wires, ducts, etc.) the vocabulary of designers.
The writer and the designer both devise the choice of words, construct sentences and paragraphs to express, explain some ideas, create some mystery, and romance while the designer contrives his vocabulary of elements to reify the program. The completed building speaks through its every part. Its volume, spaces, shape, form, and height with proportions, shades and shadows, reflections, inner and outer spaces, sequence of spaces, planes and internal and external volumes.
The building is the ensemble of the actors of the play reciting their parts, the musicians in the orchestra playing their pieces all led by a conductor who interprets the composer’s composition as the general contractor interprets the contact documents. Today we have computers which can translate words into three dimensional building models and translate the model to drawings and specifications. This application of this analogy was not even conceivable when we began this study in 1967. Forty years from now the possibilities seem endless but leading to expanded metaphors and use of metaphoric thinking. However, between then and now I have been asked by software giants to discuss architectural terms so they could build tools for architects to design. Computer Aided Design, Master Spec, Modeling is the results of such conversations.

Most cognitive linguistic research [E] on metaphor (such as architecture as the making of metaphors) may be characterized as theory building, in which concepts and hypotheses are developed about the nature of conceptual metaphor. To be sure, such theories have empirical underpinnings, in that their authors are careful to collect many linguistic and architectural examples that corroborate our theoretical constructs. To put this slightly differently, these are theories meant to be put to the test in empirical research. In that respect, they are not like the hermeneutic theories of philosophers [E].

[F] What makes our present comparison about metaphor unique is the important distinction that has been drawn between conceptual metaphors or metaphorical concepts on one hand (as “architecture as the making of metaphors”), and linguistic metaphors on the other hand (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; our lecture series was in 1967).
The former (concepts) refers to “love is war” and “love is Journey” while the latter is actually "linguistically" in nature as Weiss’: “Richard the Lion hearted”. Metaphorical language, consisting of specific linguistic expressions, is but a surface manifestation of realization of conceptual metaphor. Conceptual metaphors are systematic mappings across conceptual domains: one domain of experience, the target domain (architecture). In short, the locus of metaphor is not a language at all, but in the way we conceptualize one mental domain in terms of another (Lakoff 1994:43) is precisely what we do when we bridge architecture the making of metaphors with building and literature 8.0.

The contemporary Theory of Metaphor: a perspective from Chinese by Ning Yu [F] says that it can be that architecture is the making of Conceptual Metaphors (not literal) - This occurs where the metaphor or extension of meaning from one object to the other is not in the words (building) themselves but is the mental image. The words (or in the case of architecture the shapes, forms, materials, etc) are prompts for us to perform mapping from one conventional image to another at the conceptual level. Nevertheless, according to Webster linguistics is the scientific study of natural language  from where metaphors emanate and is also both  art and science and we can say that what can be true for linguistics may also be true for non-language (conceptual)  expressions including art; if art then all of its subsidiaries and what may be true of any one of them may also be true for them all.
In fact there have been many important art movements such as the Beaux Artes and the Bauhaus that also believed there is correspondence of these forms with one another. We can do this because language is any set or system of such symbols as used in a more or less uniform fashion by a number of people, who are thus enabled to communicate intelligibly with one another.
Linguistics it the study of any system of formalized symbols, signs, sounds, gestures, or the like used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, emotion, etc.: the language of mathematics; sign language. We extend this to include non-spoken language (concepts) and that art is conceived as a means of communicating thought such as mathematics, sign language, etc. While or metaphor of architecture to metaphors is conceptual many of its applications find linguistic metaphors helpful.  
Semiotics, for example, is a related field concerned with the general study of signs and symbols both in language and outside of it. Literary theorists study the use of language in artistic literature. Linguistics additionally draws on work from such diverse fields as psychology, speech-language pathology, informatics, computer science, philosophy, biology, human anatomy, neuroscience, sociology, anthropology, and acoustics. No scientific study of architecture as arts is known, particularly in the industrial age when business and not aesthetics dominates. In a time when aesthetics dominated the making of architecture aesthetics and the art of modeling a building into a particular form of art prevailed. Witness the debates in books like The Fountainhead and the plethora of arts [G] with architecture that flourished under the kings of Europe. The building, interiors and decoration were all commissioned as arts and expected to be aesthetically pleasing.
It undoubtedly is true that while the goal of ordinary language is to communicate, the primary goal of architecture is “shelter” and of art to entertain, educates, beautify and decorate). Actually the main purpose of the architect is to be an arbiter between owner and contractor as the owner’s surrogate and what the architect actually produces is not the shelter but the documents from which the shelter will be built. This distinction is relevant since the language of architecture is his documents (plans, sections, elevations, specifications, scale models, etc).
The work of his design is habitable shelter so we can presume the built outcome for this metaphor whether built or not, whether on drawings or the real thing.  

While it is true that a bi-product of architecture’s shelter is that which expresses in a system of symbols, such as character sequences, combined in various ways and following a set of rules, communicating thoughts, feelings, or instructions,   architecture’s primary goal is to shelter by accommodating programmatic specifics peculiar to its needs and necessities. It is not only to communicate (express) but to shelter. In most of today’s contemporary architectural programs there would be little on aesthetics. Thankfully there are noteworthy exceptions which fill the pages of architectural journals.
It is for this reason that why till now architects have not been trained to think of their preferred choices of forms, patterns, structures, material, sizes and spaces responsible to impart any message, implication, thought or emotion. In fact, aside from mere pomp, pride, monumentalizing, trophy, corporate symbol,  works of architecture stops there at “imparting”, commentating or symbolizing not trying to teach educate, specify and instruct but simply shelter.  
However, there is no doubt that spaces, proportions, colors, textures, dimensions, sequence of spaces, planes in space, etc control , support and guide human behavior;  they do so by depending on predicting human responses and behavior within a multidimensional world where they respond and act and not converse using words. My own study of behavioral psychology preceding my serious study of design gave my every later choice a possible predilection toward human behavior which other designers seemed not to be aware.
Yet, they were able to successfully design but the consequences of their decisions to express anything were not considered.
Architecture is the making of metaphors,  but more, it is also  so-called  “body language”; it makes metaphors, poetry, music, dance, ballet, etc. its is widely expressive but it does not converse hearing and responding as in normal human conversation. Conceptual Metaphors (not literal) occurs where the metaphor (or extension of meaning from one object to the other) is not in the words themselves but is the mental image.  The words (or in the case of architecture the shapes, forms, materials, etc) are prompts for the user to perform mapping from one conventional image to another at the conceptual level. We find works which “welcome”, “open up”, “close”, “reject”, “turn-in”, “introvert”, “explode”, “shout”, etc.  As the building shelters it entertains by getting and holding inhabitants attention, it welcomes and provides the opportunity to be fed, diverted, and amused. It is the place preferred to do one or another act as opposed to being and doing similar things outside.  Metaphor is a figure of speech, not an architectural style, building term , kind of building- type but a condition of its creation and use, but it is not normally what architecture is.
I say normally because there are exceptions as monuments, exhibits, some public buildings; building which may house one thing but try to communicate something else. The White House and Capital buildings are good examples communicating the US strength by the referent forms and unity with the trusted past to contain its operations. The White House is the home of the revered first family whiles the Capital the place where our revered congress transacts its business.  
Works of architecture as metaphors may be more onomatopoetic, then a full sentence, may be grasped intuitively as analogy than overtly, may be sensed but never understood, may be used but never seen, and may be ignored, condemned and obliterated with less concern that of its human counterpart or preserved and worshiped as an icon as a landmark .   
As a landmark it communicates a history of what people have done in that place, a period of time; demarks a context and as a metaphor communicates its past in terms of itself. It marks time, space and place; and the human epoch. Conceptually it converses about the things it marks in terms of its designed characterization, its mere age or method of construction (they don’t make them like that anymore).
While both the linguistic, conceptual and architectural metaphor makes the strange familiar, it is the architectural and artistic that identifies our position in society and is the emblem of who we are. We are not the metaphor but our experience of it is as real as anything else we know. As we perceive it, the metaphor is our virtual reality. It contains our identity, signs and signals. Its' vocabulary, symbols and characters are symbiotic. The metaphor itself is symbiotic and our relationship to the metaphor is symbiosis. The metaphor is a change vehicle. It transforms and it is a transformer. It works internally between its' elements and upon us as we complete metaphor.
It is completion that users and audience participate in the ultimate creation of any metaphor. A work of literature, book, and play, novel may have similar affects but they are more then communicating but communication in a certain way. By the way the Latin for "transfer" is "metaphor".
It is no wonder that my own study linking metaphors to architecture in the realms of cognitions should be parallel with important developments in cognitive linguistics. This includes conceptual metaphors based on the idea that form-function correspondences are based on representations derived from embodied experience and constitute the basic units of language. (We are the sum total of all that has gone before us). So basic in fact that they may easily be the same basis as they are for architecture. This is at the heart of our presumption, that we can make metaphoric use of the term metaphor as for linguistics as for architecture.  For any one work there are two metaphors: the concept and the manifestation of the concept. Richard the Lionhearted is the manifestation while the concept of the commonplace linking Richard to the Lion is understood without being visible. When we hear the voices of singers, the sounds of musician, the tones of speakers and the quality of a manifest metaphor we encounter the presence of other human beings. The essence of this presence authenticates our identity and we transfer their realty to our own.

Dedication:
My childhood quest was, and, still is today, to learn why building and streets are the way they are?  I dedicate this latest monograph to fellow-seekers in the hopes that some of my latest findings may be the answers to someone’s similar questions.  I’d roam the streets looking but what I saw became mnemonics for my life and answers which I did not recognize.  Now we have a new way of understanding works of architecture as creating and seeing them with a new vocabulary, and with a new vocabulary the potential for a new architecture. Seeing in a different way can bring about different outcomes.  As a summary I have listed the below axioms in the hope they may index my monograph to be a useful tool to students (including myself), design professionals, professors and scholars, writers and of course, ourselves, as users.  
This monograph is to once again do what Dr Paul Weiss suggested, that since we are borrowing a term normally associated with linguistics we turn to their respective scholars for understanding of the metaphor so that we can find a metaphorical use of the term to explain how architecture is the making of metaphors. So readers will find that I have faithfully quoted applicable texts form their dissertations and applied them to architecture and architectural ideas. I have not tried to further prove or disprove their points except as they explained architecture and my previous understandings of metaphors (based on over forty years of this study). Let not the amount of time misdirect you as much of it has been spent in other pursuits including my own field as an architect and educator.  Having researched and written so much I believe there is still so much I do not know and understand,  and hope that others may find this work a mere foundation for more learned study, particularly in yet to be newly defined fields of scholarship. My quest was answered when I discovered that metaphors were why things are they way they are and perceived to be the way they are because of metaphors.
Justification:
Since this monograph primary audience is scholars related to the making of built metaphors I first present the architectural axioms followed by the *footnotes evidence of science from which the axioms are derived.
This I do with roman numerals for the axioms and later numbered footnotes for the evidence of science and sources. One can apply anyone of these axioms and sub-axioms to a design project and, hopefully, watch as it changes the paradigm of outcomes.
The evidence is based on the authorities of the following disciplines:
*Philosophy, Linguistics, Psychology, and English.
*Urban Studies and Planning, Linguistics, Cognitive Science, Experimental Psychology, *Psychology and Opinion Research. * Special Education, Social Policy, *Learning Sciences, and *Education and Applied Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences.
Axioms:
Axioms (shown in Roman numerals) are self-evident principles that I have derived out of A.Ortony Metaphor and Thought[1.0] and accept as true without proof as the basis for future arguments; a postulates or inferences including their  warrants (which I have footnoted as 1._._ throughout).These axioms are in themselves clarification, enlightenment, and illumination removing ambiguity where the derivative reference (Ortony)  has many applications. Hopefully, these can be starting points from which other statements can be logically derived. Unlike theorems, axioms cannot be derived by principles of deduction as I wrote: "The metametaphor theorem" published by Architectural Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut Arab University.  The below axioms  define  properties for the domain of a specific theory which evolved out of the stasis defending architecture as an art[G]  and in that  sense, a” postulate" and "assumption" . Thusly, I presume to axiomatize a system of knowledge to show that these claims can be derived from a small, well-understood set of sentences (the axioms). Universality, Global uniqueness, Sameness, Identity, and Identity abuse are just some of the axioms of web architecture.  Francis Hsu of Rutgers writes that “Software Architecture Axioms is a worthy goal. First, let's be clear that software axioms are not necessarily mathematical in nature”.
Furthermore, in his book titled The Book of Architecture Axioms  Gavin Terrill wrote: Don't put your resume ahead of the requirements Simplify essential complexity; diminish accidental complexity; You're negotiating more often than you think ;It's never too early to think about performance and resiliency testingFight repetition; Don't Control, but Observe and Architect as Janitor”. In “Axiomatic design in the customizing home building industry published by  Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management; 2002;vol 9; issue 4;page 318-324  Kurt  Psilander wrote that “the developer would find a tool very useful that systematically and reliably analyses customer taste in terms of functional requirements (FRs). Such a tool increases the reliability of the procedure the entrepreneur applies to chisel out a concrete project description based on a vision of the tastes of a specific group of customers. It also ensures that future agents do not distort the developer's specified FRs when design parameters are selected for the realization of the project. Axiomatic design is one method to support such a procedure. This tool was developed for the manufacturing industry but is applied here in the housing sector. Some hypothetical examples are presented”. Aside from building-architect’s axioms directing that “form follows function”; follow manufacturers requirements and local codes and ordinances, AIA ( American Institute of Architects) standards for professional practice architectural axioms are few and far between.


28 dominant Axioms:
Axiom I. In making a habitable conceptual metaphor, after assimilating the program, the very first step in the design process is to develop a “parte’ (a communication directed to the merits (outcome) of the design process) …it’s the [B] resolution of the argument supported by claims, inferences, evidence and warrants) It is a “top-down” approach later followed by designs which meet the parte. The parte may follow the design process and be presented to sell the product.
Of courses this parte would have to converse with the parte of the street, neighborhood and township with all the social, political, and legal matters pertinent to such an undertaking.  The generative metaphor is “seeing” -as, the “meta-pherein” or “carrying –over” of frames or perspectives from one domain of experience to another. You build one thing in terms of another where the other is the model, and, what you build is the application. It is the “ideal” of the proposed design. While architects may initially state an ideal, it most likely evolves and even radically changes by the time the design process yields an architectural configuration (building manifestation). 
Once achieved the “parte” (concept/gestalt) manifests and can be articulated. [1.1]
Axiom II. 1.2.1 Peculiarization, personalization and authentication are required for a metaphor to live. This too is the way the user metaphorize the using process, the user and the work empathize.  In this is the art of making metaphors for the architect of public works. His metaphor must “read” the cultural, social and rightness of the metaphor’s proposed context. Whereas a dead metaphor is one which really does not contain any fresh metaphor insofar as it does not really “get thoughts across”; “language seems rather to help one person to construct out of his own stock of mental stuff something like a replica, or copy,  of someone’s else’s thoughts”.  I say: “Dead-in, Dead-out” and “you are what you eat” ; designs without concerns for scale, hierarchies, scenarios, surprise, delight, vistas, etc will be “dead”.

They are “techne” driven engineering a building without architectural concerns. Such a work is a techne driven design where craft-like knowledge is called a ‘techne.' It is most useful when the knowledge is practically applied, rather than theoretically or aesthetically applied.
It is the rational method involved in producing an object or accomplishing a building design.  Techne is actually a system of practical knowledge. As a craft or art technê is the practice; of design which is  informed by knowledge of forms such as the craft of managing a firm of architects where even virtue is a kind of technê of management and design practice, one that is based on an understanding of the profession, business and market.. Technai are such activities as drafting, specifying, managing, negotiating, programming, planning, supervising, and inspection; by association with these technai, we can include house-building, mathematics, plumbing, making money, writing, and painting. So much so that the study and practice of design is devoid from the humanities and downplays theories of architecture developing rather the crafts, skill and understandings needed to engineer, plan, sketch, draw, delineate, specify, write, and design.
Axiom III. 1.2.2/1.2.3 Geometry of urban blocks and the location of building masses that reflect one anther is a scheme to sharply define the volume and mass of the block and experience of city streets (Vincent Scully). In New York City the grid and this insistence on buildings reflecting the geometry of the grid is a metaphor of city-wide proportions.
The streets are defined by the 90 degree corners, planes and tightness of the cubes and rectangles to the city plan. In this way the metaphor of the overall and each building design no mater where it’s location on the block; no matter when or in what sequence the metaphoric constraint of appropriateness or zoning formulas, all lead the ideas to flow from one to another architect.
Furthermore, the reader is able to “appreciate” (to value is to attach importance to a thing because of its worth) the street, its geometry, limits and linearity as an idea on the 1.2.2/1.2.3 conduit from the architect, through the metaphor and to the reader. 1.2.2/1.2.3 A conduit is a minor framework which overlooks words as containers and allows ideas and feelings to flow, unfettered and completely disembodied, into a kind of ambient space between human heads.  Irregardless of the details the overall concept is “transferred “from one to the other, irrespective of sub-dominant and tertiary design elements.
Axiom IV. Building shapes and forms tend to reflect common geometry; building types tend to share common facilities; building code use designations influence the selection of applicable code requirements, architecture, forming clusters and community spaces create opportunities for neighborhood identity and nurturing cultural identity. 1.3“It's a strange thought, that culture is a product of man-made, unnatural things, that instead of culture shaping the architecture, architecture shapes the culture.
Axiom V. If the facade of a building is designed in one order of architecture you can presume the other parts are in like arrangements where the whole may be of that same  order including its’ plan, section and details because of mapping and channeling one idea from one level to another.  Frank Lloyd Wright designed his prairie architecture with dominant horizontal axis thrust to his structure as common to the horizontal axis of the land upon which the building sat.   
In geometrical formal parts of an architectural metaphor we note those common elements where fit, coupling and joints occur. 1.4 Metaphor maps the structure of one domain onto the structure of another”. 1.4.1 for example, the “superimposition of the image of an hour glass onto the image of a woman’s waist by virtue of their common shape”. As before the metaphor is conceptual; it is not the works themselves, but the mental images. In this case Metaphor is a mental image. “Each metaphorical mapping preserves image-schema structure:” In acting it is called a” handle” where your whole character’s peculiarity is remember by one acting device (accent, slang, twang, wiggle, walk, snort, etc) ;in architecture the building’s roof top, cladding, silhouette, interior finishes, lighting, gargoyles, entrance, rounded corners, etc.
Axiom VI. Since metaphor is the main mechanism through which we comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning:  1.4.3 what is built is first thought and conceived separately from building as thinking and conceiving is separate from the outward expression, so metaphor is a process and architectural metaphor is a process and what we see is what the process issues; not the manifest metaphor.
Axiom VII. The metaphor-building clarifies our place, status and value.
As Metaphor is the main mechanism through which we comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning so works of architecture inform our social, psychological and political condition. 
Axiom VIII. 1.4.4 Much subject matter, from the most mundane to the most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor. The metaphor is engrafted with knowledge about the state of contemporary technology, scientific advancement, social taste and community importance, even an anonymous Florentine back ally’s brick wall, carved door, wall fountain, shuttered windows, building height, coloration of the fresco.
Axiom IX. The architects process and what is assembled may or may not correlate; likewise what we perceive of what we see is not necessarily what we think or believe we have seen. As thought, poetry, song, etc architecture is both precise around the technique but vague about the cultural, psychic and social bridges. Yet architecture is rich with its icons, classic silhouettes, orders of architecture, styles and periods.  1.4.5 Metaphor is fundamentally conceptual, not linguistic, in nature. It is the difference between the thing and what we perceive. Our perception of the building is the metaphor while the building is the evidence of the design process and the keys to unlock our mind.
Axiom X. 1.4.6 Metaphorical language (building) is a surface manifestation of conceptual (program, design and contact documents)   metaphor. The built metaphor is the residue, excrement, product and periphery of the deep and complex reality of the building’s creative process and extant reality. As we don’t know the inner workings of our car and yet are able to drive so we can use our building. What we design and what we read not the metaphor but a surface manifestation of the concept metaphor. A concept which we can only know as well as we is able to discern metaphorical language. The construction and the metaphor beneath are mapped by the building being the manifestation of the hidden conceptual metaphor. To know the conceptual metaphor we must read the building.
Axiom XI. 1.4.7 Through much of our conceptual system is metaphorical; a significant part of it is non-metaphorical. Metaphorical understanding is grounded in non-metaphorical understanding.
Our primary experiences grounded in  the laws of physics of gravity , plasticity, liquids, winds, sunlight, etc all contribute to our metaphorical understanding often the conceptual commonality accepting the strange .
Axiom XII. The whole of the conceptual metaphor is designed in such a way as to clarify, orient and provide “concrete” reification of all the design parameters into a “highly structured’ work; a work which homogenizes all these diverse and disjointed systems and operations into a well working machine. 1.4.8 Metaphor allows us to understand a relatively abstract or inherently unstructured subject matter in terms of a more concrete, or at least, more highly structured subject matter. A structured building is a structured subject offering access to relatively abstract and unstructured subject matter. Hence architects translate their architectural conception from philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled drawings and then to real-life full-scale multi dimensions conventions consisting of conventional materials, building elements (doors, windows, stairs, etc).
Axiom XIII. Sifting through the program the architect seeks the “commonality” between the reality and experience to make the metaphor. Mapping is only possible when he knows the “commonplace”, the commonality, the characteristic common to both, the terms that both the source and the target have in common in which the mapping takes place. The architect’s design agenda and the user’s requirements find both their commonalities and differences.
As the architect structures his program, design and specifications he simultaneously structures the metaphor of his work of architecture. Architecture consists of program specifics where the conditions, operations, goals and ideals are from heretofore unrelated and distant contexts but are themselves metaphors “mapped across conceptual domains”. Architects translate their architectural conception from philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled drawings and then to real life full scale multi dimensions conventions consisting of conventional materials, building elements (doors, windows, stairs, etc).1.4.9 As maps are the result of cartographers rendering existing into a graphics for reading so is mapping to the reading of metaphors where the reader renders understanding from one source to another. As the cartographer seeks lines, symbols and shadings to articulate the world reality so the reader’s choices of heretofore unrelated and seemingly unrelated  are found to have an essence common to both the reality and the rendition so that the metaphor can be repeated becoming the readers new vocabulary. As the reader can describe the route he can identify the building.
1.4. 10 Each mapping (where mapping is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between constituent elements of the source and the target domain. Many elements of target concepts come from source domains and are not preexisting. To know a conceptual metaphor is to know the set of mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing. The same idea of mapping between source and target is used to describe analogical reasoning and inferences. For example, reception area to receive people, doors and door frames, columns as vertical supports, parking spaces for cars, Iron and stained glass design patterns, and typical design details appropriated for a given building system.
1.4.11 Aside from articulating a program architects carry-over their experiences with materials, physics, art, culture, building codes, structures, plasticity, etc. to form a metaphor. Identifying conditions, operations, ideals and goals are combined to form plans, sections and elevations which are then translated in to contract documents.
Later the contractors map this metaphor based on their schemes of cost, schedule and quality control into schedules and control documents. It is not until equipment, laborers and materials are brought to the side that the metaphor starts to form.  Once formed the only evidence for the user (reader) are the thousands of cues from every angle, outside and inside to enable use and understanding. An informed user can read the building’s history from its inception to opening day. 1.4.11 The scale of habitable metaphors is the intrinsic relation between the human figure and his surroundings as measured, proportioned and sensed. It is dramatically represented by Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man is based on the correlations of ideal human proportions with geometry described by the ancient Roman architect Vitruvius.1.4.11 It seems that  onomatopoeic are metaphors and can be  onomatopoeic (grouping of words that imitates the sound it is describing, suggesting its source object, such as "click", "bunk", "clang", "buzz", "bang", or animal noises such as "oink", "moo", or "meow").  In this case an assemblage instead of a sound. 
As a non-linguistic it has impact beyond words and is still a metaphor. Then a metaphor is much more than the sum of its parts and is beyond any of its constituent constructions, parts and systems.
The buildings’ very existence is a metaphor and may not be valued much more than an onomatopoeic.  1.4.12 Mappings are not arbitrary, but grounded in the body and in every day experience and knowledge. Mapping and making metaphors are synonymous. The person and not the work make the metaphor.
Without the body and the experience of either the author or the reader nothing is being made. The thing does not have but the persons have the experiences. As language, craft, and skills are learned by exercise, repetition and every day application so are mappings. Mappings are not subject to individual judgment or preference: but as a result of making seeking and finding the commonality by practice. 
1.4.13 A conceptual system contains thousands of conventional metaphorical mappings which form a highly structured subsystem of the conceptual system.  Over the year’s society, cultures, families and individuals experience and store a plethora of mapping routines which are part of society’s mapping vocabulary. As a potential user, when encountering a new building-type, such as a hi-tech manufacturing center, we call upon our highly structured subsystem to find conceptual systems which will work to navigate this particular event. 1.4.11 Architecture as a surrogate is accepted at face value. As a surrogate (a work of architecture) is "a replacement that is used as a means for transmitting benefits from a context in which its’ user may not be a part”. Architecture’s metaphors bridge from the program, designs and contractors a shelter and trusted habitat. The user enters and occupies the habitat with him having formulated but not articulated any its characteristics. Yet it works. “It makes sense, therefore, to speak of two sides to a surrogate, the user side and the context side (from which the user is absent or unable to function). “ Each of us uses others to achieve a benefit for ourselves. “We have that ability”. “None of us is just a person, a lived body, or just an organism. We are all three and more. We are singulars who own and express ourselves in and through them.
As Weiss proclaims that we cannot separate these three from each other so that it follows that we may find it impossible to separate us from the external metaphors. Inferences that are not yet warranted can be real even before we have the evidence.
Metaphors are accepted at face value and architecture is accepted at face value. Accustomed to surrogates architecture is made by assuming these connections are real and have benefit. Until they are built and used we trust that they will benefit the end user. Assembling the ambulatory we assume the occupancy, frequency and destinations.  We each are surrogates to one another yet fitted into one message. When this passage had been used as read as had been other passages, corridors and links. Like a linguistic, the building stands, like a great, stone dagger, emphatic against the sky. The stair, the exit, the space calls, gives emphasis and is strongly expressive.
Axiom XIV. Elegant architectural metaphors are those in which the big idea and the smallest of details echo and reinforce one another. Contemporary architects wrapping their parte in “green”, “myths” and eclectic images” are no less guilty than was their predecessors of the Bauhaus exuding asymmetry, tension and dissonance as were the classics and renaissance insisting on unity, symmetry and balance. The architect’s parte and the user’s grasp of cliché parte were expected and easy “fill-in” proving the learned mappings, learned inference trail and familiarity with bridging.  
1.5.1 People ascertain the deep metaphor that underlies one or more surface metaphors by filling in terms of an implicit analogy”. A unique building metaphor may be reckoned by its apparent similarity to another from a previous experience. As a grain silo is to a methane gas plant and to oil tank storage, what may be implicit are the shapes, appurtenances, and locations.  1.5.2 We see the architectural metaphor, we read its extent, we synapse, analogies and metaphorize absorbing its information, contextualizing and as much as possible resurrecting its reasons for creation. 
The architectural metaphor only speaks through its apparent shape, form, volume, space, material, etc that the concepts which underlie each are known to the user as they would to a painting, poem, or concerto.  1.5.3 Architecture is often more suggestive and trusting rather than being pedantic; it leads and directs circulation, use recognition while abstracting shapes and forms heretofore unknown but ergonometric.  Furthermore as observation, analysis and use fill in the gaps users inference the locations of concealed rooms, passages and supports; the user infers from a typology of the type a warehouse of expectations and similes to this metaphor from others. In this way there are the perceived and the representations they perceive which represents when explored and inert what we call beautiful, pleasurable and wonderful. Upon entering a traditional church in any culture we anticipate finding a common vocabulary of vestibule, baptistery, pews, chancel, and choir area including transepts, chapels, statuary, altar, apse, sacristy, ambulatory and side altars.
1.5.4 So while architecture is the making of metaphors and architects are making metaphors, their works, though metaphoric, are not themselves the metaphors but the shadow of the metaphor which exists elsewhere in the minds of both the creator and the user, and, it is there that the creator and the user may have a commonality (not commonplace) . Ideally, if I design my own house, decorate my own room there will likely be that commonality. If an architect is selected from a particular neighborhood his metaphor will likely be sympathetic (common) to the culture of the area. Or, a concerted effort on the part of the design team to assemble the relevant and commonplace information.  1.5.5 Architects make a spatial representation in which local subspaces can be mapped into points of higher-order hyper-spaces and vice versa is possible because they have a common set of dimensions.
Architects organize broad categories of operations and their subsets seeing that they are different from each others so as to warrant a separate group and that their subsets fit because they have common operational, functional conditions, operations, models and object is.  Hotel front and back of the house operations; Hospital surgical from outpatient and both from administration and offices are obvious sets and subsets.
Axiom XV. Shelter and its controlled creation contains sensual ,graphic and strategic  information fulfilling shelter needs by real deed rather than words of hope and future expectations. The building and not its metaphor is direct while its metaphor is indirect and being the sticks and stones of its manifestation. Yet the metaphor may be explained with language it would not accomplish the buildings shelter metaphor. The shelter prototype and its incarnation is itself indirect since its referent is obscured by contextual realities. 1.6.1 There is a difference between the indirect uses of metaphor verses the direct use of language to explain the world.1.6.2 The distinctions and relationships between micro and macro metaphors and the way they can inform one another is as the form of design may refer to its program, or a connector reflects the concept of articulation as a design concept.
Where articulation is being jointed together as a joint between two separable parts in the sense of "divide (vocal sounds) into distinct and significant parts" or where an architect parses the program and reifies words to graphic representations bringing together desperate and seeming unrelated parts to join into parts and sub parts to make a whole.
Axiom XVI. The two domains of the building and its context may have analogies that relate to both. The site and the building will absorb a high amount of pedestrian traffic. Both are ambulatories and both guide and protect the pedestrian. Like a building metaphor’s common elements with an uncommon application the common connects to the unfamiliar and the architect is able to find a way to bring them together and the user discovers their relevance. The neighborhoods walkways and the access to and through the building are analogous. As a child a Kresge 5 and 10 was built as a huge and wide corridor diagonally connecting Westchester Avenue with Southern Boulevard thus saving lots of steps, time and distance but providing a wonderful weather-free comfort- zone cutting through this block. The joining corners of the two avenues were filled with shops facing their streets which we could alternately frequent as an alternate.  Alleys in big cities and Munich subway shopping malls are also examples of these design analogies, called galleries, alleys, mews, etc. 1.7.1 Metaphors work by “reference to analogies that are known to relate to the two domains”.
Axiom XVII. A work of architecture has integrity if the whole and the parts share the same architectural vocabulary with respect to its building systems, materials and design philosophy. In a building with dominant 90 degree, cube and squares we do not expect to find plastic, curved and circular elements. (Not that there aren’t many successful introductions of unlike geometries) On the other hand if we can reason these differences we still would question this disparity to the expression of that incongruous relationship in the final work .For this reason we have design juries, inspections and rejects of design and doing the course of construction, to stop a part or incongruity between the design and the construction and between a part and the whole.

Buildings designed to be seen from the highway or visited for a fleeting moment are designed with one set of expectations while a home, terminal, office, etc may be more elaborate and scaled for scrutiny. A built metaphor with all of its metaphorical baggage call to mind another meaning and corresponding set of truths. The metaphor is not part of the building but is made from those meanings. The meanings of one and the meanings of another may be similar so that the other comes to mind. 1.8.1 A “problem of the metaphor concerns the relations between the word and sentence meaning, on the one hand, and speaker’s meaning or utterance meaning, on the other”.
 “Whenever we talk about the metaphorical meaning of a word, expression, or sentence, we are talking about what a speaker might utter it to mean, in a way it that departs from what the word, expression or sentence actually means”. The complaint against Frank Lloyd Wright’s Fifth Avenue Guggenheim Museum was the inferior quality of the concrete pours resulting in uneven and mottled surfaces. The design and the expression are often incongruous and out of the control of the architect. Such work’s often are carried out with contractors selected prior to the design beginning and are part of the design process. 1.8.2 What are the principles which relate literal sentence meaning to metaphorical utterance meaning” where one is comprehensive, complete and coordinated while the other is merely an incomplete scanty indication of a non specific.
1.8.3 How does on thing remind us of another? The basic principle of an expression with its literal meaning and corresponding truth-conditions can, in various ways that are specific to the metaphor, call to mind another meaning and corresponding set of truths”. Unlike a legal brief, specification and engineering document a work of architecture with all its metaphors tolerates variety of interpretations, innuendo and diverse translations.
Axiom XVIII. Building style and decoration are often adaptations of a former and existing building emphasizing economic and financial status, quest for status, adaptations to local common ground of knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes. Choice of structural, building systems, building height and color are often in the vernacular of the building use (office, residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) and the zoned and neighboring fashion. 1.9.1 Explaining tropes (turn, twist, conceptual guises, and figurations) ‘Human cognition is fundamentally shaped by various processes of figuration”. “The ease with which many figurative (Based on or making use of figures {abounding in or fond of figures of speech: Elizabethan poetry is highly figurative} of speech; metaphorical: figurative language) utterances are comprehended are as often been attributed to the constraining influence of the context” ………..Including “the common ground of knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes recognized as being shared by speakers and listeners (architects and users (clients, public).  One can say one’s speech is affected; affected by peer pressure and the urge to communicate and adapt. Medieval German, French and Italian cities are replete with merchant building’s roofs configured, elongated and attenuated to be higher than others. Near the Rhine, Germany’s Trier is a fine example.
Axiom XIX. A habitable metaphor is not meant for the user to fully, continuously and forever recall all that went into its’ production. The fact that the roof silhouette was to emulate a Belvedere in Florence, windows from a palace in Sienna, and stucco from Tyrol is lost over time.
Even, the design principles so astutely applied by the likes of Paul Rudolf, Richard Meier, or Marcel Breuer may be unnoticed in favor of other internal focuses.  These many design considerations may be the metaphor that gave the project its gestalt that enabled the preparation of the documents that in turn were faithful interpreted by skilled contractors and craftsman. Yet at each turn it is the affect of metaphor and not necessarily its specifics that make a good design not a great work of architecture or a working metaphor. 1.10.1” A metaphor involves a nonliteral use of language”. A non-literal use of language means that what is said is for affect and not for specificity. At each moment in its use the metaphor may mean different things, least of which may be any intended by its authors.
Axiom XX. Matching, copying and emulating the design of other buildings or adapting the design of one to the current project is adapted to the more familiar. In the Tyrol offices are often housed in larger chalets with it all the roof, hardware, doors and flower boxes of the more typical residence. The new building is made to appear like the others. Often the signature of the original dominates the new. There is no attempt to hide the emulation. Users will easily transfer their experience from the familiar old to the emulated new. Appreciation is when a metaphor as an abbreviated simile (a figure of speech in which two unlike things are explicitly compared, as in “she is like a rose.”) designed to appreciate similarities and analogies.
1.11.1 In psychology “appreciation” (Herbert (1898)) was a general term for those mental process whereby an attached experience is brought into relation with an already acquired and familiar conceptual system (Encoding, mapping, categorizing, inference, assimilation and accommodation, attribution, etc).1.11.2 Miller sites Webster’s International Dictionary (2nd edition): “a metaphor may be regard as a compressed simile, the comparison implied in the former being explicit in the latter. In the making the comparison explicit is the work of the designer and reader”.“In principle, three steps: recognition, reconstruction, and interpretation, must be taken in understating metaphors, although the simplest instance the processing may occur so rapidly that all three blend into a single mental act.” When we face a new metaphor (building) a new context with its own vocabulary is presented, one which the creator must find and connect and the other which the reader must read and transfer from previous experience.
Axiom XXI. Buildings in one group often have more known versions than others. In one city exposed wide flanged steel structures may be preferred to the reinforced concrete in another. In Dubai and Qatar High rise and multi story and iconic are synonymous and know to represent commerce buildings. Iconic is the trigger for all the rest. High and rise used together recalls how the elevator and quest for grated real estate earnings encouraged the higher number of floors per single zoned building lot. 1.12.1 Prototype theory is a mode of graded categorization in cognitive science, where some members of a category are more central than others. For example, when asked to give an example of the concept furniture, chair is more frequently cited than, say, stool.” I asked a New Yorker to give an example of an office building and they answered the Empire State Building it would be because of its height, and reputation, In fact the office building and not the “church “building shape has come to be a metaphor of the city. New York is an office building city. I can see only a flash glimpse and I will know it is Manhattan.


1.12.2 Their metaphor “cigarettes are time bombs” cigarettes are assigned to a category of time bombs, what the time bomb being a prototypical example of the set of things which can abruptly cause serious damage at some point in the future.”1.12.3 “Metaphors are generally used to describe something new by reference to something familiar (Black, 1962b), not just in conversation, but in such diverse areas as science and psychotherapy. Metaphors are not just nice, they are necessary. They are necessary for casting abstract concepts in terms of the apprehendable, as we do, for example, when we metaphorically extend spatial concepts and spatial terms to the realms of temporal concepts and temporal terms”. Most designers of shelters are predisposed to the geometry of the rectangle and its variations (with exceptions of amorphic and ergonometric) and present the completed design as its offspring and/or compounded variations. The built variation certainly refers to its base and vice versa. It is not just nice but necessary; otherwise it could not be built. Most building types and classical orders from Egypt, Greece and Rome to the skewed iconic towers of the emirates hearken back to their essence as a kind of rectangle.
Axiom XXII. Without have an apriori parte a design may evolve until a final design is achieved which is no more representative as whole from any other building of its type. Escarlata Partablela of Toledo brought me, a picnic lunch and her guitar to a small mountain across from her city.  She urged me to sketch while she serenaded. After a while I noticed her wry smile as she scanned my sketches and when I noticed how familiar they looked she confessed that she had sat me down on the very spot El Greco sat to sketch “View Of Toledo”.
Arab “tentness” and “home-sweet-home” map basics from the “home-sweet-home” to the Arabness to make all the bits and pieces be understood.
Architects choose building elements from catalogs and in the most metaphoric circumstances designs elements form scratch. Metaphor buildings may or may not be composed of element metaphors and buildings which are analogies may of or may not have elements designed metaphorically. However, it is less likely that an analogues design will contain metaphorical elements.
Architects and clients begin their conversation by finding both the abstract and commonplace to condition, model, and purpose and describe the operations. Selecting existing commonplace and choosing special design is determined by which can be analogous and which do not exist.
1.13.1 Much of architectural making of metaphors is a matter of mapping, diagramming and combining to conclude the validity of combining and matching unlike materials, shapes, & systems. In this way any one of the metaphors and the whole system of bridging and carrying over is metaphoric.1.13.2 Metaphor is reasoning using abstract characters whereas reason by analogy is a straight forward extension of its use in commonplace reasoning.1.13.3 In processing analogy, people implicitly focus on certain kinds of commonalities and ignore others”.1.13.4 An analogy is a kind of highly selective similarity where we focus on certain commonalities and ignore others. The commonality is no that they are both built out of bricks but that they both take in resources to operate and to generate their products.1.13.5 On the creative architect’s side: “The central idea is that an analogy is a mapping of knowledge from one domain (the base) into another (the target) such that a system of relations that holds among the base objects also holds among the target objects”.
On the user’s side in interpreting an analogy, people seek to put objects of the base in one-to-one correspondence with the objects of the targets as to obtain the maximum structural match 1.13.6 “The corresponding objects in the base and target need not resemble each other; rather object correspondences are determined by the like roles in the matching relational structures.” 1.13.7 “Thus, an analogy is a way of aligning and focusing on rational commonalities independently of the objects in which those relationships are embedded.” 1.13.8 “Central to the mapping process is the principle of “systematicity: people prefer to map systems of predicates favored by higher-order relations with inferential import (the Arab tent), rather that to map isolated predicates. The systematicity principle reflects a tacit preference for coherence and inferential power in interpreting analogy”. 1.13.9“No extraneous associations: only commonalities strengthen an analogy. Further relations and associations between the base and target- for example, thematic consecutions- do not contribute to the analogy.”
Axiom XXIII. More often than not designers are influenced by the existence of similar types than to re-invent themselves from scratch. Architects design by translating concepts into two dimensional graphics that which ultimately imply a multidimensional future reality. She tests the horizontal and vertical space finding accommodation and commonality of adjacency, connectivity and inclusiveness. 
 It is the commonplace and not the abstract necessity that communicates more readily. The architect is challenged to imbue in the design the more subtle analogy then the obvious.  1.14.1 Interaction view” of metaphor where metaphors work by applying to the principle (literal) subject of the metaphor a system of “associated implications” characteristic of the metaphorical secondary subject. These implications are typically provided by the received “commonplaces” (ordinary; undistinguished or uninteresting; without individuality: a commonplace person.); about the secondary subject: ‘The success of the metaphor rests on its success in conveying to the listener (Reader) some quieter defined respects of similarity or analogy between the principle and secondary subject.”  1.14.2 Metaphors simply impart their commonplace not necessity to their similarity or analogous.
Axiom XXIV. Architectural metaphors are all about names, titles, and the access to that the work provides for the reader to learn and develop. At its best the vocabulary of the parts and whole of the work is an encyclopedia and cultural building block. The work incorporates (is imbued with) the current state of man’s culture and society which is an open book for the reader. The freedom of both the creator and reader to dub and show is all part of the learning experience of the metaphor. 
However objective, thorough and scientific the designer the design tools the work gets dubbed with information we may call style, personality, and identity above and beyond the program and its basic design. It is additional information engrafted into the form not necessarily overtly and expressly required. Dubbing (imbuing) may occur in the making of metaphors as a way in which the design itself is conceived and brought together. Dubbing may in fact be the process which created the work as an intuitive act. Imbuing is often what distinguishes the famous from the ordinary architect and the way the architect dubs is what critics calls the art [G] of architecture. 1.15.1“Dubbing” (invest with any name, character, dignity, or title; style; name; call)   and “epistemic access” (relating to, or involving knowledge; cognitive.).
“When dubbing is abandoned the link between language and the world disappears”, adding a sound track to a film is the best use of the word where the picture remains but the experience of the whole is changed.  Now we have both picture and sound. Today’s works of architecture are minimal and only by dubbing the program can functionally superficial  non-minimal features be added However, the architect’s artistry (way of design, proportioning, arranging spaces, selections of materials, buildings systems, etc. can be dubbed to enhance an otherwise “plain vanilla” solution.
Axiom XXV. Climbing the stairs of a pyramid in Mexico City or a fire stair in a high rise is essentially the same except for the impact of its context and what the stair connects (create and base) and the object on which the stair ascends and descends.
Little old ladies in the tiniest Italian village can tell in the minutest detail all about every building, street and area. She has learned and passed on the “knowledge” from her ancestors and is as trained as its creators but in a totally different way. Hers is the act of perception and reader who must recreate and challenge her memory and recollections. She does not have to work at design but at reliving and imagining the design process to find the details and the whole of the building and its social, political and chronological context.  Structural engineers design from the top down so as to accumulate the additive loads to the consecutive lower members and ultimately the foundation which bears it all.
Conceptual design and first impressions both begin with the general and go to the specific.Architecture combines and confirms the secular (of this time), “how things really are” with the gestalt of personal, social, community and private importance. If art is the making of metaphors and it has no real use then how significant is architecture with both “reality” and fantasy/ imagination combined and confirmed by its very existence. 1.16.1 Pylyshyn explains: “…………….consider new concepts as being characterized in terms of old ones (plus logical conjunctives)” 2.0 As William J. Gordon points out we make the strange familiar by talking about one thing in terms of another. Pylyshyn: "On the other hand, if it were possible to observe and to acquire new “knowledge” without the benefit of these concepts (conceptual schemata (an underlying organizational pattern or structure; conceptual framework) which are the medium of thought. 1.16.2 “Knowledge” would not itself be conceptual or be expressed in the medium of thought, and therefore it would not be cognitively structured, integrated with other knowledge, or even comprehended. Hence, it would be intellectually inaccessible”. In other words we would not know that we know. Where knowing is the Greek for suffer, or experience. This was the Greek ideal proved in Oedipus; “through suffering man learns”; we know that we know. Therefore, when we observe that architecture makes metaphors we mean that we know that we know that works exists and we can read authors messages. We learn the work. 
1.16.3 Pulling from three dimensional and two dimensional  means and methods, from asymmetrical and symmetrical, and from spatial and volumetric design principles the architect assembles metaphor metaphorically by associating and carrying-over these principles applying to the current program to lift and stretch the ideas into space and across the range of disassociated ideas and concepts making a new and very strange metaphor unlike anything ever created yet filled with thousands of familiar signs and elements that make it work . 1.16.4 About the difference between words (which are limited and specific to concepts Pylyshyn   notes: “…in the case of words there is a component of reason and choice which mediates between cognitive content and outward expression.  
I can choose what words I use, whereas I cannot in the same sense choose in terms of which I represent the world.” So architects and readers deal with materials, structures, systems and leave the concepts to a variety of possible outcomes. 1.16.5 About a “top-down strategy” called “structured programming” in computer science allows for a point of entry into a the development of a new idea where you begin with an idea and after testing and developing that idea bringing everyday knowledge to bear on the development of theoretical ideas with some confidences that they are new either incoherent nor contradictory, and furthermore with some way of exploring what they entail. 1.16.6 Explaining this approach as a “skyhook-skyscraper" construction of science from the roof down to the yet unconstructed foundations” describes going from the general to the specific in and decreasing general to an increasing amount of detail and pragmatic evidence, referents, claims and resolutions. 1.16.7 “The difference between literal and metaphorical description lies primarily in such pragmatic consideration as (1) the stability, referential specificity, and general acceptance of terms: and (2) the perception, shared by those who use the terms, that the resulting description characterizes the world as it really is, rather than being a convenient way of talking about it, or a way of capturing superficial resemblances”. 1.16.8 Pylyshyn asserts that: “metaphor induces a (partial) equivalence between two known phenomenons; a literal account describes the phenomenon in authentic terms in which it is seen.
Axiom XXVI. Modern architecture wants to express the truth about the building’s systems, materials, open life styles, use of light and air and bringing nature into the buildings environment, not to mention ridding building of the irrelevant and time worn cliches of building design decoration, and traditional principles of classical architecture as professed by the Beaux-Arts movement. For equipoise “Unity, symmetry and balance” were replaced by “asymmetrical tensional relationships” between, “dominant, subdominant and tertiary” forms and the results of science and engineering influence on architectural design, a new design metaphor was born. The Bauhaus found the metaphor in all the arts, the commonalities in making jewelry, furniture, architecture, interior design, decoration, lighting, industrial design, etc.1.17.1 “Analogical transfer theory (“instructive metaphors create an analogy between a to-be-learned- system (target domain) and a familiar system (metaphoric domain
Axiom XXVII. Metaphorical teaching strategies often lead to better and more memorable learning than do explicit strategies which explains why urbanites have a “street smarts” that is missing from sub-urban; they actually learn from the metaphors that make up the context. Of course this is in addition to the social aspects of urbanity which is again influenced by the opportunities of urban metaphors: parks, play grounds, main streets, broadways, avenues, streets, sidewalks, plazas, downtown, markets, street vendors, etc. When visiting new cities in another country one is immediately confronted with metaphors which create similarities as interactive and comparative as we seek to find similarities and differences with what we already known in our home context.
Visiting, sketching and writing about over seventy European cities I noted the character and ambiance of each and the differences between one and another. Each metaphor was of the past’s impact on the future with the unique design of crafts, building materials, and skills that were peculiar to their times but were no enjoyed in the present. In this context there are the natives who experience these metaphors all their lives and the visitor who is fist learning the lesson of these metaphors. Both experience these in different ways.
The native knows the place and comprehends both the old and the new knowledge domains whereas the visitor the very same metaphor may be interactive, creating the similarity under construction. The visitor (this is my word) may “well be acquiring one of the constitutive or residual metaphors of the place (this is my word) at the same time; same metaphor, different experiences. 1.18.1 “Radically new knowledge results from a change in modes of representation of knowledge, whereas a comparative metaphor occurs within the existing representations which serve to render the comparison sensible. The comparative level of metaphor might allow for extensions of already existing knowledge, but would not provide a new form of understanding.
Axiom XXVIII. Many architects can make metaphors to overcome cognitive limitations and resort to graphics rather than language to explain the metaphor. Metaphor as a design act serves as a graphic tool for overcoming cognitive limitations.  As most artists their language is beyond speech and to the peculiar craft of their art of which their practice and exercise develops new capacity and opportunity to teach and express thought outside of the linguistics but is nevertheless perhaps as valuable and worthy.
Architects both compose the program and reify its contents from words to diagrams and diagrams to two dimensional graphics and three dimensional models to reify and bring- out (educate) the user’s mind and fulfillment of unspoken and hidden needs.
Needs which many or may not have been programmed and intended; the metaphor is the final resolution until it is built and used. Then it is subject to further tests of time, audience, markets, trends, fashions, social politics, demographic shifts, economics, and cultural changes.  1.19.1Metaphors have a way of extending our capacities for communications. 1.19.2 “Speech is a fleeting, temporarily linear means of communicating, coupled with the fact that that, as human beings, we are limited in how much information we can maintain and process at any one time in active memory, means that as speakers we can always benefit from tools for efficiently bringing information into active memory, encoding it for communication, and recording it, as listeners, in some memorable fashion.” 1.19.3 Metaphor is the solution insofar as it encodes and captures the information:” transferring chunks of experience from well –known to less well known contexts; 1.19.4 The vividness thesis, which maintains that  metaphors permit and impress a more memorable learning due to the greater imagery or concreteness or vividness of the “full-blooded experience” conjured up by the metaphorical vehicle; 1.19.5 and the inexpressibility thesis, in which it is noted that certain aspects of natural experience are never encoded in language and that metaphors carry with them the extra meanings never encoded in language. One picture is worth a thousand words and how valuable are the arts as makers of who we are as a people, society and time. 1.19.6“The mnemonic (intended to assist the memory)   function of metaphor as expressed by Ortony’s vividness thesis also points to the value of metaphor as a tool for producing durable learning from unenduiring speech
Footnotes to the 28 dominant Axioms:
Using the below book’s compendium of relevant scholars the analysis follows:
1.0 Metaphor and Thought: Second Edition
Edited by Andrew Ortony: School of Education and social Sciences and
Institute for the learning Sciences: North Western University
Published by Cambridge University Press
First pub: 1979 Second pub: 1993
1.1 Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy: by Donald A. SchonIn his paintbrush as pump discussion as a metaphor claims that by attaching to the paintbrush the way of a pump the researchers were able to better improve the design of the paintbrush as an instrument which pumps paint on the surface. By describing painting in an unfamiliar way they were able to make what was already somewhat known dominant. They now saw the brush as a pump. Before then they seemed to be different things now they were the same. To arrive at this conclusion they had to observe the working of the brush and make the observation and then apply it to the mechanism. The paintbrush was now seen as a pump and the act of painting, pumping. Schon refers to this a generative metaphor. The generative metaphor is the name for a process of symptoms of a particular kind of seeing-as, the “meta-pherein” or “carrying –over” of frames or perspectives from one domain of experience to another. This process he calls generative which many years earlier 2.0 WJ Gordon called the Metaphoric Way of Knowing and 2.1 Paul Weiss called associations.
In this sense both in interior design and architecture after assimilating the program the very first step in the design process is to develop a “parte’ (An ex parte presentation is a communication directed to the merits or outcome of a proceeding …it’s the resolution of the argument consisting of claims, inferences, evidence and warrants to the inference) .It is a “top-down” approach later followed by designs which meet the parte. The parte may follow the design process and be presented to sell the product.  Commercial retail shops maximize both visual and physical access to their merchandise by the use of glass and positioning entrances convenient to potential shoppers’ paths of travel. Attached or detached the idea of the shop as a flickering flame and welcoming transformed shops prior image as formidable container into which one ventured for surprise and possible revelation.
With this is in mind designers of malls extend this accessibility to nodes on highways and close to their prime markets. Commercial retail is no perceived as an attractive recreational experience and as such provides shoppers with a secondary perception of the metaphor, shoppers now “carry-over” from play, rest and relaxation to fulfilling their needs and necessities. Michael Angelo in Qatar is designed in a Renaissance style with a huge domed entry, shop facades and themes of the period, with paintings, sculptures and decoration reminding patrons that they are as royalty and in the lap of luxury. This was also adopted by the Loews theatre chain when all of their theaters were decorated with red velvet wallpaper, huge mahogany, Tudor chairs; chandeliers, plush Aubusson rugs, beautiful crystal and porcelain lamps and accessories. During the depression and recovery patrons would come and spent the day in the theater (Palace was not just the name of one of the down town theaters but its description)  to not only see the movie, but buy refreshments and lounge in the many beautiful parlors and lounges.
In the middle of the twentieth century William Levitt revolutionized and created the home building business as an industry applying mass production of the home ideal containing what the Park Ave penthouses had; built in closets, complete kitchens with dishwashers, and an even better, an attached garage. Not only that but every single house was identical so that all were part of a harmonious single minded community. It was called Levittown, the miracle suburb on Long Island that opened the way for the middle class to move out of New York City.
They came to escape crowded and own their own home, cook with their own appliances, mow their own lawn. They had GI loans in hand, babies on the way, and a ‘50s brand of pioneering spirit.Similar stories can be told of the way the modern office building was catapulted by the invention of the fly –wheel elevator by Otis and the conversion form iron to steel for building structures to increase real estate profits in as many as there are layers by building office space in layers up to the sky as zoning, elevator and engineering would allow.
4.0 WWW; “In Europe the Grand Central Railroad Terminal were built and then a clone brought t to New York City as part of the Park Ave Manhattan Development project including ten underground floors bringing freight, shopping, auto parking, etc underground and into the center of the city providing a hub extending from the thirties up to the nineties under Park Ave. This grand scheme was only partially carried out but forever transformed Park Ave from a boulevard of swanky three story mansions to a sophisticated high rent district of high-rise residences.
The first Grand Central Terminal was built in 1871 by shipping and railroad magnate Cornelius Vanderbilt. A "secret" sub-basement known as M42 lies under the Terminal, containing the AC to DC converters used to supply DC traction current to the Terminal designed to replicate the galleried hall of a 13th-century Florentine palace.  The train shed, north and east of the head house, had two innovations in U.S. practice: the platforms were elevated to the height of the cars, and the roof was a balloon shed with a clear span over all of the tracks. In order to accommodate ever-growing rail traffic into the restricted Midtown area, William J. Wilgus, chief engineer of the New York Central Railroad took advantage of the recent electrification technology to propose a novel scheme: a bi-level station below ground. Arriving trains would go underground under  Park Avenue, and proceed to an upper-level incoming station if they were mainline trains or to a lower-level platform if they were suburban trains. In addition, turning loops within the station itself obviated complicated switching moves to bring back the trains to the coach yards for servicing. Departing mainline trains reversed into upper-level platforms in the conventional way. Necessity being the mother of invention burying electric trains underground brought an additional advantage to the railroads: the ability to sell above-ground air rights over the tracks and platforms for real-estate development. With time, all the area around Grand Central saw prestigious apartment and office buildings being erected, which turned the area into the most desirable commercial office district of Manhattan”.
In each of the above instances a metaphor was created by attaching another concept to the primary function. Once the projects were thought of in that added way the metaphor was born and under it the many metaphorical spin-offs and sub metaphors. Not to mention the metaphor of the Empire State and the overall iconic image of Manhattan and it’s New York State. Even today when we say New York we mean downtown Manhattan. The city is” being pumped” by its metaphors.
3.0 “Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition; by Professor Dr. David Zarefsky of Northwestern University and published by The Teaching Company, 2005 of Chantilly, Virginia
1.2 The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language: by Michael J. Reddy.
1.2.1 A dead metaphor is one which really does not contain any fresh metaphor insofar as it does not really “get thoughts across”; “language seems rather to help one person to construct out of his own stock of mental stuff something like a replica, or copy,  of someone’s else’s thoughts”.
The landscape is replete with an infinite number of inane replicas which render readers dull, passive and disinterested (How many times will you read the same book?)    Mass housing, commercial office buildings and highways are the main offenders leaving the owner designed and built residence, office, factory, fire station, pump house, as unique and delightful relief’s in an otherwise homogenized context. The reader stops reading because it is the same as before. Not reading the copy yet seeing the copy and the collective of copies focuses rather on the collective as the metaphor as the overall project which also may be “dead”.
In its time, Levittown’s uniqueness and the sub-structures sameness were its’ metaphor. It was alive and today still lives as new residents remodel upgrade and exhume their “dead” to become a “living” metaphor.
Disregarding this, the architects of public housing created dead metaphors and blamed the lack of pride of ownership for their failure.  In revitalization teams of revivalist have discovered there is more than turf and proprietorship. Peculiarization, personalization and authentication are required for a metaphor to live. In this is the art of making metaphors for the architect of public works. His metaphor must “read” the cultural, social and rightness of the metaphor’s proposed context. In modern architecture no one was better able than Phillip Johnson in his Seagram Building and Museum of Modern Art (MOMA). Johnson's early influence as a practicing architect was his use of glass; his masterpiece was the Glass House (1949) he designed as his own residence in New Canaan, Connecticut, a profoundly influential work.
The concept of a Glass House set in a landscape with views as its real “walls” had been developed by many authors in the German Glasarchitektur drawings of the 1920s, and already sketched in initial form by Johnson's mentor Mies. The building is an essay in minimal structure, geometry, proportion, and the effects of transparency and reflection. Johnson was the head of my Yale thesis jury and my primary design associate on a project in Puerto Rico and when I returned to Manhattan he invited me to work with him on the design of Roosevelt Island.  Defining the operation of metaphor Reddy says that 1.2.2 “a conduit is a minor framework which overlooks words as containers and allows ideas and feelings to flow, unfettered and completely disembodied, into a kind of ambient space between human heads. There are also individual pipes which allow mental content to escape into, or enter from, this ambient space. Thoughts and feelings are reified into an external 1.2.3 “idea space” and where thoughts and feelings are reified in this external space, so that they exist independent of any need for living human beings to think or feel them”.  This most closely resembles works of architecture and what goes inside and outside works. “Somewhere we are peripherally aware that words do no really have insides (“it is quit foreign to common sense to think of words as having “insides” ……………major version of the metaphoric which thoughts and emotions are always contained in something”) In his examples one can see a variety of putting ideas onto paper meaning that the ideas are out of the head of the creator and onto paper to be read and then transferred.
Architecturally this is best reflected in the example pointed out by Vincent Scully describing the geometry of urban blocks and the location of building masses that reflect one anther is geometry to sharply define the volume and mass of the block and experience of city streets. The streets are defined by the 90 degree corners, planes and tightness of the cubes and rectangles to the city plan. In this way the metaphor of the overall and each building design no mater where it’s location on the block; no matter when or in what sequence the metaphoric constraint appropriateness, zoning formulas, all lead the ideas to flow form one to another architect. Furthermore, the reader is able to “appreciate” the street, its geometry, limits and linearity as an idea on the conduit from the architect, through the metaphor and to the reader.
Likewise a visit to the Tyrol will immediately locate the conduit of design style as practically all chalets, houses and villas have identical roofs, walls, balconies, windows, flower boxes and doors. The conduit dominates and connectors builders, designers, contractors, suppliers and buyers.  That conduit is the dominant theme that unites all the villages.
Interior decoration in the Bronx and Brooklyn in the middle of the twentieth century was dominated by wall to wall drapes, cornices, valences, upholstered furniture covered with slip covers, ketch and bric-a-brac figures and “charkas” known affectionately as “Bronx Renaissance”. The conduit that connected these outcomes were are system of city-wide gift stores, national  gift market, central fabric suppliers and workshops and the heroic drapery hangers (of which I was one) completed their work.  1.3 In Programs and Manifestos on 20th-Century Architecture about Glasarchitektur Ulrich Conrad' writes: 1.3.1 “It's a strange thought, that culture is a product of man-made, unnatural things, that instead of culture shaping the architecture, it is the architecture (the environment) that shapes the culture.  I would guess it makes sense after some  amount of years....maybe its in cycles: At first, culture creates the architecture, x years pass by, and then the architecture-environment modifies the culture. Then new modified culture creates new architecture, etc.
(2): But then if we only build steel, glass structures, wouldn't we suffer from the glass metropolis in the future, when another form or material is introduced to replace steel, concrete and glass?”
The affect of the metaphor on other metaphors with all its links and consequences is manifest in the conduit which leads to one after the other and a continuation of the first.
1.4 The contemporary theory of metaphor by George Lakoff,
About novel images and image metaphors he quotes 1.4.1 Andre Breton’s “My wife……whose waist is an hourglass” he says …..”By mapping the structure of one domain onto the structure of another”, “This is a superimposition of the image of an hour glass onto the image of a woman’s waist by virtue of their common shape. As before the metaphor is conceptual; it is not the works themselves, but the mental images. Here, we have the mental image of an hour glass and of a woman and we map the middle of the hourglass into the waist of the woman. The words are prompts for us to map from one conventional image to another”.  Lakoff concludes that “ all metaphors are invariant with respect to their cognitive topology, that is, each metaphorical mapping preserves image-schema structure:”  Likewise when we look at the geometrical formal parts of an architectural metaphor we note those common elements where fit, coupling and joints occur. We remember that which exemplified the analogous match.
This observation of the metaphor finds that the commonality, commonplace and similarity are the chief focus of the metaphor. As Frank Lloyd Wright designed his Prairie architecture with Dominant horizontal axis thrust to his structure as common to the horizontal axis of the land upon which the building sits.
Thus the two horizontal axes, the land and then the building were wed by their commonality of horizontality. In a city of sky scrapers architects parallel their new shafts with those adjacent to with space between to form the architectonic of verticality, canyons and shafts where the commonalty of all the vertical shafts bind them together. The red tile roofs of the Italian Riviera, California’s Mission Architecture are other such examples of commonalities, commonalities which are synonymous with their identity and expected class. We note the 90 degree angles and shape that slide into one another. We note the way like metals, clips and angles fit; the way ceiling ducts are made to fit between structures and hung ceiling, etc.
While it is less possible to spontaneously imagine the way we could relate the human form to a building when we circulate through its halls, rooms and closets its accommodation to our needs and necessities; to our self preservation and the maintenance of the building become apparent. We can map the building structure to ours by finding the one commonality amongst all the others. Very often we will hear someone say this place is” me”. The common image has been located and the fit made.  Describing generic specific structure he notes that they are under the Invariance Principle and concludes that the way to arrive at generic-level schemes for some knowledge structure is to extract its image its image-schematic structure.  This is called the Generic is Specific Structure. He adds that it is an extremely common mechanism for comprehending the general from the specific. So what you can deduce for part you can assume is true of the whole.
So if the facade of building is in one order of architecture you can presume the other part are in a like arrangement and that the whole is of the classic order including its plan, section and details. What are involved here are mapping, channeling and one idea from one level to another.
1.4.2 According to Lakoff plausible accounts rather than scientific results is why we have conventional metaphors and why conceptual systems contain one set of metaphorical mappings than another. An architectural  work establishes its own vocabulary which once comprehended become the way in which we experience the work, finding its discrepancies and fits and seeking the first and all the other similar elements. We do judge the work as to have Consistency, integrity and aesthetics. Buildings which do not have these characteristics do not work as metaphors.  The relevance of studying architecture as the making of metaphors is to provide practitioners, owners, and mainly those that shape the built environment that they have a somber and serious responsibility to fill our world with meaning and significance, That what they do matters as in this first of Layoff’s results (Please note the application of Layoff’s vocabulary, definitions and descriptions related to linguistics metaphorically applied to architecture): Summary of results:

1.4.3 Metaphor is the main mechanism through which we comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning.  For example, as this is so for linguistics(spoken or written), then I infer that it must be true for non linguistics ,and I give as evidence the built habitats and their architectural antecedents, being as how what is built is first thought and conceived separately from building as thinking and conceiving is separate from the outward expression . Whether it is one or thousands public cultures is influenced, bound and authenticated by its’ metaphors. Not withstanding “idolatry” the metaphors are the contexts of life’s dramas and as our physical bodies are read by our neighbors finding evidence for inferences about social, political and philosophical claims about our culture and its place in the universe.  One of many warrants is recognizing, and operating the front door of a castle as we would the front door of our apartment; another warrant is the adaptive uses of obsolete buildings to new uses as a factory to multi- family residential uses, etc. We see the common space and structure and reason the building codes written to protect the health , safety and welfare  of the general; public can be applied and the found to be re-zoned to  fit the new uses in the fabric of the mixed-use zoned area; “comprehend abstract concepts (building codes, design layouts, and building codes)  and perform abstract reasoning”. (Design and planning).
1.4.4 Much subject matter, from the most mundane to the most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor. Even an anonymous Florentine back ally’s brick wall, carved door, wall fountain, shuttered windows, building height, coloration of the fresco.  1.4.5 Metaphor is fundamentally conceptual, not linguistic, in nature. After many years living in Saudi Arabia and Europe and away from Brooklyn I visited Park Slope.  I saw the stoops ascending to their second floors, the carved wood and glass doors, the iron grilles, the four story walls, the cementous surrounded and conventionally pained widows but what I saw was only what I described. I did not recognize what it was; it was all unfamiliar like a cardboard stage setting. I did not have a link to their context nor the scenarios of usage and the complex culture they represented. I neither owned nor personalized what I was seeing. All of this came to me without language but a feeling of anomie for what I was seeing and me in their presence, years later I enthusiastically escorted my Saudi colleagues thorough Washington, DC’s Georgetown showing them the immaculately maintained townhouses. I was full of joy, perceptually excited but my colleagues laughed and were totally disinterested. These were not their metaphors and they could hardly wait to leave the area to find a good Persian restaurant to have dinner. They, like my self years before did not see what I saw and more relevantly did not “get-the-concept”.  Both of the above anti-metaphor cases were conceptualized without words as would be positive cases of metaphor.
1.4.6 Metaphorical language is a surface manifestation of conceptual metaphor.
As language is to speech so are buildings to architecture where each has a content and inner meaning of the hole as well as each of its parts. As each word, each attachment, plain, material, structure had first been conceived to achieve some purpose and fill some need. Hidden from the reader is the inner psychology, social background, etc of the man when speaking and the programming deign and contacting process from the reader of a building metaphor.  As in completing an argument the reader perceives the inferences with its warrants and connects the evidence of the seen to the claims to make the resolution of the whole, all of which are surmised from the surface.  
1.4.7 through much of our conceptual system is metaphorical; a significant part of it is non-metaphorical. Metaphorical understanding is grounded in non-metaphorical understanding.  The science of the strength of materials, mathematics, structures, indeterminate beams, truss design, mechanical systems, electricity, lighting, etc. are each understood metaphorically and there precepts applied metaphorically but often random selections, trails and feasibility are random and rather in search of the metaphor with out knowing it is or not a metro and fit to be part of the metaphor at hand. On the other hand we may select on or another based on non-metaphorical, empirical test and descriptions of r properties. We then try to understand the metaphor in the selection, its commonality, how it contributes to  the new application, how its has properties within itself which are alone strange and unrelated yet when couple with the whole or part of the created metaphor contribute to metaphor.
From example in the last 20 years store front's tempered glass has been enhanced, thickened, strengthen and is now used in large quantities frameless curtain walls on private and massive public properties. A non-metaphorical building product with one used in one context has been taken out of a non-metaphorical understanding of properties and use to apply to another.  Our primary experiences grounded in  the laws of physics of gravity , plasticity, liquids, winds, sunlight, etc all contribute to our metaphorical understanding often the conceptual commonality accepting the strange . In Belize, faced with a an unskilled workforce and the government wanting fancy houses for its government staff I choose a plethora of pre-engineered building components form non architectural catalogs as gigantic drainage  pipes , sawn in half and used for roofs and in Tennessee relocated the country look of indignities building with US Plywood's "texture 1-11".  1.4.8 Metaphor allows us to understand a relatively abstract or inherently unstructured subject matter in terms of a more concrete or at least more highly structured subject matter.    Owner occupied specialized works of architectural metaphors may begin with long periods of research, observations, and analysis ; conclusions and redesign and re-thinking of existing or utility of new systems; setting our system feasibility, pricing and meeting budgets, palling and programming, diagramming and design of sub systems and systems but when complete the metaphor is accessible, usable and compatible.
The whole of the metaphor is designed in such a way as to clarify, orient and provide “concrete” reification of all the design parameters into a “highly structured’ work, a work which homogenizes all these diverse and disjointed systems and operations into a well working machine. Building types such as pharmaceutical, petrochemical laboratories, data research centers, hospitals, space science centers, prisons, etc are such relatively abstract unstructured uses which only careful assembly can order. Faced with both housing and creating identify the Greeks and the Romans derived an Order of Architecture which we now call the Classical order of Architecture.
A classical order (originally derived from Egypt) is one of the ancient styles of building design in the classical tradition, distinguished by their proportions and their characteristic profiles and details, but most quickly recognizable by the type of column and capital employed. Each style also has its proper entablature, consisting of architrave, frieze and cornice. From the sixteenth century onwards, theorists recognized five orders.


From its inception design professionals will look outside of their field and the field of the proposed project to find organism, technologies provides a conceptual handle as the inner working of microchips, mainframes, submarines, rockets and jet propulsion, circus, markets, battleships and air-craft carriers, etc.  Long before the use of computers after faced with a complex way of teams of service clerks communicating on the phone, accessing and sharing files and instantly recording all transactions I invented a huge a round table where all clerks would be facing the center where would be sitting a kind of “Lazy Susan” . I choose the Lazy Suzan because of my experience in Chinese restaurants and selling Lazy Suzan’s as a young sales assistant in a gift store in the Bronx. As a result of the overall design of which this was one part the company’s business increased and prospered. One of the executive vice presidents befriended me and late went on to head the New York Stock Exchange. The installation was a success and was used until the company closed its doors many years later.
Layoff’s observations emphasize the instinctive, impulsive and intuitive nature of the architect’s metaphor that takes place in its creation and use.  1.4.9 Like the onomatopoeic metaphors Lakoff’s mappings of conceptions override the overt spoken and descriptive and rely much more on Mnemonics (something intended to assist the memory, as a verse or formula) . However, for Lakoff the assistance comes from something much more primordial (constituting a beginning; giving origin to something derived or developed; original; elementary: primordial forms of life) to the person’s or societies experiences. These become the matrix (encyclopedic) of schemas (in argument; the warrants {where a warrant is a license to make an inference and as such must have reader's agreement} supporting the inferences (mappings) where in the metaphor becomes real). In this way the reader maps, learns and personalizes the strange into the realm of the familiar. The reader does so by the myriad of synaptic connections he is able to apply to that source.  Hence architects translate their architectural conception from philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled drawings and then to real life full scale multi dimensions convention consisting of conventional materials, building elements (doors, windows, stairs, etc).
As maps are the result of cartographers rendering existing into a graphics for reading so is mapping to the reading of metaphors where the reader renders understanding from one source to another. Doing so mentally and producing a rendition of understanding (as a pen and ink of a figure) not as a graphic but a conceptual understanding.  Reader sees in a critical way the existing culling through and encyclopedia of referents to make the true relationship; the mapping which best renders the reality; the relationship which informs and clarifies as the map the location, configuration and characteristic of the reality.  As the cartographer seeks lines, symbols and shadings to articulate the reality so the reader choices of heretofore unrelated and seemingly unrelated  are found to have and essence common to both the reality and the rendition so that the metaphor can be repeated becoming the readers new vocabulary .
In fact architects do the opposite as graphic renditions are made of synapses between amorphic and seemingly desperate information. Yet the process of mapping is no less intense as architect review the matrix of conditions, operation , ideal and goals of the thesis to find similarities and differences , commonalities, and potential for one to resonate with another to make a “resolution” on the experience of a cognitive mapping which becomes the metaphor, parte and overwhelming new reality.
The new reality is the target of the source and finally can be read.  In the case of the birth of an infant metaphor readers may find a wide variety of source information which is germane to their own experience.  Before the public ever sees the constructed metaphor Building Officials, manufactures, city planners, owners, estimators, general contractors, specialty contractors, environmentalist, neighbors and community organization frost read the drawings and map their observations to their issues to form a slanted version of the reality. Their mappings are based on the warrants which are their licensed to perform. Each warrant will support a different mapping (inference) and result in its own metaphor. In effect each will see a kind of reality of the proposed in the perspective of their peculiar warrant, where license is permission from authority to do something. It is assumed if one gets permission it has met the conditions, operations, ideal and goals of the proposed metaphor. Mapping is critical at this read to assure that the architect’s rendering of the program is faithful to the cognitive, lawful, physical and legal realities.  It s like a map which gets tested by scientist, navigators , pilots and engineers before they build a craft to use the map, or set out on a journey using the map.
Before the contracts start committing men and material the metaphor must map and be the metaphor meeting all expectations.  Before building, the suppliers, contractors and specialist make “shop drawings” to map the metaphor and present the graphic evidence that they can fill their claim to build for compensation.  The architect’s team now gathers reviews and coordinates all of these warrants to assure their mappings do not interfere, nullify but additively contribute to the reifying of the source to the target and build the final product, on time, on budget and within the allowed schedule.  After opening the public users have the opportunity to map any and all the information that is superficially available form the shell, to its nuts and bolts. Many enjoy reading the project while it is being constructed to read the work and conceptualize the final form the bits and pieces they observe, mapping a single task to its final outcome and so forth. So the mapping of construction by onlookers, contractors is all part of the mapping process.
Like a landscape artist [G] who gathers for the chaos of the nature into select5ed items to organize into the canvas so that the viewers will find what he saw and reconstruct so the architect and the user map their reality into a metaphor. In this way the conception of the map is the metaphor and what is made by the cartographer is a "graphic" to simplify the chaos to find the commonality.   Sifting through the program the architect seeks the “commonality” between the reality and experience to make the metaphor. Mapping is only possible when we know the “commonplace”, the commonality, the characteristic common to both, the terms that both the source and the target have in common that the mapping takes place.  As the architect structures his program, design and specifications he simultaneously structures the metaphor of his work of architecture. Architecture consists of program specifics where the conditions, operations, goals and ideals are from heretofore unrelated and distant contexts but are themselves metaphors “mapped across conceptual domains”.
As the architectural program the mappings are asymmetric and partial. The only regular pattern is their irregularity, and,  like a person can be read and understood,  once one is familiar with the personality and character, vocabulary and references, and of course the context and situation of the work  the work can also be read and understood.  About Lakoff, In cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to the understanding of one idea, or conceptual domain, in terms of another, for example, understanding quantity in terms of directionality (e.g. "prices are rising"). A conceptual domain can be any coherent organization of human experience. The regularity with which different languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be perceptually based, has led to the hypothesis that the mapping between conceptual domains corresponds to neural mappings in the brain.
This idea, and a detailed examination of the underlying processes, was first extensively explored by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in their work 1.4.9 Metaphors We Live By. Other cognitive scientists study subjects similar to conceptual metaphor under the labels "analogy" and "conceptual blending."
Lakoff continues:  7. / 1.4. 10 Each mapping (where mapping is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between constituent elements of the source and the target domain. Many elements of target concepts come from source domains and are not preexisting. To know a conceptual metaphor is to know the set of mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing.
The same idea of mapping between source and target is used to describe analogical reasoning and inferences) is a fixed set of ontological (relating to essence or the nature of being) correspondences between entities in source domain and entities in target domain.
1.4.11 *LOVE IS A JOURNEY
LIFE IS A JOURNEY
SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS ARE PLANTS
LOVE IS WAR
* 1.4.11 From Wikopedia on the www.
1.4.11 There is a list of over 100 schemas in many categories about basic human behavior, reactions and actions. These schemas are the realms in which the mappings takes place much the same as the inferences in arguments have warrants and link evidence to claims so do these schemas, architects carry-over their experiences with materials, physics, art, culture, building codes, structures, plasticity, etc. to form metaphor. Identifying conditions, operations, ideals and goals are combined to form plans, sections and elevations which are then translated in to contract documents. Later the contractors map this metaphor based on their schemes of cost, schedule and quality control into schedules and control documents.  It is not until equipment, laborers and materials are brought to the side that the metaphor starts to form. Once formed the only evidence for the user (reader) are the thousands of cues from every angle, outside and inside to enable use and understanding.
The latter half of each of these phrases invokes certain assumptions about concrete experience and requires the reader or listener to apply them to the preceding abstract concepts of love or organizing in order to understand the sentence in which the conceptual metaphor is used. Operationally,  the work’s entrance is the first clue about the sequence of experiences of the metaphor taking us to the anticipated lobby, then reception followed by sequences of increasingly private (non-communal) and remote areas until reaching the terminal destination. The very size, context and location  is couple with theme of parks, gated communities, skyscraper’s roof tops and cladding becoming a metaphor. The very outer edges of a metaphor portend of its most hidden content. Once we understand the metaphor and the mapping from the context to the form the mapping continues from entrance to the foyer and mapping from the context and cladding to every detail. We carry-over and map the metaphor as we delve deeper into its content and inner context always mapping the first to the current metaphor.
In linguistics and cognitive science, cognitive linguistics (CL) refers to the school of linguistics that understands language creation, learning, and usage as best explained by reference to human cognition in general. It is characterized by adherence to three central positions. First, it denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; second, it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization; and third, it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use.
Therefore the metaphor of architecture is inherent not in the media of the building’s presence, parts or bits and pieces but in the mind of the reader and that the articulation of the metaphor as thinking and third that our use of the metaphor increases our know ledge of the metaphor and reading metaphors comes out of practice.

The more we view paintings, ballets, symphonies, poetry, and architecture the better we become at their understanding and its metaphor further dwells in the reader while the building and its parts exist with out being understood. Extrapolating:  the writer of the speech is as the architect and the speaker is as the reader of the metaphor where the metaphor can only be experienced to be understood.  Walk though an unlit city at night and feel the quite of the building’s voices because the readers have no visual information and with access to the closed buildings the metaphor is a potential with being a reality. Yet the potential for cognition does exist and is real but is not understood apart from its experience.  1.4.11 Humans interact with their environments based on their physical dimensions, capabilities and limits. The field of anthropometric (human measurement) has unanswered questions, but it's still true that human physical characteristics are fairly predictable and objectively measurable. Buildings scaled to human physical capabilities have steps, doorways, railings, work surfaces, seating, shelves, fixtures, walking distances, and other features that fit well to the average person.
1.4.11 Humans also interact with their environments based on their sensory capabilities. The fields of human perception systems, like perceptual psychology and cognitive psychology, are not exact sciences, because human information processing is not a purely physical act, and because perception is affected by cultural factors, personal preferences, experiences, and expectations, so human scale in architecture can also describe buildings with sightlines, acoustic properties, task lighting, ambient lighting, and spatial grammar that fit well with human senses. However, one important caveat is that human perceptions are always going to be less predictable and less measurable than physical dimensions. 1.4.11 Basically the scale of habitable metaphors is the intrinsic relation between the human figure and his surroundings as measured, proportioned and sensed. It is dramatically represented by Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man is based on the correlations of ideal human proportions with geometry described by the ancient Roman architect Vitruvius, representation of the human figure encircled by both a circumference encapsulating its feet to its outstretched fingertips where the whole is then encased in a square.
This scale is read in elevations, sections, plans, and whole and based realized in the limited and bound architectural space. These spaces and their variations of scale are where the reader perceives the architectural metaphors of compression, smallness, grandeur, pomposity, equipoise, balance, rest, dynamics, direction, staticness, etc.  In his Glass House,  Phillip Johnson extended that space to the surrounding nature, making the walls the grass and surrounding trees, St. Peter’s interiors is a Piranesi space. (The # # #Prisons (Carceri d'invenzione or 'Imaginary Prisons'), is a series of 16 prints produced in first and second states that show enormous subterranean vaults with stairs and mighty machines.       1.4.11 Piranesi vision takes on a Kafkaesque, Escher-like distortion, seemingly erecting fantastic labyrinthian structures, epic in volume, but empty of purpose. They are cappricci -whimsical aggregates of monumental architecture and ruin). Many of my pen and ink drawings were inspired by the Piranesi metaphor.  In St. Peters the spaces are so real that they imply the potential for all mankind to occupy. The scale of the patterns on the floor are proportional to the height and widths enclosing the space they overwhelm the human figure as does the Baldachino whose height soars but is well below the dome covering the building.
The metaphor is instinctively perceived, mapped and sorted by mnemonic schemas as is New York’s Radio city Music Hall designed by my former employer Edward Durrell Stone and the entrance to the Louver by IM Pei. The surrounds of offices and shops by Michael Angelo feature window and door proportionally designed to man’s scale and perfectly mitigate the universal scale of the 1.4.11 Piazza did San Marco (St. Marks Plaza). Recalling the plazas of Italy Stone designed and I developed the State University of New York in Albany which featured metered arches, columns and pilasters on buildings to mitigate the various scales of both the large and small plazas.
I remember my interview for the job where Bob Smith, his office manager proudly entertained Mr. Stone and his board with an array of my portfolio, covering all four walls of his executive conference room.
The project gave me the opportunity to plan, design and details many plazas, monumental and convenience stairs as well as the way they would be enclosed and encased to demark the plazas, plinths, terraces and porticos of the galleries and circulation areas. Like Radio City this project was a grand public works metaphor recalling the Parthenon, Rome, Venice and the many tiny urban villages I had visited including Lucca, Sienna, Florence, etc.
1.4.11 The below is where human scale in architecture is deliberately violated:
# For monumental effect. Buildings, statues, and memorials are constructed in a scale larger than life as a social/cultural signal that the subject matter is also larger than life. An extreme example is the Statue of Liberty, the Washington Monument, etc.
#For aesthetic effect. Many architects, particularly in the Modernist movement, design buildings that prioritize structural purity and clarity of form over concessions to human scale. This became the dominant American architectural style for decades. Some notable examples among many are Henry Cobb's John Hancock Tower in Boston, much of I. M. Pei's work including the Dallas City Hall, and Mies van der Rohe's Neue Nationalgalerie in Berlin. # To serve automotive scale. Commercial buildings that are designed to be legible from roadways assume a radically different shape. The human eye can distinguish about 3 objects or features per second. A pedestrian steadily walking along a 100-foot (30-meter) length of department store can perceive about 68 features; a driver passing the same frontage at 30 mph (13 m/s or 44 ft/s) can perceive about six or seven features. Auto-scale buildings tend to be smooth and shallow, readable at a glance, simplified, presented outward, and with signage with bigger letters and fewer words.  This urban form is traceable back to the innovations of developer A. W. Ross along Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles in 1920.
# =Wikopedia on the www.
8. / 1.4.12 Mappings are not arbitrary, but grounded in the body and in every day experience and knowledge. Mapping and making metaphors are synonymous. The person and not the work make the metaphor. Without the body and the experience of either the author or the reader nothing is being made. The thing does not have but the persons have the experiences. As language, craft, and skills are learned by exercise, repetition and every day application so are mappings. Mappings are not subject to individual judgment or preference: but as a result of making seeking and finding the commonality by practice.  Architects learn to associate, create and produce by years of education and practice while users have a longer history approaching and mapping for use and recognition. Yet new metaphors are difficult to assimilate without daily use and familiarity.
Often the owners of new building will provide its regular occupants with orientation, preliminary field trips and guided tours. Many buildings restrict users’ access by receptionist, locked doors and restricted areas.
It is not hard to experience a built metaphor as it is an ordinary fixture on the landscape of our visual vocabulary. It has predictable, albeit peculiar and indigenous characteristics the generic nature of the cues are anticipated.
9. /1.4.13 A conceptual system contains thousands of conventional metaphorical mappings which form a highly structured subsystem of the conceptual system.  Over the year’s society, cultures, families and individuals experience and store a plethora of mapping routines which are part of our mapping vocabulary.
As a potential user when encountering a new building type such as a hi-tech manufacturing center we call upon our highly structured subsystem to find conceptual systems which will work to navigate this particular event. Another example is as a westerner encountering a Saudi Arab home which divides the family from the public areas of the house as private. In the high tech building doors will not open and corridors divert visitors away form sensitive and secret areas. In the Arab home the visitor is kept in area meant only for non-family members and where the females may not be seen. There is a common conventional metaphorical mapping which uses a highly structured subsystem of the conceptual system. There is a similarity and an ability to accept and the constraints.  The metaphor or the work of architecture includes each and every nut and bolt, plane and volumes, space and fascia, vent and blower, beam and slab, each with there mappings parallel to operational sequences, flows representations, openings and enclosures so that they operate in tandem and compliment one another. The conventions come from the experiences of doors that open, elevators that work, stairs that are strong, floors that bear our weight, buildings that don’t topple, and basic experiences that prove verticality, horizontality, diagonals, weights of gravity, etc.
And finally Lakoff concludes the structure of metaphor claiming that:
10 / 1.4.14There are two types of mappings: conceptual mappings and image mappings; both obey the Invariance Principle. “A. Image metaphors are not exact “look-alikes”;many sensory mechanisms are at work, which can be characterized by Langacker’s focal adjustment (selection, perspective, and abstraction); B. images and Image-schemas are continuous; an image can be abstracted/schematized to various degrees; and C. image metaphors and conceptual metaphors are continuous; conceptual metaphorical mapping preserves image-schematic structure (Lakoff 1990) and image metaphors often involve conceptual aspects of the source image.
(“All metaphors are invariant with respect to their cognitive topology, that is, each metaphorical mapping preserves image-schema structure:”  Likewise when we look at the geometrical formal parts of an architectural metaphor we note those common elements where fitting, coupling and joints occur), again this simultaneity of ideas and image operating in tandem where we see and know an idea simultaneously; where the convention of the architectural space and the metaphor of the conception converge.
 Image mappings in architecture finds schemes from  a repertoire of superficial conventions except in a Japanese or Arab house where we are asked to sit on the floor or eat without knives and forks or find no room with identifiable modality of uses, or a palace with only show rooms where living is behind concealed walls. A hotel’s grand ballroom is both a room in a palace, a place for royalty, we must be one of them, yet a congregation of guests in black ties and gowns are contemporary and family celebrating a wedding. Incongruities merge in continuous and seamless recollections.
# 1.4.11 In cognitive linguistics, the invariance principle is a simple attempt to explain similarities and differences between how an idea is understood in "ordinary" usage, and how it is understood when used as a conceptual metaphor.
Kövecses (2002: 102) provides the following example based on the semantics of the English verb to give.
She gave him a book. (Source language)


Based on the metaphor CAUSATION IS TRANSFER we get:
(a) She gave him a kiss.
(b) She gave him a headache.
However, the metaphor does not work in exactly the same way in each case, as seen in:
(b') She gave him a headache, and he still has it.
(a') *She gave him a kiss, and he still has it.
1.4.11 The invariance principle offers the hypothesis that metaphor only maps components of meaning from the source language that remain coherent in the target context. The components of meaning that remain coherent in the target context retain their "basic structure" in some sense, so this is a form of invariance.
Architecturally, users encounter a habitable metaphor with their experience engrafted in a particular mapping inherent in their catalog of mappings. This mapping has its own language , vocabulary say of the way doors, windows floors, stairs and rooms names work and the user brings this vocabulary into, the target metaphor, say a new office building.  Of course there will be all sorts of incongruities, similarities and differences. However this principle points out that the office building vocabulary will retain its basic structure. This means that while the vocabulary the user brings to the target from the source will be unchanged still keeping the images of doors, windows, etc as they were in the residential the office will be unchanged and unaffected. For example when an architect designs a bank from his source in the size, décor and detail of medieval great hall the target of banking with all its vocabulary of teller windows, manager’s carols, customer’s areas, vaults, etc will not change into medieval ways of serving, storing and managing the business.
When I designed a precinct police station for Bedford Stuyvesant ( a section in Brooklyn) I brought the community, park and community services onto the street and public pedestrian sidewalks while housing the police offices, muster and patrol functions to the back and under the building.  While the building metaphor is now a community service police station mapping components of meaning from the source language of user and community friendly, human scale, public access and service which remained in the target police station. The vocabulary of all the police functions remained coherent, perceived and understood and did not vary. The problem is particularly interesting when the metaphor of a shopping mall with commercial retail shops brings its language to a target context of a hotel with service support. The front and back of the hotel, the rooms and maintenance and the transience of guest will remain coherent, overlaid with malls covered, circulation and service area. The separated spaces will face the ambulatory and be separately accessible to visitors. Such a combination you can see art work in airport terminals being open shops and passenger circulation to a common metaphor. The airport is still an airport but an airport with a mall. The Munich subway and underground shopping center are another such examples. Underground subway language, structures, ventilation, circulation is sustained while being influenced but not overriding the source.

1.4.15 Of the eight aspects of metaphor Lakoff describes the two most applies to architecture which is: Our system of conventional metaphor is “alive” in the same sense that our system of grammatical and phonological (distribution and patterning of speech sounds in a language and of the tacit rules governing pronunciation.) rules is alive; namely it is constantly in use, automatically, and below the level of consciousness and Our metaphor system is central to our understanding of experience and to the way we act on that understanding.  1.4.11 It seems that  onomatopeics are metaphors and can be  onomatopoeic (grouping of words that imitates the sound it is describing, suggesting its source object, such as "click", "bunk", "clang", "buzz", "bang", or animal noises such as "oink", "moo", or "meow") ? In this case an assemblage instead of a sound.  As a non-linguistic it has impact beyond words and is still a metaphor. Then a metaphor is much more than the sum of its parts and is beyond any of its constituent constructions, parts and systems, its very existence a metaphor.
1.4.11 Before his death at 101 years of age completed a book called "Emphatics," about the use of language.  Dr. Weiss worked in the branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, which addresses questions about the ultimate composition of reality, including the relationship between the mind and matter. He was particularly interested in the way people related to each other through symbols, language, intonation, art and music. Emphatics, (2000), which considers how ordinary experience stands in some dynamic relationship with a second dimension, which provides focus, interruption, significance, or grounds for the first. 1.4.11 "Surrogates," published by Indiana University Press. Weiss says that: “A surrogate is "a replacement that is used as a means for transmitting benefits from a context in which its’ user may not be a part”. Architecture’s metaphors bridge from the program, designs and contractors a shelter and trusted habitat. The user enters and occupies the habitat with him having formulated but not articulated any its characteristics. Yet it works. “It makes sense, therefore, to speak of two sides to a surrogate, the user side and the context side (from which the user is absent or unable to function). “ Each of us uses others to achieve a benefit for ourselves. “We have that ability”. “None of us is just a person, a lived body, or just an organism. We are all three and more. We are singulars who own and express ourselves in and through them. In my early twenties I diagrammed a being as “”appetite”, “desire” and “mind”. I defined each and described there interrelationships and support of one another. Metaphor is one and all of these and our first experiences of sharing life with in to what are outside of us.

As Weiss describes our mother, language and other primary things we too ascribe like relations with objects and even buildings assigning them the value from which we may benefit and which may support. As Weiss proclaims that we cannot separate these three from each other so that it follows that we may find it impossible to separate us from the external metaphors. Inferences that are not yet warranted can be real even before we have the evidence. Metaphors are accepted at face value and architecture is accepted at face value. Weiss:” It is surely desirable to make a good use of linguistic surrogates” “ A common language contains many usable surrogates with different ranges, all kept within the limited confines that an established convention prescribes”  It is amazing how that different people can understand one another and how we can read meaning and conduct transaction with non-human extents, hence architecture. Architecture is such a “third party” to our experience yet understandable and in any context. In his search for what is real Weiss says he has explored the large and the small and the relationships that realities have to one another. Accustomed to surrogates architecture is made by assuming these connections are real and have benefit. Until they are built and used we trust that they will benefit the end user.
Assembling the ambulatory we assume the occupancy, frequency and destinations. We each are surrogates to one another yet fitted into one message. When this passage had been used as read as had been other passages, corridors and links. Like a linguistic the building stands, like a great, stone dagger, emphatic against the sky. The stair, the exit, the space calls, gives emphasis and is strongly expressive.
Despite their styles, periods, specific operations, conditions, operations and goals; despite their building types, country, national language, weather , climate, culture, etc. doors, openings, windows, stairs, elevators, floors, walls, roofs, ramps, landscaping, cladding, decoration, furniture, curtains, etc are all immediately understood and mapped from past to present , from other to present context and form individual to community of uses. A door in a private house is a door in a public concert hall. In fact its differences are naturally assimilated and unconsciously enjoyed.
1.5.0 Metaphor, induction, and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
Elegant architectural metaphors are those in which the big idea and the smallest of details echo and reinforce one another.  Contemporary architects wrapping their parte in “green”, “myths” and eclectic images” are no less guilty than was their predecessors of the Bauhaus exuding asymmetry, tension and dissonance as were the classics and renaissance insisting on unity, symmetry and balance. Both the architects’ ant the public could not help but know the rules and seek confirmation from one end to the other. The architect’s parte and the user’s grasp of cliché parte were expected and easy “fill-in” proving the learned mappings, learned inference trail and familiarity with bridging.  1.5.1 Paraphrasing: “people ascertain the deep metaphor that underlies one or more surface metaphors by filling in terms of an implicitly analogy”. It is the “filling in” wherein the synapse (a region where nerve impulses are transmitted and received, encompassing the axon terminal of a neuron that releases neurotransmitters in response to an impulse) takes place.  1.5.2 Synapse is metaphor where two are joined together as the side-by-side association of homologous paternal and maternal chromosomes during the first prophase of meiosis.
How this happens is as biblical as: “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” where our mental associations are themselves the metaphor, the evidence of the works we do not actually see.   We see the metaphor, we read its extent, we synapse, analogies and metaphorize absorbing its information, contextualizing and as much as possible and resurrecting its reasons for creation.  The architectural metaphor only speaks through its apparent shape, form, volume, space, material, etc that the concepts which underlie each are known to the user as they would to a painting, poem, or concerto.  1.5.3 Furthermore as observation, analysis and use fill in the gaps  users inference the locations of concealed rooms, passages and supports, the user infers from a typology of the type a warehouse of expectations and similes to this metaphor from others. In this way there are the perceived and the representations they perceive represents which when explored, inert what we call beautiful, pleasurable and wonderful.
1.5.4 So while architecture is the making of metaphors and architects are making metaphors their works, though metaphoric, are not themselves the metaphors but the shadow of the metaphor which exists elsewhere in the minds of both the creator and the user. Architects would not be known as artist [G] nor should their works be known as works of art[G]. Both their works are the “deep” while the owners deal with the “surface”;  the true architectural artisan has deep and underlying metaphors predicated two and three dimensional space analysis, history, culture, class, anthropology, geography etc. They all are often underlying the surface of the choices of lighting, material, claddings, etc. 1.5.5 In a discussion of theories of representation Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro proposes that a spatial representation in which local subspaces can be mapped into points of higher-order hyper-spaces and vice versa and that is possible because they have a common set of dimensions. In this way the many architectural elements are fitted and combine to make a unity. It can be argued that the seen is not at al the metaphor but the transfers, bridges and connections being made apart from the building. In filling in the terms of the analogy lies the metaphor. My design of a New Haven Cultural Center Concert Hall brought the visitors form entrances on the plaza under the stage and orchestra and up a ramp into the theater facing the audience where they would be after socializing.
One seated they world be watching the stage and the very access back to the street. This would also be the place where refreshments were served and all would observe. The audience was planned to be the entertainment along with the musicians on stage. The architects have tools to control the metaphor and allow the users to replay precisely what was intended by the architect. My proposal for an exhibit called: Contemporary Theories of the Universe” consisted of a giant sphere enclosing a continuous ramp on the inner circumference going from top to bottom around a three dimensional mobile of our galaxy. The entry elevators brought visitors to the top and as they made their way down they could see were overhead and side exhibits telling the story of the various theories of cosmology and the creation of the universe. From the metaphor of the idea, a sphere containing the universe about the universe to the design of the entrance, elevators, ramps, exhibits and central galaxy the mapping of the experience was from the design to the perception.  (P.S. Many years later I was to find one of my former professors design a similar building for the New York City Museum of Natural History as an adjunct the to the famous Hayden Planetarium) .
1.6.0 Figurative speech and linguistics by Jerrold M. Sadock apologizes for the inconsistencies, lack of derivatives and many unexplained changes in linguistics to explain the way metaphor is used and understood, misused and misunderstood.
Likewise, the street talk that permeated my childhood was a string of “sayings, clichés, proverbs and European linguistic slang. This was contrasted by the poetry of songs and medieval literature. The architecture was the only source of my identity having consistency, reputation and allusions toward science, logic and consequence. I just know there was something out side of this circus. Although I could not derive what I saw I could document and retain the types and details of each type. My hunger and thirst to know what, why and how to make these spurned each morning waking before dawn and doing reconnaissance from the time I was three till I was in my teens.
My tours were capricious and free roaming (my version of play) but not my curiosity where the metaphors fed me with my identity and certainty of a reality.
The neighborhood authenticated my persona, family and location. Later my study of architecture was organically adjunctive while reason for study was to further my own metaphor. Figurative or not , the metaphors I perceived then are still my “boiler-plate” and when I scrutinized and sketched over seventy European cities I was able to find metaphors, similes, and analogies. All was helped by preceding studies under architectural historians as: Ross, Popiel, Maholy Nage and Vincent Scully (to name a few).  However, Sadock’s examples and apologies only remind me that my work to derive the phenomenon of architecture as the making of metaphors is in its’ infancy, beginning to develop a vocabulary and understanding for the architectural profession and its’ allies. There are none known to me that today regards the social psychological building metaphors in a way that translates into practice. As a result, as Sadock bemoans he also apologizes for the inconsistencies, lack of derivatives and many unexplained changes in linguistics.
1.6.1 He thus discusses the difference between the indirect use of metaphor versed the direct use of language to explain the world. . In some circles this is referred to tangential thinking, that approaching a subject from its edges without getting to the point. Users can accept works which are vague, inane, and non-descript, evasive, and disorienting. Public housing, “ticky-tack” subdivisions, anonymous canyons of plain vanilla towers with countless nameless windows, offices with a sea of desks, nameless workstations and the daunting boredom of straight highways on a desert plain.  This too applies to works of architecture which assembles a minimum and constructs the minimum in a stoic fashion considering the least needed to produce a work that fills the minimum economy of its commission. As such many architectural works escape the many and various realities settling for a minimum of expression of and otherwise prolific potential.  1.6.2 He distinguishes and draws relationships between micro and macro metaphors and the way they can inform one another as the form of design may refer to its program, or a connector may reflect the concept of articulation as a design concept. The way one 45 degree angle may reflect all the buildings geometry.
More the way the design concept, design vision drawn on a napkin can be the vision, gestalt, formulae, and “grand design” of a particular project. Such an ideal can be the seed, fountainhead and rudder guiding all other design decisions.

The macro metaphor drives the micro while they both inform one another. Classic, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Empire, Bedemier, Renaissance, Modern, Baroque, Rocco, Gothic, Tudor, etc are examples of styles and periods where a macro design imperative controlled micro decisions. And, vice versa, where construction means and methods determined certain design and style as the flying buttress and buttress of the Gothic’s, the arch for the Romans.  The renaissance not only was informed by discoveries of the Roman classics but by the intellectual and spiritual exuberance so well exuded in music, art and sculpture and in architecture by the eccentric articulation of figure and bugling in pediments, capitals and form of the plans and sections.  Likewise the macro Bauhaus and its principles doggedly produced the architecture of Mies, Johnson, Breuer, Corbusier, Gropius, and Meier turning away from fanciful experimentation, and turned toward rational, functional, sometimes standardized building.
1.7.0 Some problems with the emotion of literal meanings by David E. Rumelhart are “primarily interested in the mechanisms whereby meanings are conveyed”. He makes several observations relevant to our study. Discussing the idioms and informal expressions such as turn on the lights;” kick the bucket” he notes  1.7.1 Metaphors work by “reference to analogies that are known to relate to the two domains”. In other words there is apriori knowledge of these before they are spoken and when heard they are immediately found. Like a building metaphor’s common elements with an uncommon application the common connects to the unfamiliar and the architect is able to find a way to bring them together and the user discovers their relevance.
1.8.0 Metaphor by John R. Searle is concerned with “how metaphors work”. As we are concerned with how architectural metaphors work we can draw some analogies. 1.8.1          A” problem of the metaphor concerns the relations between the word and sentence meaning, on the one hand, and speaker’s meaning or utterance meaning, on the other” “Whenever we talk about the metaphorical meaning of a word, expression, or sentence, we are talking about what a speaker might utter it to mean, in a way it that departs from what the word, expression or sentence actually means”.
With the exception of major corporate brands, churches, specialty building in architecture the examples is in infinite as most works designed are with no intended message, meaning or referent. Many are in the class of others of its types and generally convey their class while others are replicas and based on a model. Furthermore most architects have a design vocabulary which is foreign to the user. Conversely, in public buildings, the user’s expectations, use and expectations are foreign to the architect. At its best the architect may connect the vocabulary of his design to some exotic design theory which, results I a very beautiful and appealing building to which the user finds beautiful but has no idea about the intended making of the whole or its parts. But some how it works!
After formulating a program of building requirements and getting agreement that the words and diagrams are approved by the client. If the architect built-work can meet this program and come to be the building the client intended is such an example of the work of architecture as a metaphor and metaphorical work.
(They carry-over, bridge, and are each others advocate)  Limited to meeting the program and the fulfilling the design contract says nothing about the unintended consequences of the building on the context and the way the metaphor outcome impacts for users, community and the general public. In some ways this is the job of municipal Departments of Community Services, town fathers, zoning boards and building departments and their building codes. All contribute to honing the metaphors and their outcomes which is this relationship of intended words to spoken words and the chasm between the two.  We are told to think before we speak, picture what you are going to say then speak, still whatever we speak, in tone, emphasis, timing(meter) and pitch can carry its own meanings; this was also one of the final fields of investigation for my late mentor, Dr. Paul Weiss.
1.8.2 Searle’s “task in constructing a theory of metaphor is to try to state the principles which relate literal sentence meaning to metaphorical utterance meaning”. In like manner the architect tries to find a way that program relates to design and design the final product.  A good example of unappreciated excellent metaphors is the cases of the many non-New Yorkers who visit the city and find no interest in the buildings. Whereas its’ natives have the language, vocabulary and years of incremental experience to know both the words and the metaphors of each and the collective of building –types. Searle adds:”  1.8.3 The basic principle of an expression with its literal meaning and corresponding truth conditions can, in various ways that are specific to the metaphor, call to mind anther meaning and corresponding set of truths” In other words:” how does one thing remind us of another”.  Without apparent rhyme of reason metaphors of all arts have a way of recalling other metaphors of other times and places. In my mind I recall Brooklyn brick warehouses on Atlantic Ave. with turn of the century Ford trucks and men adorned in vests, white shirts and bow ties loading packages from those loading docks under large green metal canopies. The streets are cobble stones. I can cross to this image when seeing most old brick buildings in Leipzig, San Francisco, or Boston. No matter the claims of mansion, palace, castle I will never mistake any such titled commercial building with the likes of Versailles, Fontainebleau, etc. yet seeing any view of formal gardens, great castles my mind’s eye will return me to Schloss Schönbrunn outside of Vienna (the palatial home of Maria Theresa and the Hapsburg Empire).
In the case of building metaphors it is the familiarity with not only the building- type, materials, context and convention but the  architects, contactor’s and owner’s personas which increase the understanding of the metaphor. In the case of Dubai and other such contexts it is the lack of such familiarity and tolerance for the strange that makes the metaphor acceptable on face value. The metaphor is accepted yet not understood. As many beautiful things they are awesome, forbidding, and indicative of some greater condition as being a stranger in one’s own context. Buildings are perceived as cars manufactured by some idioms indicative of their species with little conscious relevance to the user’s context. It is very strange. Building designed for people who before this generation found tents to be their habitat metaphor.

In the book’s section on “Metaphor and Representation”:
1.9.0 Process and products in making sense of tropes by Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr.
1.9.1 Explaining tropes (turn, twist, conceptual guises, and figurations) ‘Human cognition is fundamentally shaped by various processes of figuration”. “The ease with which many figurative utterances are comprehended are has often  been attributed to the constraining influence of the context” ………..Including “the common ground of knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes recognized as being shared by speakers and listeners (architects and users(clients, public) As speakers architects, designers and makers “can’t help but employ tropes in every day conversation (design) because they conceptualize (design) much of their experience through the figurative schemes of metaphor (design).  
It explains the standard and traditional building types found in various contexts as the chalet in the Alps and the specific style of each found in each of the Alp’s counties and villages, etc.  Psychological processes in metaphor comprehension and memory by Alan Paivio and Mary Walsh say that Susanne Langer writes that:” Metaphor is our most striking evidence of abstract seeing, of the power the human mind to use presentational symbols”.
1.10.0 Interpretation of novel metaphors by Bruce Fraser is trying to define metaphor he says that: 1.10.1” a metaphor involves a nonliteral use of language”. A non-literal use of language means that what is said is for affect and not for specificity. A habitable metaphor is not meant for the user to fully, continuously and forever recall all that went into its production. At each moment in its use the metaphor may mean different things, least of which may be any intended by its authors. The fact that the roof silhouette was to emulate a Belvedere in Florence, windows from a palace in Sienna, and stucco from Tyrol is lost over time.  Even, the design principles so astutely applied by the likes of Paul Rudolf, Richard Meier, or Marcel Breuer may be unnoticed in favor of other internal focuses. These many design considerations may be the metaphor that gave the project its gestalt that enabled the preparation of the documents that in turn were faithful interpreted by skilled contractors and craftsman. Yet at each turn it is the affect of metaphor and not necessarily its specifics that make a good design not a great work of architecture or a working metaphor.
On visiting the Marseille block I was struck by a plethora of innovation, and lack of care and relative poor quality thane I was about standing in a Corbu building. Yet in Gaudi’s Barcelona apartment block the affect of the sculpture was ever-present. I could not even remember what particular theory or design principle governed, it was just a Gaudiesque experience.  It is this observation that allows us to make parallel references to painting, music, dance, painting, sculpture and architecture as metaphor since they are involves a nonliteral use of language. Except the specifications, titles and performance descriptions a work of architecture metaphor is open to interpretation and random perceptions in time and space. What the maker might have intended and its perception may not be exact but can be understood in a very general use of the common functions necessary as finding the entrance, elevators, stairs, exits, toilets, etc.  At some point Alvar Aalto chided members of his design team wanting to distort a part of his final design to which he replied something like I would prefer you do so that it would be less precious and still valid after intervention.  Aalto did not rely on modernism's fondness for industrialized processes as a compositional technique, but forged an architecture influenced by a broad spectrum of concerns.
Alvar Aalto’s early work was influenced by contemporary Nordic practitioners such as Asplund and Ragnar Ostberg, as well as by the simple massing and ornamentation of the architettura mirwre of northern Italy. His work evolved from the austere quality of the Railway Workers Housing (1923), to the more Palladian inspired Workers Club (1924-1925) (both in Jyvaskyla), and from there to the deftly refined and detailed Seinajoki Civil Guards Complex (1925), Jyvaskyla Civil Guards Building (1927), and the Muurame Church (1927-1929). Composed of simple, well proportioned volumes rendered in stucco or wood, these works are characterized by their sparse decoration and selective use of classical elements. Whether you know any of these things when you in one of Aalto’s work you are in awe of its space and simplicity. The same may be said of the work of Louis Isadore Kahn.  
1.11.0 Images and models, similes and metaphors by George A. Miller Defends a metaphor as an abbreviated simile to appreciate similarities and analogies which is called “appreciation”. 1.11.1 In psychology “appreciation” (Herbert (1898)) was a general term for those mental process whereby an attached experience is brought into relation with an already acquired and familiar conceptual system. (Encoding, mapping, categorizing, inference, assimilation and accommodation, attribution, etc).
Miller explains how reading metaphors build an image in the mind. That is to say we “appreciate” what we already know. I have always contended that we do not learn anything we already do not know. We learn in terms of already established knowledge and concepts.  We converse reiterating what we presume the other knows, otherwise the other party would not understand. The other party understands only because he already knows.  The architect who assembles thousands of  bits of information , resifts  and converts form words to graphics and specification documents communicates the new proposed (the strange new thing) in terms of the known and familiar. The first recipients are the owner, building officials; contractors must read seeking confirmations of known and confirm its adherence to expectations. After its construction the users read familiar signs, apparatus, spaces, volumes, shapes and forms. The bridge carries over from one to another what is already known .Even the strange that becomes familiar are both known but not in the current relationship. For example when we apply a technology used on ships to a building or a room which is commonly associated with tombs as a bank, etc. Both are generally known but not in that specific context. We could not appreciate it if it were not known .It is what Weiss calls commonalities and is the selection between commonalities and differences that makes a metaphor. About understanding and discerning between what is” true in fact” and “true in the model” Miller says: Metaphors are, on a literal interpretation, incongruous, if not actually false-a robust sense of what is germane to the context and what is “true in fact” is necessary for the recognition of a metaphor, and hence general knowledge must be available to the reader (user, public). “We try to make the world that the author is asking us to imagine resemble the real world (as we know it) in as many respects as possible. Offices, bedrooms, lobbies, toilets, kitchens are such models which are built to specific situations in images of yet some other context.
Kitchen is a social gathering place, toilet is the baths of Rome, and the deck is top of a ship. The architect accommodates all the realities of the goal of the room into the model of the foreign context. By analogy what Miller distinguishes between what the architect designed and what he thought are different.
The architects of the Renaissance tried to resurrect the grandeur of the classic building they discovered and resurrected. The contemporary architect faces a vernacular of design principles which are reified in to conventional building types. The convention is the model whiles the specific application in the strange. Often new buildings are likened to the first model or the prototype.  The reader knows the building type and is able to recognize the new version. About the metaphor  1.11.2 Miller sites Webster’s International Dictionary (2nd edition): “a metaphor may be regard as a compressed simile, the comparison implied in the former being explicit in the latter. In the making the comparison explicit is the work of the designer and reader”.  “In principle, three steps, recognition, reconstruction, and interpretation, must be taken in understating metaphors, although the simplest instance the processing may occur so rapidly that all three blend into a single mental act.”When we face a new metaphor (building) a new context with its own vocabulary is presented, one which the creator must find and connect and the other which the reader must read and transfer from previous experience”.
1.12.0 How metaphors work by Sam Glucksberg and Boaz Keysar distinguishes between (italics are Gluksberg and Keysar) “metaphor topic” and “metaphor vehicle (predicate)” “The vehicle being a prototypical exemplar (cigarettes) of that attributive category (time bomb).  1.12.1 Prototype theory is a mode of graded categorization in cognitive science, where some members of a category are more central than others. For example, when asked to give an example of the concept furniture, chair is more frequently cited than, say, stool.” I asked a New Yorker to give an example of an office building and they answered the Empire State Building it would be because of its height, and reputation, In fact the office building and not the “church “building shape has come to be a metaphor of the city. New York is an office building city. I can see only a flash glimpse and I will know it is Manhattan.   1.12.2 Their metaphor “cigarettes are time bombs” cigarettes are assigned to a category of time bombs, what the time bomb being a prototypical example of the set of things which can abruptly cause serious damage at some point in the future.” It is for this reason that the landscape is filled with many metaphoric topics (applications) based on few metaphor vehicles (building types) not only true in functions and goals but also in characteristic building systems and structures. Office (metaphor topic) Building (metaphor vehicle) metaphor topic as a house may be a hotel, grand estate, small or large private residence depends on the predicate. Carried with each are also, social, psychological, political and geographic inferences.
1.12.3 “Metaphors are generally used to describe something new by references to something familiar (Black, 1962b), not just in conversation, but in such diverse areas as science and psychotherapy. Metaphors are not just nice, they are necessary.  They are necessary for casting abstract concepts in terms of the apprehendable, as we do, for example, when we metaphorically extend spatial concepts and spatial terms to the realms of temporal concepts and temporal terms.  In another sense when an architect creates a metaphor it a building which takes on the attributes of all buildings and if it is work of art, as a building metaphor it takes on the attributes of the calls of buildings which are more than a tin box but a statement of complex ideas which demands reading and is an opportunity to be read.
How do I know it is an “office building”?
1. It is located in the neighborhood of other office buildings
2. It does not have balconies and, curtains in the windows,
3. It has an open and wide public plaza and unrestricted wide openings
4. Its glazing, cladding and skin are high tech, impersonal and large scale.
In adaptive use buildings where office are housed in residential and residential are house in office buildings precisely the metaphor topic and the metaphor vehicle are purposefully confuses the metaphor its unique identity.
1.13.0 In the Metaphor and Science section of the book: The shift from metaphor to analogy in Western science by Dedre Gentner and Michael Jeziorski
Part on “The alchemists they describe a system of triangulation I developed, taught and applied at Pratt Institute which is as: “Metals were often held to consist of two components: mercury, which was fiery, active and male, and sulphur, which was watery, passive and female. Thus the combination of the two metals could be viewed as a marriage. Metals and other minerals were often compared with heavenly bodies and their properties triangulated to produce a third. Not to let this arbitrary characterizations blemish the structure of this system it is valid to triangulate and in fact 1.13.1 much of architectural making of metaphors is a matter of mapping, diagramming and combining to conclude the validity of combining and matching unlike materials, shapes, & systems. In this way any one of the metaphors and the whole system of bridging and carrying over is metaphoric. Map a rectangle and circle to a third and you get a part square part circular odd shape. Map cold and hot and you get warm; map hotel, office, residential and shops and you get mixed use.  Renaissance European cities beguile their metaphor with such combinations known by their scale, cladding, décor, and entrees. Particularly charming are the German “guest houses ("gast hofs"), English family pubs, etc. New Towns and contemporary town centers are mixed use, multi zoned urban cores. It isn’t the referent where one is the other but where there is a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump. The commonality is apparent. They both share a similar characteristic.  The hotel, residence , office and shop are joined by their convenience  to that provide service to clients and their use of rooms, and a core of service, mountainous and housekeeping and supply. A small staff can support these businesses and there customers are compatible. They all have a front of the house and back-of-the -house function (garbage, deliveries, maintenance, etc) in many citers lacks zoning regulations have alo9owed such mixed uses zones to still exist to day. Seeing these metaphors is a part of the fabric and character of neighborhoods.
1.13.2 Metaphor is reasoning using abstract characters whereas reason by analogy is a straight forward extension of its use in commonplace reasoning. All this to say and as if there was a choice that architects have a choice where to make a new building by analogy or by metaphor. Analogies may be the ticky-tacks, office building, church, school building, fire station analogies to a first model verses an abstraction of a program into a new prototype. Is the analogy any less a work of architecture?
Or do we only mean that works of architecture are works of art when they make abstractions?  1.13.3 In processing analogy, people implicitly focus on certain kinds of commonalities and ignore others”. In my New Haven drafting service builders would give me a floor plan for me to redraft to build a news house: they simply wanted an analogy to the first with no changes. The Florida school board uses and reuses both firms and plans to dieing new high schools bases on plans used before to build other schools and only slight modifications to make them site-specific.
This is design by analogy. Many design professionals use standard details and standard specifications relying upon analogy to design a new building. The overall may be either metaphor or analogous. Whole professional practices are formulated and bases on one or the other practices.  Noting these things an industry was created called the “housing industry’ churning out analogies rather than individual metaphors, leaving the metaphor to the context or theme of the development. It is famous architects who are mostly famous because they made metaphors and from them analogies were drawn. The analogous phenomenon has resulted in the nineteenth century Sears offering pre-designed and package barns ready to ship form Wisconsin to any where by mail order. Pre-engineered metal being and manufactured homes are all part of the analogous scheme of reasoning the built environment. Users have access to either and are able to shift perceptions. In commonplace users wanting to be fed by metaphorical architecture go to Disney, European, or urban entertainment and recreation centers. Las Vegas thrives on what I call "metaphoric analogies” abstractions of analogous building types. It is that synapse which attracts and beguiles the visitor hungry for authenticity and reality.
 Living in analogous urban replicas city dweller migrated to the suburbs in search of the metaphor of “a man’s home is his castle”. Today this metaphor has become an analogy as the metaphor proliferates and analogies from one to another state and country.
We may be told a “cell is like a factory” which gives us a framework for analogy and similarity.   1.13.4 An analogy is a kind of highly selective similarity where we focus on certain commonalities and ignore others. The commonality is no that they are both built out of bricks but that they both take in resources to operate and to generate their products. As users, design professionals begin their design process by finding analogies from extent projects as user faced with the building resort to their own vocabulary. Both do not favor one or the other and vacillate between the two for what they can learn.
For example HOK Sport Venue Event Company prides itself on designing stadiums recapturing the community context, history of the teams while designing a new abstraction worthy of the future of the game and the entertainment of the fans.
Populous” (HOK sports facility business) is a global design practice specializing in creating environments that draw people and communities together for unforgettable experiences. So much so that the new name of the firm is: “POPULACE”. “As Populous, we enthusiastically embrace the expertise we uniquely claim—drawing people together around teams, athletes, events, places, commerce, industry and ideas they wholeheartedly embrace and adore.”
1.13.5 On the creative and architect’s side: “The central idea is that an analogy is a mapping of knowledge from one domain (the base) into another (the target) such that a system of relations that holds among the base objects also holds among the target objects”. On the user’s side in interpreting an analogy, people seek to put objects of the base in one-to-one correspondence with the objects of the targets as to obtain the maximum structural match”. Confronting a Bedouin village of tents a westerner faced with apparent differences looks for similarities.  1.13.6 “The corresponding objects in the base and target need not resemble each other; rather object correspondences are determined by the like roles in the matching relational structures.” Cushions for seats, carpets for flooring, stretched fabric for walls and roof. Cable for beams and columns, etc.
1.13.7 “Thus, an analogy is a way of aligning and focusing on rational commonalities independently of the objects in which those relationships are embedded.” However, there may be metaphors at work as well as the user reads the tent’s tension cable structure, banners and the entire assemblage in a “romantic” eclectic image of Arabness, metaphors beyond the imperial but of the realm of the abstract and inaccurate.
1.13.8 “Central to the mapping process is the principle of “systematicity: people prefer to map systems of predicates favored by higher-order relations with inferential import (the Arab tent), rather that to map isolated predicates. The systematicity principle reflects a tacit preference for coherence and inferential power in interpreting analogy”. Arab tentness and “home-sweet-home” map basics from the “home-sweet-home” to the Arabness to make all the bits and pieces be understood.
Thus architects choose building elements from catalogs and in the most metaphoric circumstances designs elements from scratch. Metaphor buildings may or may not be composed of metaphoric elements.  Metaphors and buildings which are analogies may of or may not have elements designed metaphorically. However, it is less likely that an analogues design will contain metaphorical elements.  1.13.9“No extraneous associations: Only commonalities strengthen an analogy. Further relations and associations between the base and target- for example, thematic consecutions- do not contribute to the analogy”. Analogous matching looks for duplicates, replicas and like elements; the more the better. Most contemporary commercial design relies on many commonalities hence CAD, design format programs, etc assume commonalities in and analogies. After choosing title system the rest follows as repetition as before. Many commercial house plans, office plans, department store, etc acre designed as analogous design schemes.
As the architect of record for Dhahran Academy in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and after having designed and redesigned their primary buildings the school superintendent asked how to go about adding additional space. Rather than adding to his expense and time for another design process I recommended and they engage a pre-engineered steel building manufacturer to produce this building for them. In this case I knew the analogous rather than the metaphorical process would be appropriate. King Faisal University asked my advice to design their new and temporary school to house their school of architecture while the permanent overall campus plans were being completed. Again I suggested the analogous approach of a pre-engineered building system. Of course within this approach, the specific sizes, electrical, plumbing and HVAC requirements were all specifically selected from already available “off-the-shelf” modules.
1.14.0Metaphor and theory change: What is” metaphor” a metaphor for? By Richard Boyd defines the  1.14.1 “interaction view” of metaphor where metaphors work by applying to the principle (literal) subject of the metaphor a system of “associated implications” characteristic of the metaphorical secondary subject. These implications are typically provided by the received “commonplaces” (ordinary; undistinguished or uninteresting; without individuality: a commonplace person.)  About the secondary subject ‘The success of the metaphor rests on its success in conveying to the listener (Reader) some quieter defines respects of similarity or analogy between the principle and secondary subject.” Architects design by translating concepts into two dimensional graphics that which ultimately imply a multidimensional future reality.  She tests the horizontal and vertical space finding accommodation and commonality of adjacency, connectivity and inclusiveness.
1.14.2 To Boyd, metaphors simply impart their commonplace not necessity to their similarity or analogous. This kind of metaphor simply adds information to the hearer which was not otherwise available which explains the built metaphor that is neither analogous not abstractly common but works, is unique and serves a purpose. I found methane gas silos on the Ruhergebeit in Germany’s three city district conically shaped (with the wider circumference at the base) like a Byzantine apse with channeled walks and fluted sides. I had seen nothing like this and it took hours and an article I wrote which was published in Progressive Architecture to explain this metaphor.  I called it Pollution Architecture. The Pricklley Mountain project in Warren Vermont was another such example of received “commonplaces” of its use(s).  
1.15.0 Metaphor in science by Thomas S. Kuhn speaking about scientific language he distinguishes between  1.15.1“dubbing” (invest with any name, character, dignity, or title; style; name; call)   and “epistemic access” (relating to, or involving knowledge; cognitive.).”When dubbing is abandoned the link between language and the world disappears”.  Architectural metaphors are all about names, titles, and the access to that the work provides for the reader to learn and develop. At its best the vocabulary of the parts and whole of the work is an encyclopedia and cultural building block. The work incorporates the current state of man’s culture and society which is an open book for the reader.  The freedom of both the creator and reader to dub and show is all part of the learning experience of the metaphor.  As a good writer “shows” and not “tells” so a good designer manifests configurations without words.  However objective, thorough and scientific; the designer, the design tools and the work gets dubbed with ideas (not techne) we may call style, personality, and identity above and beyond the program and its basic design (techne). It is additional controls, characterizations and guidelines engrafted into the form not necessarily overtly and expressly required.  Dubbing may occur in the making of metaphors as a way in which the design itself is conceived and brought together. Dubbing may in fact be the process which created the work as an intuitive act.
1.16.0 Metaphorical imprecision and the “top down” research strategy by Zeon W. Pylyshyn; Zenon W. Pylyshyn is Board of Governors Professor of Cognitive Science at Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. He is the author of Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not what You Think (2003) and Computation and Cognition: toward a Foundation for Cognitive Science (1984), both published by The MIT Press, as well as over a hundred scientific papers on perception, attention, and the computational theory of mind.
About Cognition (pertaining to the mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning, as contrasted with emotional and volitional processes) justifies Socrates “learning as recollecting” to explain that we absorb new knowledge on the shoulders of old experiences.  1.16.1 Pylyshyn explains: “…………….consider new concepts as being characterized in terms of old ones (plus logical conjunctives)” 2.0 As William J. Gordon points out we make the strange familiar by talking about one thing in terms of another.
Pylyshyn: "On the other hand, if it were possible to observe and to acquire new “knowledge” without the benefit of these concepts (conceptual schemata (an underlying organizational pattern or structure; conceptual framework) which are the medium of thought), then such  1.16.2 “Knowledge” would not itself be conceptual or be expressed in the medium of thought, and therefore it would not be cognitively structured, integrated with other knowledge, or even comprehended. Hence, it would be intellectually inaccessible”. In other words we would not know that we know.
Where knowing is the Greek for suffer, or experience. This was the Greek ideal proved in Oedipus; “through suffering man learns”; we know that we know. Therefore, when we observe that architecture makes metaphors we mean that we know that we know that works exists and we can read authors messages. We learn the work.   The art implicitly has gathered the information and organized it in way that given the right apriori vocabulary, codes definitions and signal and sign cognitions one can read the message in one way or another depending on the individual and the variety of individual perceptions. Buildings, artifacts, products with embedded (encrypted) workings can be read, learned, assimilated, connected and either by epiphany or Pavlovian stimulus –response known. Climbing the stairs of a pyramid in Mexico City or a fire stair in a high rise is essentially the same except for the impact of its context and what the stair connects (create and base) and the object on which the stair ascends and descends. The conditions, ideals and goals are very different while most of the operation is the same. In this way you can say that non-architecture can be identifies as teaching nothing.  I don’t believe that there is such a thing, even the “tin-box” (pre-engineered manufactured factory warehouse is a metaphor. It may be a one page comic book character but is has content and is readable.
1.16.3 Pulling from three dimensional and two dimensional  means and methods, from asymmetrical and symmetrical, and from spatial and volumetric design principles the architect assembles metaphor metaphorically by associating and carrying-over these principles applying to the program at hand to lift and stretch the ideas into space and across the range of disassociated ideas and concepts making a new and very strange metaphor unlike anything ever created yet filled with thousands of familiar signs and elements that make it work .  Just as practice makes perfect for the concert pianist, opera singer, ballerina, etc so is it for the architect. However, having said this reader is at imitate disadvantage except for the natives of a particular location. Little old ladies in the tiniest Italian village can tell in the minutest detail all about every building, street and area. She has learned and passed on the “knowledge” from her ancestors and is as trained as its creators but in a totally different way. Hers is the act of perception and reader who must recreate and challenge her memory and recollections. She does not have to work at design but at reliving and imagining the design process to find the details and the whole of the building and its social, political and chronological context. Her explanations will include great joy, violent emotions, dis-tastes and rejections of the owners and authors. Her experience of the metaphor will be different from that of the creators both about the same work.
1.16.4 About the difference between words (which are limited and specific to concepts Pylyshyn   notes: “…in the case of words there is a component of reason and choice which mediates between cognitive content and outward expression. I can choose what words I use, whereas I cannot in the same sense choose in terms of which I represent the world.” So architects and readers deal with materials, structures, systems and leave the concepts to a variety of possible outcomes.  1.16.5 About a “top-down strategy” called “structured programming” in computer science allows for a point of entry into a the development of a new idea where you begin with an idea and after testing and developing that idea bringing everyday knowledge to bear on the development of theoretical ideas with some confidences that they are new either incoherent nor contradictory, and furthermore with some way of exploring what they entail. The point is there are better and worse places for introducing rigor into an evolving discipline.
“This explanation is pretty much that path of the development of my theory that "architecture is the making of metaphors" has followed over the past 45 years. From general recognitions, observations and analogies within the framework of professional design practice , painting, sculpture and philosophy to discussions with renowned scholars most notably Dr. Paul Weiss , followed by a lecture series involving prominent design professionals and arts and then years of research and documentation into monographs.,
1.16.6 Explaining this approach as a “skyhook-skyscraper" construction of science from the roof down to the yet un-constructed foundations” describes going from the general to the specific in and decreasing general to an increasing amount of detail and pragmatic evidence, referents, claims and resolutions.
Structural engineers design from the top down so as to accumulate the additive loads to the consecutive lower members and ultimately the foundation which bears it all. Conceptual design and first impressions both begin with the general and go to the specific. Gated communities, Newtown’s, malls, resorts and commercial buildings give high marks to the overall and superficial .Yet most working metaphors are the result of design and perception from the gestalt (overall concept)  to the emptiness (non-gestalt) .   Maria Theresa’s Schoenbrunn is an excellent example along with major university campuses such as Cambridge, Yale, Oxford, etc where theme and design philosophy prevails and dominates from the facades to the planning techniques of large public spaces to increasing private and smaller spaces and detailing, where with the overall one cannot imagine any thing.  The gestalt is the entity in which all occurs and with the concept there is no context. So it is with metaphor with it the rest of the conversation has no framework and no conception can begin either in its creation or use.
1.16.7 Pylyshyn asks:” What distinguishes a metaphor from its complete explication (explain) ….”? In the case of architecture the entire set of contract documents, program, etc.” Pylyshyn answers: “The difference between literal and metaphorical description lies primarily in such pragmatic consideration as (1) the stability, referential specificity, and general acceptance of terms: and (2) the perception, shared by those who use the terms, that the resulting description characterizes the world as it really is, rather than being a convenient way of talking about it, or a way of capturing superficial resemblances”. In this ways of all the arts, architecture is the most profound in that it combines and confirms the secular (of this time), “how things really are” with the gestalt of personal, social, community and private importance. If art is the making of metaphors and it has no real use then how significant is architecture with both “reality” and fantasy/ imagination combined and confirmed by its very existence. I mean to say that the very real existence of work of art which bespeaks of life and times exists and is accessible and in our contexts is itself a metaphor of great significance and satisfaction.  Were the building us it would be me, where I a building I be it. The metaphor expresses a value common to both; both are both real and ideas at the same time. The metaphor is the bridge and confirmation of art in the world, life in the flesh and flesh become ideas. Architecture is an extreme reification from notion in both creator and reader of materials and idea.
1.16.8 Pylyshyn asserts that: “metaphor induces a (partial) equivalence between two known phenomenons; a literal account describes the phenomenon in authentic terms in which it is seen”.
Socially speaking worldly people that work in offices dress then behave the way they do if for example they reported to work in manufacturing warehouses? Their scenario of the behavior and the metaphor would not correspond.
Metaphor and Education is the final section: Readers may wish to review my monograms on Schools and Metaphors  (Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York and The Metametaphor of architectural education", (North Cypress, Turkish University. December, 1997)
1.17.0 The instructive metaphor: Metaphoric aids to students’ understanding of science by Richard E. Mayer concludes that  1.17.1 “analogical transfer theory ( “instructive metaphors create an analogy between a to-be-learned- system(target domain) and a familiar system(metaphoric domain)” It was these concerns behind Frank Lloyd Wright’s separation from the architecture of Louis Sullivan and what spurned the collective work of the Bauhaus in Germany , that is to express the truth about the building’s systems, materials, open life styles, use of light  and air and bringing nature into the buildings environment, not to mention ridding building of the irrelevant and time worn cliches of building design decoration, and traditional principles of classical architecture as professed by the
Beaux-Arts movement. For equipoise “Unity, symmetry and balance” were replaced by “asymmetrical tensional relationships” between, “dominant, subdominant and tertiary” forms and the results of science and engineering influence on architectural design, a new design metaphor was born.  The Bauhaus found the metaphor in all the arts, the commonalities in making jewelry, furniture, architecture, interior design, decoration, lighting, industrial design, etc.
1.18.0 Metaphor and learning by Hugh G Petrie and Rebecca S. Oshlag
Concludes that metaphorical teaching strategies often lead to better and more memorable learning than do explicit strategies which explains why urbanites have a “street smarts” that is missing from sub-urban; they actually learn from the metaphors that make up the context. Of course this is in addition to the social aspects of urbanity which is again influenced by the opportunities of urban metaphors: parks, play grounds, main streets, broadways, avenues, streets, sidewalks, plazas, downtown, markets, street vendors, etc.
About metaphor:  1.18.1 “Radically new knowledge results from a change in modes of representation of knowledge, whereas a comparative metaphor occurs within the existing representations which serve to render the comparison sensible. The comparative level of metaphor might allow for extensions of already existing knowledge, but would not provide a new form of understanding. When visiting new cities in another country one is immediately confronted with metaphors which create similarities as interactive and comparative as we seek to find similarities and differences with what we already known in our home context. Visiting, sketching and writing about over seventy European cities I noted the character and ambiance of each and the differences between one and another. I drew so many vignettes of buildings and cityscapes noting the metaphor of each. I had a Baedeker’s guide to educate me bout the time and place of each street and building. I had already studied the history of architecture so I could relate the metaphors to their own time and circumstance, yet I enjoyed each metaphor in my time as places and settings for contemporary urban life with a backdrop of their historical past,


Each metaphor was of the past’s impact on the future with the unique design of crafts, building materials, and skills that were peculiar to their times but were no enjoyed in the present. In this context there are the natives who experience these metaphors all their lives and the visitor who is fist learning the lesson of these metaphors. Both experience these in different ways. The native knows the place and comprehends both the old and the new knowledge domains whereas the visitor the very same metaphor may be interactive, creating the similarity under construction.
The visitor (this is my word) may “well be acquiring one of the constitutive or residual metaphors of the place (this is my word) at the same time; same metaphor, different experiences.
1.19.0 Educational uses of metaphor by Thomas G. Sticht discusses how the natures of
metaphor as a speech act and serves as a linguistic tool for overcoming cognitive limitations.  1.19.1       Sticht claims that metaphors have a way of extending our capacities for communications. As most artists their language is beyond speech and to the peculiar craft of their art of which their practice and exercise develops new capacity and opportunity to teach and express thought outside of the linguistics but is nevertheless perhaps as valuable and worthy.  1.19.2 Sticht adds: “that speech is a fleeting, temporarily linear means of communicating, coupled with the fact that that, as human beings, we are limited in how much information we can maintain and process at any one time in active memory, means that as speakers we can always benefit from tools for efficiently bringing information into active memory, encoding it for communication, and recording it, as listeners, in some memorable fashion.”  1.19.3 Relevantly he points out that metaphor is the solution insofar as it encodes and captures the information:” transferring chunks of experience from well –known to less well known contexts;
1.19.4 The vividness thesis, which maintains that  metaphors permit and impress a more memorable learning due to the greater imagery or concreteness or vividness of the “full-blooded experience” conjured up by the metaphorical vehicle; 1.19.5 and the inexpressibility thesis, in which it is noted that certain aspects of natural experience are never encoded in language and that metaphors carry with them the extra meanings never encoded in language. One picture is worth a thousand words and how valuable are the arts as makers of who we are as a people, society and time.  1.19.6“The mnemonic (intended to assist the memory)   function of metaphor as expressed by Ortony’s vividness thesis also points to the value of metaphor as a tool for producing durable learning from unenduiring speech”. Architects both compose the program and reify its contents from words to diagrams and diagrams to two dimensional graphics and three dimensional models to reify and bring- out (educate) the user’s mind and fulfillment of unspoken and hidden needs. Needs which many or may not have been programmed and intended; the metaphor is the final resolution until it is built and used. Then it is subject to further tests of time, audience, markets, trends, fashions, social politics, demographic shifts, economics, and cultural changes.
Postscript:  Architecture’s New Paradigm
When  kingdoms created dynasty’s iconic buildings the architect and artisans took their ques from the reigning monarch. In our modern federal democratic pluralistic society the free reign of ideas and opinions as to contexts and their meanings are diverse.
Not only is my childhood quest relevant but the essence of the responsibility of today’s architect who not only reasons the technical but individually reasons the conceptual . It is to  the architect that society turns to be informed about the shape and form of the context in which life will be played. With this charge the need to know that we know and do by reasoning what science verifies by the scientific method to know that we know about the buildings , parks, and places we set into the environment. It is a public and private charge included in the contract for professional services but unspoken as professional life’s experience; to prove the relevant, meaningful and beneficial metaphors that edify encourage and equip society as well as provide for its’ health, safety and welfare. So it is critical to realize, control and accept as commonplace that the role of the architect is to do much more than build but build masterfully.
We are witnessing a shift in architectural paradigms from one set of architectural forms to another.  It was material shelter and now its electronic affluence. 
As cars are being bought not just for their  ride but for  access to communications, Internet and web technology;  shelters are something other that a habitat. As the life style of the world changed so has the accommodation for that world. The borders and contexts specific places are global where building systems and materials are transferred from one to another context while we are in transit from one to anther. Life is likewise metaphoric; analogies won’t do. Architect now  form a macro metaphor sourcing the new paradigm to the target program. No one can afford to be parochial disregarding all pervasive contextual conceptual metaphors.
Some still unanswered non-contextual random concerns:
What is the significance of all these findings as applied to practice, education, understanding and making better architecture?
Can inanimate objects exude a message?  And if they can what is their language?
How do we read a metaphor?
If a metaphor does not exude, is it still a metaphor?
Is a metaphor an inherently social, interactive, commutative form or is it by itself a structure which stands irrespective of being read?
As a building will stand long after it is created and still stands when vacant and deserted, does the metaphor? Are the attributes of the architectural metaphor built-in and not only making the building stand, but a potential for exuding its content?
What is the difference between a metaphor exuding and it being read?
Architecture is inanimate, is mute, and without a conductor or libretto. Few works will even announce its architect unlike a signed painting; the designers remain in hiding taking no public pride except in portfolio. What has happened? Is this anonymity indicative of something more endemic and perhaps sinister? Is our culture anti-art-anti-metaphor?
If we can read paintings, sculpture, music, and dance then we can assume we can read architecture.  If it can be read as the other arts then it too must have some similar characteristic.
People are magnetically attracted to buildings because they are sources of information about their culture, the future, their identity and their precious security.
All shelters are relative to the individual, the context, society and culture and as such they are relative to each other.
People compare one shelter to the other in search of their status, dominance, voice and representative cost and power in the context and relative to one another. In this way architecture is values and like all other artifacts and arts has a value unto itself and relative to its owner, (an n individual, corporation, church or state) and between one another.
As shelters the building metaphor is an essential learning tool. What else?
Architecture and not just pre-engineered or anonymous builder’s boxes, or engineered utility structures are a collection of thoughts whose thoughts can be read as a book (when we know the vocabulary), touched as we can touch sculpture and can be seen as a painting, play, ballet, and opera, but we cannot hear it as music (accept its acoustics), nor smell (unless we inhale the smell of its materials) and taste it as gourmet food (we do not apply our taste buds to buildings). Non-metaphors may operate as metaphors and therefore be metaphoric but they are not metaphors nor have a complex of intentional thoughts. But all are perceived where we have to discern the non-metaphor as a non-metaphor and therefore an apparent lack of message, meaning and communication potential. It communicates non-metaphor.
Does it work as a metaphor without message? Are onomatopeics metaphors?  Are metaphors onomatopoeic (grouping of words that imitates the sound it is describing, suggesting its source object, such as "click", "bunk", "clang", "buzz", "bang", or animal noises such as "oink", "moo", or "meow") ? In this case an assemblage instead of a sound.  As a non-linguistic is its impact beyond words and still a metaphor? And, if it is then does that say that a metaphor is much more than the sum of its parts and is beyond any of its constituent constructions, parts and systems.  Is its very existence a metaphor?
We began this study in 1966 at Yale University in search of bringing beauty, art and aesthetics back to architecture. To endow the profession with its historical place as the premier aesthetician of society which focused on meaning, significance and beauty rather than finance, economics and efficiency? Believing that without a vision a nation perishes so must architects have a vision beyond the mundane?  To prove the philosophical, sociological and commercial reasons to make buildings as art the making of metaphors, if art was the making of metaphors and architecture was an art then architecture too was the making of metaphors. We also could have expressed our true motives by saying that if art make metaphors and architecture too makes metaphors then they both are art and therefore can be beautiful ( assuming that art and beauty are synonymous) .
As voice and musicians are to music so the constructed metaphor is to architecture. When we hear the musicians we hear the presence of the people. It is the attraction of all the arts to authenticate our humanity, or personage, our reality by the reality of the voice and the confirmation of being. All metaphors share being a tome to our human being and are valued as a person. Consider for example the silent voices of buildings exuding the mason’s craft, the glaser's skills, the structure’s geometry, the volume’s presence and the building’s height.
What ever its composition, content and circumstance the built metaphor is a shelter, used, judged and perceived on its effectiveness to shelter (a dwelling place or home considered as a refuge from the elements). This effectiveness is relative to overall non functional use in the urban fabric, its specific use and how its message content can be read.
While all the arts have a plethora of words, phrases and styles dwelling on their beauty, architecture is without these expressions and meanings. It has an inordinate vocabulary of technical terms but little in the way of its metaphorical tools. These studies hope to provide those tools, vocabulary and examples as I metaphorically apply general, psychological and linguistic theory to further build a metaphoric language applying to built-metaphors known as architectural metaphors.
Having argued that architecture is an art because it too makes metaphors assumed that art is an art and that art is the making of metaphors. While it may be arguable that art is a metaphor I have never seen an argument for this resolution.
To date, my argument for architecture being a metaphor using a literary term has itself never been challenged or proven plausible or unreasonable. 
The future:
Places like Masdar City (Arabic: Masdar, literally “the source”) is a planned city in Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates. It is being built by the Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company, a subsidiary of Mubadala Development Company, with the majority of seed capital provided by the government of Abu Dhabi. Designed by the British architectural firm Foster + Partners, the city will rely entirely on solar energy and other renewable energy sources, with a sustainable, zero-carbon, zero-waste ecology.
Space cities, cities in the desert, etc. Places free form the influences of competing analogies, similes and contextual metaphors. Masdar City is a carbon-neutral community. We are aiming to develop a unique clean tech cluster where companies and researchers from around the world could develop solutions to address climate change and global energy issues. The city itself will be developed in a way to reduce carbon emissions from its development, making it carbon-neutral. The whole city will be provided with renewable power which is not based on fossil fuels and also developing a transportation system that is free from fossil fuel.  In addition to that, all the materials used in the city will be accounted for and offset through the landscape and energy savings.  The city itself is a test bed for technologies from around the world and at the same time it will be the source of solutions for sustainability and advancing energy.
Like my State University of New York in Albany by Edward Durrell Stone, Giant umbrellas, with a design based on the principles of sunflowers, will provide moveable shade in the day, store heat, then close and release the heat at night in the plaza of a new eco-city in the United Arab Emirates. We called ours mushrooms and they were the typical structural design for most of the academic buildings and their connectors.
Campus planning and design, Malls, New Towns, Planned Unite Developments, gated communities, city centers are all opportunities to dub, add  and enhance a minimal building program with metaphors that reach beyond the financial, economic and market demographics to social ,political, communal and cultural targets and sources of the metaphor.  Places which are not like Disney, etc which are market driven but any program which in free of extent contextual metaphorical influences.
www.bariefez-barringten.com


Citations listed alphabetically:

Boyd, Richard; 1.14.0
Conrad, Ulrich; 1.3
Fraser, Bruce; 1.10.0
Gentner, Dedre ;  1.13.0
Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W.; 1.9.0
Glucksberg, Sam; 1.12.0
Jeziorski, Michael; 1.13.0
Kuhn, Thomas S.; 1.15.0
Keysar, Boaz; 1.12.0
Lakoff, George; 1.4
Mayer, Richard E.; 1.17.0
Miller, George A.; 1.11.0
Nigro, Georgia; 1.5.0
Ortony,Andrew;1.0
Oshlag, Rebecca S.; 1.18.0
Petrie, Hugh G; 1.18.0      
Pylyshyn, Zeon W.; 1.16.0
Reddy. Michael J.; 1.2
Rumelhart, David E.; 1.7.0
Sadock, Jerrold M.; 1.6.0
Schon, Donald A. ; 1.1
Searle, John R.; 1.8.0
Sternberg, Robert J.; 1.5.0
Thomas G. Sticht; 1.19.0
Tourangeau, Roger; 1.5.0
Weiss,Paul; 1.4.11



Footnotes listed chronologically:
1.0 Metaphor and Thought: Second Edition
Edited by Andrew Ortony: School of Education and social Sciences and
Institute for the learning Sciences: North Western University
Published by Cambridge University Press
First pub: 1979
Second pub: 1993
1.1 Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy: by Donald A. Schon
1.2 The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language: by Michael J. Reddy.
1.3 In Programs and Manifestos on 20th-Century Architecture about Glasarchitektur Ulrich Conrad'
1.4 The contemporary theory of metaphor by George Lakoff
1.4.11 "Surrogates," published by Indiana University Press. By Paul Weiss
1.5.0 Metaphor, induction, and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
1.6.0 Figurative speech and linguistics by Jerrold M. Sadock
1.7.0 Some problems with the emotion of literal meanings by David E. Rumelhart
1.8.0 Metaphor by John R. Searle
Section on “Metaphor and Representation”:
1.9.0 Process and products in making sense of tropes by Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr.
1.10.0 Interpretation of novel metaphors by Bruce Fraser
1.11.0 Images and models, similes and metaphors by George A. Miller
1.12.0 How metaphors work by Sam Glucksberg and Boaz Keysar
1.13.0  In the Metaphor and Science section of the book: The shift from metaphor to analogy in Western science by Dedre Gentner and Michael Jeziorski
1.14.0 Metaphor and theory change: What is” metaphor” a metaphor for? By Richard Boyd
1.15.0 Metaphor in science by Thomas S. Kuhn
1.16.0 Metaphorical imprecision and the “top down” research strategy by Zeon W. Pylyshyn
Zenon W. Pylyshyn is Board of Governors Professor of Cognitive Science at Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. He is the author of Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not what You Think (2003) and Computation and Cognition: toward a Foundation for Cognitive Science (1984), both published by The MIT Press, as well as over a hundred scientific papers on perception, attention, and the computational theory of mind.
Metaphor and Education is the final section:
Readers may wish to review my monograms on Schools and Metaphors  (Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York and The Metametaphor of architectural education", (North Cypress, Turkish University. December, 1997)
1.17.0 The instructive metaphor: Metaphoric aids to students’ understanding of science by Richard E. Mayer
1.18.0 Metaphor and learning by Hugh G Petrie and Rebecca S. Oshlag
1.19.0 Educational uses of metaphor by Thomas G. Sticht
References:
A. Background:
The first lectures "Architecture as the Making of Metaphors" [3] were organized and conducted near the Art and Architecture building at the Museum of Fine Arts Yale University 11/02/67 until 12/04/67. The guest speakers were: Paul Weiss, William J. Gordon, Christopher Tunnard, Vincent Scully, Turan Onat, Kent Bloomer, Peter Millard, Robert Venturi, Charles Moore, Forrest Wilson, and John Cage.
Three major questions confront both the student and the practitioner of architecture: First, what is architecture? Second, why is architecture an art? Third, what are the architecture's organizing principles? Many answers to these questions have been provided by scholars and professionals, but seldom with enough rigors to satisfy close scrutiny. Nor have the questions been attached to proven and workable forms, so that the art could be developed beyond the limits of personal feelings.

In 1967, a group of master students gathered to discuss the issuance of Perspecta 12, Yale's architectural journal - a discussion which summarized the sad state of the profession as well as the major environmental problems society was generating and failing to solve. The group had already been exposed to studies on the creative process, on contradictions of form, on the comprehension of relevant facts of an existing life style, on planning systems, in educational theories, and in building methodologies, yet it seemed that fundamental question inherent in the profession were being skirted rather than directly attacked.
During the series of colloquia at Yale on art, Irving Kriesberg [4]  had spoken about the characteristics of painting as a metaphor. It seemed at once that this observation was applicable to architecture, to design of occupiable forms. An appeal to Paul Weiss drew from him the suggestion that we turn to English language and literature in order to develop a comprehensive, specific, and therefore usable definition of metaphor. But it soon became evident that the term was being defined through examples without explaining the phenomenon of the metaphor; for our purposes it would be essential to have evidence of the practical utility of the idea embodies in the metaphor as well as obvious physical examples. Out of this concern grew the proposal for a lecture series wherein professional and scholars would not only bring forward the uses of metaphor but would also produce arguments against its use.
For obviously there can be dissent from the metaphorical method; in this case the dissent (which focuses upon the possibility that the metaphor might obscure reality) actually reinforces the metaphor's wide structural applicability. Thus developed the symposium, which was presented by the Department of Architecture at Yale in the same year. 1967, with the intent "to illuminate, in order to refine and develop, the idea because it makes metaphors; that a work of architecture is a metaphor because it too blends certain programmatic specifics with concerns implicit to its own medium.
"Those exploring these possibilities included Paul Weiss, William J.J. Gordon, Peter Millard, Robert Venturi and Charles Moore; the following statements are edited transcriptions of a small portion of the talks which were contributed to this discussion.
B. 3.0 “Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition; by Professor Dr. David Zarefsky of Northwestern University and published by The Teaching Company, 2005 of Chantilly, Virginia
C. 4. Irving Kriesberg; the American painter was born in 1919. He studied painting in America at The Art Institute of Chicago and the University of Chicago from 1938-1941 and later in Mexico from 1942-1946. Kriesberg began his interest in art as a cartoonist in high school in Chicago. In the 1930's he spent many days sketching the work of the great masters Titian & Rembrandt when visiting The Art Institute of Chicago. In the late 1930's he came under the influence of modern art via School of Paris exhibit.
D. 5.0 “Difference and Identity” : 4.0 Gilles Deleuze (French pronunciation: [ʒil dəløz]), (18 January 1925 – 4 November 1995) was a French philosopher of the late 20th century. Deleuze's main philosophical project in his early works (i.e., those prior to his collaborations with Guattari) can be baldly summarized as a systematic inversion of the traditional metaphysical relationship between identity and difference. Traditionally, difference is seen as derivative from identity: e.g., to say that "X is different from Y" assumes some X and Y with at least relatively stable identities. To the contrary, Deleuze claims that all identities are effects of difference. Identities are neither logically nor metaphysically prior to difference, does Deleuze argue, "given that there are differences of nature between things of the same genus."
That is, not only are no two things ever the same, the categories we use to identify individuals in the first place derive from differences. Apparent identities such as "X" are composed of endless series of differences, where "X" = "the difference between x and x'", and "x" = "the difference between...” and so forth. Difference goes all the way down.
To confront reality honestly, Deleuze claims, we must grasp beings exactly as they are, and concepts of identity (forms, categories, resemblances, unities of apperception, predicates, etc.) fail to attain difference in itself. "If philosophy has a positive and direct relation to things, it is only insofar as philosophy claims to grasp the thing itself, according to what it is, in its difference from everything it is not, in other words, in its internal difference."
In analyzing a metaphor we ask:  “What are its commonalities and significant differences and what are the characteristics common to both”.
E. 7.0 Identifying Metaphor in Language: a cognitive approach Style, fall, 2002 by Gerard J. Steen
F. 8.0 The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor: a perspective from Chinese by Ning Yu
G. Art is the intentional and skillful act and/or  product applying a technique and differes from natural but pleasing behaviors and useful or decorative products in their intent and application of a develoed technique and skill with that technique. Art is not limited to fields, prsons or institutions as science, goevernment, securitry, architecutre, engineering, administration, construction, design, decoratiing, sports, etc.

On the other hand in each there are both natural and artistic where metaphors (conceptual and/technical)  make the difference, art is something perfected and well done in that field. For example, the difference between an artistic copy and the original is the art of originality and authorship in that it documents a creative process lacking in the copy.
H. Axiom’s contextual  forms
Three levels of axioms matching three levels of disciplines:
  1. Multidiscipline: Macro most general where the metaphors and axioms and metaphors used by the widest and diverse disciplines, users and societies. All of society, crossing culture, disciplines, professions, industrialist arts and fields as mathematics and interdisciplinary vocabulary.
  2. Interdisciplinary: Between art [G] fields Where as metaphors in general inhabit all these axioms drive a wide variety and aid in associations, interdisciplinary contributions and conversations about board fields not necessary involved with a particular project but if about a project about all context including city plan, land use, institutions, culture and site selection, site planning and potential neighborhood and institutional involvement.
  3. Micro Discipline: Between architects all involved in making the built environment particularly on single projects in voting relevant arts, crafts, manufactures, engineers, sub-con tractors and contractors. As well as owners, users, neighbors, governments agencies, planning boards and town councils.

I. TOC: Metaphor 2012 Monographs
  1.  

    Barie Fez-Barringten

    Is the originator (founder) of “Architecture: the making of metaphors(architecture as the making of metaphors)"
    First lecture at Yale University in 1967
    First published in 1971 in the peer reviewed learned journal:"Main Currents in Modern Thought";
    In 1970, founded New York City not-for-profit called Laboratories for Metaphoric Environments (LME) and has been widely published in many international learned journals including Springer publications, MIT, and Syracuse University.  
    The book “Architecture: the making of metaphors" has been published in February 2012 by Cambridge Scholars Publishing in New Castle on Tyne,UK..
    All glory and honor goes to Jesus Christ who is my Lord and Savior



    Researched Publications: Refereed and Peer-reviewed Journals: "monographs":

    Barie Fez-Barringten; Associate professor Global University

    1. "Architecture the making of metaphors" ©
    Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education; Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.
    2."Schools and metaphors"
    Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.
    3."User's metametaphoric phenomena of architecture and Music":
    “METU” (Middle East Technical University: Ankara, Turkey): May 1995"
      Journal of the Faculty of Architecture
    4."Metametaphors and Mondrian:
    Neo-plasticism and its' influences in architecture" 1993                               Available on Academia.edu since 2008
    5. "The Metametaphor© of architectural education",
                 North Cypress, Turkish University.     December, 1997

    6."Mosques and metaphors"                         Unpublished,1993
    7."The basis of the metaphor of Arabia"      Unpublished, 1994
    8."The conditions of Arabia in metaphor"   Unpublished, 1994
    9. "The metametaphor theorem"                  
    Architectural Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut Arab University.    
    10. "Arabia’s metaphoric images"                Unpublished, 1995
    11."The context of Arabia in metaphor"      Unpublished, 1995
    12. "A partial metaphoric vocabulary of Arabia"
    “Architecture: University of Technology in Datutop; February 1995 Finland
    13."The Aesthetics of the Arab architectural metaphor"
    “International Journal for Housing Science and its applications” Coral Gables, Florida.1993
    14."Multi-dimensional metaphoric thinking"
    Open House, September 1997: Vol. 22; No. 3, United Kingdom: Newcastle uponTyne
    15."Teaching the techniques of making architectural metaphors in the twenty-first century.” Journal of King Abdul Aziz University Engg...Sciences; Jeddah: Code: BAR/223/0615:OCT.2.1421 H. 12TH EDITION; VOL. I and “Transactions” of 
    Cardiff University, UK. April 2010

    16.Word Gram #9” Permafrost: Vol.31 Summer 2009 University of Alaska Fairbanks; ISSN: 0740-7890; page 197
               
    17. "Metaphors and Architecture."© ArchNet.org. October, 2009.at MIT 


    18. “Metaphor as an inference from sign”;© University of Syracuse
        Journal of Enterprise Architecture; November 2009: and nominated architect of the year in speical issue of  Journal of Enterprise Architecture explaining the unique relationship between enterprise and classic building architecture.

    19. “Framing the art vs. architecture argument”; Brunel University (West London); BST: Vol. 9 no. 1:  Body, Space & Technology Journal: Perspectives Section

    20. “Urban Passion”: October 2010; Reconstruction & “Creation”; June 2010; by C. Fez-Barringten; http://reconstruction.eserver.org/;

    21. “An architectural history of metaphors”: ©AI & Society: (Journal of human-centered and machine intelligence) Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Communication: Pub: Springer; London; AI & Society located in University of Brighton, UK;
    AI & Society. ISSN (Print) 1435-5655 - ISSN (Online) 0951-5666 : Published by Springer-Verlag;; 6 May 2010 http://www.springerlink.com/content/j2632623064r5ljk/
    Paper copy: AIS Vol. 26.1.  Feb. 2011; Online ISSN 1435-5655; Print ISSN 0951-5666;
    DOI 10.1007/s00146-010-0280-8; : Volume 26, Issue 1 (2011), Page 103. 

    22. “Does Architecture Create Metaphors?; G.Malek; Cambridge; August 8,2009
    Pgs 3-12  (4/24/2010)

    23. “Imagery or Imagination”:the role of metaphor in architecture:Ami Ran (based on Architecture:the making of metaphors); :and Illustration:”A Metaphor of Passion”:Architecture oif Israel 82.AI;August2010pgs.83-87.

    24. “The sovereign built metaphor” © monograph converted to Power Point for presentation to Southwest Florida Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. 2011

    25.“Architecture:the making of metaphors”©The Book;
    Cambridge Scholars Publishing
    Published: Feb 2012

    Newcastle upon Tyne 

    United Kingdom
    Edited by
    Edward Richard Hart,

    Glasgow

    UK
    Lecture:

    Also, “Gibe” which documents his founding of international Earth Day along with John McConnell (deceased Oct 20, 2012).



1 comment:

Blogger said...

You may be qualified for a new solar program.
Click here to discover if you are eligble now!