RM - project 1

School of Architecture, Building & Design Masters of Architecture

Research Methods (RES70103) ASSIGNMENT 1

Lecturer: Associate Professor Dr. Veronica Ng Foong Peng LIAW YAU VERN CHONG YI HUI NUR ALIA NADIA BINTI RAUB

0326627 0324404 0346192

1 | page

Table of Content 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Definition of research 3.0 Roles of research 4.0 Relationship between research and design 5.0 Logical argumentation 5.1 Characteristics of logical argumentation 5.1.1 A First Principle 5.1.2 A Spectrum of Logical Argumentation Typologies 5.2 Strategic traits of logical argumentation 5.3 Tactics of logical argumentation 5.4 Strengths and weaknesses 5.5 Case study 5.5.1 Stewart Brand’s Theory 5.5.2 BIM 6.0 Conclusion 7.0 References

2 | page

1.0 Introduction Architecture is a field rifled with various viewpoints and subjectivity. These various points of view are all based on research that supports their point of view. This paper will be discussing the definition and role of research along with the relationship between research and design. In addition, one chosen methodology which is logical argumentation is explained and depicted in order to understand the processes involved.

2.0 Definition of research Research is defined by scientific and systematic research, which provides pertinent information on specific topics, which includes an act to learn insight, creativity, product and process development, while also providing a more comprehensive and future-oriented view of complex issues.The method employed in doing research can either be theoretical which is derived from the past knowledge or it can be empirical, basically based on present experience.

Research in architecture exists in two essential settings which comprises both academic/scientific and practice, not one or the other one is more overwhelming as they are additionally as vital to one another.

3.0 Role and purpose of research in architecture The progression of architecture is accelerated by the acquisition of knowledge, which is obtained through various research models. With research being included, architecture will be capable of achieving a balance in terms of academia and practise, allowing both aspects to be explored and developed further. Designers/Researchers will be able to become acquainted with a certain phenomenon and gain new insights into it while accurately depicting the characteristics of a specific practise. Methodological tools and research techniques are used to locate and collect information to analyze the research question. Only then can a conclusion be drawn for the research hypothesis through research and discussion in terms on how successful it was in achieving its objectives.

Based on the reader by Faste, design research has two categories. It involves a systematic investigation that establishes novel facts while design deals with the act of planning and communicating the course of action. The combination of these two fairly well-understood areas of discipline, research and design, will result in a seemingly meaningful investigation of knowledge through premeditated design.

Ken Friedman (2008) states that theory construction also has a role in the research of architecture by creating a general theory of design to act as a guide for problem solving.

Furthermore, Friedman (2008) also explained that the various forms of conceptualization and explicit knowledge are just as important as tacit knowledge. Friedman (2008) stated that 3 | page

“without a body of theory-based knowledge, the design profession’s future will be unprepared to face the challenges”.

4.0 Different relationship between research and designs Several concepts are used to describe the relationship between research and design, based on what we learned from the readers.

The first concept is “Research through DESIGN through Research” by Wolfgang Jonas (2004).

Reciting from Wolfgang Jonas’s design orientation, it suffices to say that research and design conceive the involvement of investigation and studies towards academic presence and human-based integration with the density to acquire knowledge that is further to be known. For ‘Design’, isolated from scientific support will fail to translate into realistic application and practicality for human usage (lack of analyze towards human social behaviour/culture/ realization/ knowledge of users) and ‘future developments’ as in term that new innovative ideas might not overcome lack of resources and technology which can support the truth meaning of ‘design’ / true developments to be transition into real world applications. For ‘Research’, ‘Science approaching designerly ways of knowledge production’ (Jonas 2004) - which evokes ‘research through design’ as concepts to involve scientific approach into design and shifting ideas towards knowledge production. Scientific approach without design intervention may not develop communication between human based integration and presence of nature.for example ‘Building construct as a building but without value or meaning’ Most of the hypothesis derived from various scientific investigation but without the density of experimentation to exploit the potential of data for developing theory ,it would be a critical challenge to render the representation of experience.

In “Design through Research'' by Faste (2012), research involves systematic investigation that establishes novel facts while design deals with the act of planning and communicating the course of action. There are four domains of research which are “scientific” and “practice based”, categorise by the knowledge field e.g. math, sciences, history or art and the method employed can be either “theoretical” (derived from the past knowledge) or “empirical” (derived from present experience) (Faste, 2012). When design is done as a kind of research, it involves deductive reasoning which is rooted in present experience and the fact that the field of knowledge is “Art”, design research is empirically oriented and “applied” approaches to knowledge discovery and creation. We can conclude that ‘design research” is a subset of many research activities.

In “Research in Art and Design” by Christopher Frayling (1993), analysed varied stereotypes in their perception of research which comprises fine artists, designers, research scientists and practitioners. Frayling was able to ascertain three types of research. “Research into art and design” which is a simple historical research with a range of analytical insights on art and design. Second, although “research by art and design” is less obvious, it is also clear and recognisable. It does lack the fundamental process of documentation as the evidence is often

4 | page

empirical. Thirdly, “analysis for art and design” is unique from the others in that the final result of the research is an artefact that is conveyed through visualisation, whether iconic or imagistic.

For “Research through Design (RtD)” it has been defined as a collection of criteria applied at various stages of the research and design process that allows for systematic creative practise that produces explicit knowledge while preserving freedom of expression. This approach strengthens the innovative methodology described by Jonas (2014) which suggests that design should not be concerned with the “true" but rather the “real‘.

The extraction of information occurs in stages of: - Ontological aspect - Epistemological aspect - Expected contributions - Methodological aspect - Limits In research through design, the design process becomes the research process and the outcomes are disseminated through artefacts which offer a prime role in producing knowledge (Godin & Zahedi 2014). To tackle the problems in which we are to obtain knowledge, the epistemology of experimentation is key as going through the trial and error of experimentation is normally utilized in design research.

In our conclusion, research and design should be correlated within each aspect to execute significance value in life and scientific guided approach to bridge the gap between artificial (human based) and natural aspect. Despite that, ‘Research’ acts as a guidance to bring logical and practical sense into the design process which will not limit ‘Design’ from exploration and future development. In another term, smarty applies scientific research to project possibilities, widens people’s (academic peer / practitioners) perspective, and builds a symbiotic relationship between ‘imagination & projection’ and ‘real & truth’.

5.0 What is logical argumentation?

In seeking new knowledge, a series of systematic inquiries needs to be done by researchers as part of the research process. There are many research methods that could be conducted and logical argumentation is one of them. Logical argumentation is the strategy of inquiry where interdisciplinary study, reasoning, inference or evidence through one's logical thinking were developed to construct a conclusion. Through a series of arguments, be it a piece of reasoning, inference or evidence, it allows us to examine whether the knowledge is accepted or not. This is why the ending of this research method is always unique broad explanatory theories. Research in architecture discipline tends to use logical argumentation methods intentionally or unintentionally. However, it needs to be supported by other methods as well, for example using simulation or experimentation research to prove and solidify the logic.

5 | page

As emphasized by Groat and Wang, the fundamental traits of logical argumentation research methods are the ‘enumeration of first principles’ (Groat and Wang,2013). This is where researchers tend to find self evidence in order to construct broad explanatory theory. In logical argumentation, the knowledge is created by framing logical theory, concept and also it’s set of categories. This diverse form of information needs to be clearly integrated to be used as evidence of the research question to avoid muddled or unorganised reasoning.

Secondly, large and desperate realities are organised into a comprehensible framework.

This characteristic was explained through Building Information Modelling (BIM), a research done

by Ajla Akasamija, Ivanka Iordanova as an example. Using the BIM platform as a tactic/strategy for logical argumentation research method, a stipulation of logical frameworks appears through the series of data as the best evidence of a particular design solution which also creates a new order of things.

5.1 Characteristics of logical argumentation 5.1.1 A First Principle First Principles as a fundamental proposition that is so self-evident whereas any more elementary evidence does not need to be derived.

Prince Charles proposed the "Ten Commandments" as the first principles to adopt in order to achieve successful architectural design, but it is unclear how broad a domain must be represented in a logical framework and it is rendered as a simple proposition or inference by definition.

Furthermore, according to Aristotle’s philosophy which categorizes first principles in terms of house construction into 4 elements as “material to build,the formal cause,the efficient cause and final cause”, he addressed the primary task of philosophy is to experience the physical traits and understand the structure of cause. The illustration of his perspective corresponds to the truth behind the theories constructed, which define how people have the knowledge of an element when their perception is similar to it.

6 | page

5.1.2 A Spectrum of Logical Argumentation Typologies.

Figure 1 Spectrum of logical argumentation

Every person perceives things in a unique way, either through knowledge that influenced different academic peers or architects (Eg. Mies Van der Rohe, “Less is More”) or Aksamija,Iordan-ova and other researchers made a breakthrough in the BIM field by capturing the tacit design knowledge in alphanumeric terms,we can divided the spectrum pole that people would identify and being convinced into 3 parts shown in Figure 1.

From the left pole are the formal/mathematical frameworks which researchers decipher the software's capabilities ,so that they are able to analyze the figural grammar, generate design configurations, analyzes spatial location and organizes layers of information into visualizations using GISs(Geographic information systems), using computer-aided design (CAD programs) with intelligent 3D objects to aid in BIM field. As stated by Groat and Wang “analyze extant designs for their basic syntactic rationale, or those that generate new figurative schemas based upon a formal‐syntactic rationale.”

As for the middle pole, the frameworks are characterized with a mixture of formal or mathematical systems and cultural/discursive, which rule-based constructed systems analyze space and form and also take into consideration cultural aspects.

Take an example of “Space Syntax”, a methodology advocated by Hillier and Hanson (1984) in their book, "The Social Logic of Space," which asserted that the arrangement of buildings and spaces has a profound impact on human activity. This approach, which includes access analysis, axial analysis, and visibility analysis, expresses spatial relationships between space and human action in highly empirical, graphic and algebraic terminology.

While on the right end pole, empowered by the large scale of cultural worldview that is embedded as a logical argument with both theoretical clarity and rhetorical power. As ‘Theoretical clarity’ refine the importance of ensuring that all stakeholders define and interpret terms in the same way. ‘Rhetorical power‘ seeks to persuade others to accept certain conclusions on the basis of premises they already accept.

7 | page

Logical argumentation is not easily recognised because somehow the researcher may not realise they are adopting this method in their research. There is a blur boundary between logical argumentation and correlational research or qualitative research. However, there are two basic traits we can look into to determine if logical argumentation is being used as a research method.

Firstly, by looking at the outcome if a broad explanatory theory is made. Second trait is, if all data collected from any research strategy is organised into a coherent summary.

5.2 The Strategic Traits Paradigmatic innovation as the starting traits that discussed in Groat and Wang’s book which they addressed the logical argumentation has the proclivity to connect previously diverse variables, or obscure and unappreciated factors, into cohesive systems with significant and, in some cases, unique explanatory strength. This system's innovation offers a new viewpoint on historical facts or current trends, and can well shape debate at a paradigmatic level only if the system outcomes a good term.

The ideology that was founded in logical argumentation in the philosophy of science from the 20th century, Thomas Kuhn's theory from "Structure of Scientific Revolutions," which discussed that scientists work within a paradigmatic worldview that governs how they interpret information, thereby linking scientific research to cultural realities.As an example, Galileo proposed that the earth orbits around the sun rather than the other way around. Mivon Kwon published her book “One Place After Another” with the attempts to tackle the question of public sculpture art recite in specific ‘site’ and ‘the sculptural object’ does not share a fixed relationship therefore they are no longer set and object-centered, but now part of a ‘spatial-political' cultural structure. Despite the fact that the exercise is ineffective, the author uses logical argumentation to create an explanatory paradigm.

First principles are the enabling requirements for a specific explanatory framework, and are logically referred to as a priori in relation to the topic at hand. On the other hand, necessary consequences will be resulted if ‘a priori’ first principle is identified. Anthony Flew defines necessity as “a proposition is said to be necessarily true, or to express logically necessary truth if and only if the denial of that proposition would involve self-contradiction.” For formal/mathematical systems, it comprises equations to generate the necessary information and analyze the principles ; for cultural/discursive treaties, the usage of rhetorical power is demonstrated to provide the basis of premises which is necessary.Thus, every factual instance is simply confirmation of those principles.

Since the framework of logical argumentation can be integrated in a broader scope on the basis of the principles to transcend disciplinary distinctions, which create correlations between scientific paradigms and how they change with architectural stylistic times, frameworks tend to be interdisciplinary. From Wang, the logical framework can apply at different scales. First example,Hillier dealt with the principles about certain locations of persons in space and the

8 | page

visual field observed at that certain location ,in his book “Space Is The Machine” , these studies showed logical application towards cities as well as residential interiors.

Secondly,the applicable principles such as Brand’s 6 ‘S’ categories (site,structure,skin, services, space plan, stuff) are not only limited to building layers,it also can be used in a city development morphology scale. Take Figure 2 as the formal evolution of Riverside Avenue, in Spokane, Washington with the application of Brand’s theory explain the changes in morphological aspect over 100 years, from 2002-2020, some physical traits of the building has changed but the structures remain.In an urban scale it has turned into a throughway to Martin Luther King Way. Despite the subtle changes, the effect has rippled on a bigger scale.

Figure 2 : The evolution of Riverside Avenue, in Spokane, Washington Pic source (2020): Google Maps

9 | page

According to Aristotle's four causes framework, an explanatory system is applicable to most modes of inquiry. In this regard, Kuhn's theory (Groat and Wang, 2013) in paradigm shift is also regarded as the primary logical system. Primary logical systems describe the fundamental principles and relationships that support the system; as a result, they spawn subsequent smaller frameworks with a greater focus of implementation. The domain mapped by the primary system tends to be deeper than secondary studies even with new materials.

Brand’s six categories (site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff) is the best example to frame a primary system. The Open Building as shown in Figure 3 directly applies Brand’s system. The building components are prefabricated off-site to control efficiency, cost, and climate, and are then brought back to the site for easy installation.

March and Stiny’s early work in shape grammar is also another precedent of Brand’s primary system. They proposed that both man's and nature's works can be simplified to distinctive rules governing line-to-space relationships, thus providing the arrangement of shapes to a given space as a new basis to architecture design.

Figure 3 : Bensonwood Homes separates different components of a building, prefabricated many assemblies in controlled environments. This also controls waste. Courtesy of Bensonwood Homes.

10 | page

5.3 Tactics of Logical Argumentation: The first tactic of logical argumentation is by (1) defining the first principles and its logical relations. First principles are usually expressed in technical terms where researchers must be able to critically understand them. It's only then that the intent of the logical system makes sense. Groat and Wang divided the first principles into three categories; first principles of quantity, first principles of quality and lastly first principles of origin. To some extent, first principles of quantity and first principles of quality are related to each other.

After first principles be it from quantity, quality or origin kinds, the next step is to find out its relational linkages. The linkages can either be ‘necessity’ which means explicitly embedded in a proposition (it must be so) or ‘contingent’, which means one hypothesis will result in a number of outcomes. The logical evidence created from necessity relations were different in different spectrums. For instance in a formal/mathematical spectrum, the relation created is straightforward or directly based on the numerical data provided while in the culture/discursive spectrum, nomic necessity relation is used as the basis of the arguments. Nomic necessity is dependent on nature's behavior where culture, nature or machine were considered and it varies depending on personal/individual point of view. Some examples of nomic necessity relation is “building must be symmetrical because nature has made the human body duly proportioned” Vitruvious. (Groat and Wang, 2013) Next, the relational linkages of the first principles can also be defined via terms induction or deduction. Generally, induction reasoning draws generalisation while on the other hand, deduction reasoning draws conclusion. As induction reasoning is solely based on generalisation, the proposition is not as strong as necessity because there is contingency of possible outcomes. Both induction and deduction relational linkages reasoning have their own unique strengths and advantages. For example, although the proposition of induction is many and it may not be 100% correct, there's still room for explanatory theories to be derived and discussed.

Secondly, unlike mathematics/formal systems, (2) rhetorical tactics in cultural and discursive systems is vital to convey the arguments and make it acceptable. The tactics include naming, association and dissociation, analogy, story, graphic images, appeals to group identity, dividing or integrating and lastly authority. All these rhetorical tactics meant to find a relation between the first principles.

Last tactic in logical argumentation mentioned by Groat and Wang is, (3) to categorise the first principles and those can be categorise by: - Simple categories - Cross categories - By spectrums or spectra - By adjacency matrices

11 | page

5.4. Strengths and Weaknesses of Logical Argumentation As all other research methods, logical argumentation has its own strength and weakness, with appropriate applicable circumstances. Groat and Wang (2013) illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of this analysis approach as : Strength : First principles are identified as the common denominator(s) for a broad range of apparently different variables, and an underlying or overarching framework is provided that combines them together into a conceptual construct that can characterise, justify, and protect within its field of concern.

Since first principles are an essential component of any research design, the principles of logical argumentation will assist in identifying and organising them in an understandable manner.

Logical argumentation is also useful in other research designs as a technique for grouping basic principles coherently.

Weakness: It's not straightforward to classify basic categories, as Prince Charles demonstrated; examples of ambiguous categories abound in the literature. It is often possible to slip into the habit of wishing for a well-accepted amount of categories, such as three or seven, while six seems to "feel" incomplete. When Prince Charles dubbed his collection "the Ten Commandments," he was clearly concerned about precedent. However, there is no internal reason why his system's material had to be comprised of ten times.

A logical system may not be an exact reflection of the truth it seeks to describe while being internally consistent from a logical standpoint. As a result, logical systems must be tested (and they should be amenable to testing).

12 | page

5.5 Case studies related to logical argumentation 5.5.1 Stewart Brand's Theory

Figure 4 : A representation of Brand’s theory showcasing the building layers’ rate of changes, indicating the rate increases in relation to how the “stuff” or a building changes for a period of time.(Groat & Wang, 2013, p384)

Referring to Stewart Brand’s “How Building Learn” where he stated the first principles which include “site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff” can be described as any building from the agglomeration of those 6 layers. As shown in Figure 4, the framework refers to Frank Duffy's earlier proposal that all its frameworks be cited as an explanatory principle. The theory of Brand studies time-related changes in the six layers, and it was said that the changing rate increases significantly against “stuff”.

However, Brand's implementation of the six technical terminology was straightforward, and the meanings of each term were well specified without the use of ambiguity or overlapping.As a result of Brand's commitment to the first principle, new knowledge can be discussed and explored with his framework, which is not limited to building aspects alone but can be applied in facilities management, preservation of historical buildings or functions as a mechanism for architects to allow the projection of future ,alterations or additions to be conducted as a guide.(Groat and Wang,2013).The framework technical term clearly discussed the compelling argument for the recognition that every building is an evolving process, and it educated us about the physical involvement of people with the need to respond to changing needs over time.

13 | page

5.5.2 Building Information Modelling Another example cited by Groat and Wang (2013) is Building Information Modelling, which was investigated by Ajla Aksamija, Ivanka Iordanova, and other researchers in an attempt to construct a logical framework. BIM contains information about any component that is in a project. Therefore, BIM is a digital representation of the characteristics, function and physical aspect of a building in a project. BIM has allowed good progress in the construction world especially in the way buildings are usually represented (2D). Building representations can all be transformed into interactive models (3D), construction sequencing (4D) and immediate cost estimating with tweaking (5D) within their platforms (Groat & Wang, 2013). BIM illustrates a logical argumentation feature by enabling to extract hidden knowledge into insight. However, the formulation of its first concepts derived from "implicit" information that can be integrated with BIM posed a challenge.The researchers made several attempts to classify the categories that reflect implicit information. The process of logical argumentation would have been fulfilled if the capturing of implicit information could be represented alphanumerically.

6.0 Conclusion In conclusion, the logical argumentation approach entails the task of developing general explanatory theories. In other words, acquiring knowledge through logical argumentation is accomplished through the process of logical description or abstract theories that pertain to some other fact (Niezabitowska, 2018). The enumeration of first principles is emphasised as the most fundamental characteristic of logical argumentation, serving as its anchor in explaining results obtained via this process. Moreover, the construction of explanatory structures by logical argumentation becomes an effective method of responding to "how" and "why" questions for case studies (Sarvimaki, 2017).

14 | page

7.0 References 1. Faste, T., & Faste, H. (2012). DEMYSTIFYING “DESIGN RESEARCH”: DESIGN IS NOT RESEARCH, RESEARCH IS DESIGN. 2. Frayling, c. (1993). Royal College of Art Research Papers Vol 1 No 1 1993/4: Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art. 3. Friedman, K. (2008). Research into, by and for design Frayling’s Research in Art and Design.

Journal of Visual Arts Practice, 7(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1386/jvap.7.2.153/1 4. Godin, D., & Zahedi, M. (2014). Aspects of Research through Design : A Literature Review.

Proceedings of DRS 2014: Design’s Big Debates, 1667–1680.

5. Groat, L. N., & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods. New York: J. Wiley.

6. Prince Charles, “Ten Commandments of Architecture,” in Harry Francis Mallgrave and Christina Contandriopoulos (eds.), Architectural Theory, Volume II: An Anthology from 1871 to 2005 (Malden, MA: Blackwell), 527. Prince Charles’s entire list: Place, Hierarchy, Scale, Harmony, Enclosure, Materials, Decoration, Art, Signs,and Lights.

7. Space syntax. (n.d.). HiSoUR - Hi So You Are. Retrieved April 11, 2021, from https://www.hisour.com/space-syntax-28293/ 8. Bob Hillier, “Cities as Movement Economies,” in Space Is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996),149–181.

9. Vitruvius, The Ten Books on Architecture (New York: Dover Publications, 1960), I.3.2.

Aristotle, Physics, Book II, section 3.

10. Aristotle, Physics, Book II, section 3.

11. The Metaphysics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI).

(2018, October 31). Thomas Kuhn (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/#PercObseIncoWorlChan 12. Stewart Brand, How Buildings Learn (New York: Viking, 1994), 2–23.

13. Google. (n.d.). [Google directions to 214 W Riverside Ave]. Retrieved April 11, 2021, from https://goo.gl/maps/z7sb51dSBDgDXP8FA 14. Miwon Kwon, One Place After Another: Site Specific Art and Locational Identity (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002)

15 | page