I argue that Michael Krausz's philosophy of interpretation has important applications to the aesthetics of architecture. I claim that the taxonomy formed by the association of the interpretive ideals of singularism and multiplism with various ontological theories is useful for organizing and analyzing architectural interpretations. Specifically, I concentrate on how we ought to reconcile the number of competing interpretations of a given work of architecture we are willing to accept and what we should look for in this reconciliation. I conclude that this framework: (1) is useful for assisting interpreters that may be unable or unwilling to overcome differences in their ontological theories and reach agreement about the number of admissible interpretations they are willing to hold; and, (2) fosters an interpretive tolerance yet avoids endorsing interpretive positions that have confused architectural interpretive practice in recent decades.
|Advisor:||Camp, Julie Van|
|School:||California State University, Long Beach|
|School Location:||United States -- California|
|Source:||MAI 48/02M, Masters Abstracts International|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be