| 14 | 0 | 14 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
本文系统梳理了西方建筑理论中具身性概念的发展脉络及理论源头。文章从词源与跨学科视角出发，指出具身性强调身体在认知与意义生成的基础作用。在建筑领域，这一视角推动建筑从静态形式转向以身体经验为核心的动态存在。文章回顾了具身性的历史发展：从古典和文艺复兴时期以维特鲁威为代表的拟人化范式，通过人体比例映射宇宙秩序；到启蒙运动与前现代共情美学及有机主义引入情感与生命力维度；再到20世纪现象学确立身体感知在空间理解的核心地位，强调多感官经验与存在体验。当代阶段，诠释学与跨学科研究扩展了具身概念的内涵，将其视为连接身体、经验与意义生成的关键机制，并对数字技术所引发的“去身体化”倾向提出反思。本文旨在揭示，具身性并非固定范式，而是一种在抽象与经验之间持续运作的中介结构，为理解建筑的本质与人类存在提供了重要路径。
Abstract：This paper systematically reviews the developmental trajectory and theoretical origin of the concept of “embodiment” in Western architectural theory. From an etymological and interdisciplinary perspective,it first argues that embodiment emphasizes the fundamental role of the body in cognition and meaning making. In the field of architecture,this perspective shifts architecture from static form toward a dynamic existence centered on bodily experience. The paper then traces the historical development of embodiment:from the classical and Renaissance anthropomorphic paradigm represented by-Vitruvius,which mapped cosmic order through human proportion;through Enlightenment and pre-modern developments such as empathy aesthetics and organicism,which introduced dimensions of emotion and vitality;to the 20 th century,when phenomenology established bodily perception as central to spatial understanding,emphasizing multisensory experience and existential engagement. In the contemporary stage,hermeneutics and interdisciplinary studies have further expanded the concept,framing it as a key mechanism connecting the body,experience,and meaning generation,while also critically reflecting on the “disembodiment” tendencies brought about by digital technologies. The paper concludes that embodiment is not a fixed paradigm but a mediating structure that continuously operates between abstraction and experience,offering an important approach for understanding the essence of architecture and human existence.
[1]Alle rs,Rudolf."Microcosmus:From Anaximandros to Pa racelsus,"Traditio,Rudolf Allers,"Microcosmus:Fro m Anaximandros to Paracelsus,"Traditio,vol.2(1944):319-407.Vol.2(1944):319-407.
[2]Barbaras,Renaud Barbaras.The Being and the Phenomenon.Bloomington:Indiana University Press,2004.
[3]Dillon,M.C.,ed.Merleau-Ponty Vivant.Albany:State University of New York Press,1991.
[4]Gadamer,Hans-Georg.Dialogue and Dialectics,trans.P.Christopher Smith.New Haven:Yale University Press,1980.
[5]Gibson,James.The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.Hillsdale:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,1986.
[6]Goethe,Johann Wolfgang von Maxims and Reflections,trans.Elisabeth Stopp,ed.and intro.Peter Hutchinson.London;New York;Toronto:Penguin Books,1998.
[7]何星宇,王凯.重新揭示建筑意义的潜在维度:《分裂的再现时代中的建筑》与达利伯·韦瑟利的建筑现象学——阐释学思想[J].建筑师,2024(1):117-124.
[8]Herrmann.Wolfgang.Gottfried Semper:In Search of Architecture.Cambridge:MIT Press,1984.
[9]Kockelmans,Joseph J.,and Theodore J.Kisiel.Phenomenology and the Natural Sciences;Essays and Translations.Eva nston:Northwestern University Press,1970.
[10]Lakoff,George,and Mark Johnson.Metaphors We Live By.Chicago,The University of Chicago,2003.
[11]Lakoff,George,and MarkJohnson.Philosophy in the Flesh:The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought.New York:Basic Books,1999.
[12]Le Corbusier.The Modulor:A Harmonious Measure to the Human Scale,Universally Applicable to Architecture and Mechanics.Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1958.
[13]Leatherbarrow,David.Architecture Oriented Otherwise.New York:Princeton Architectural Press,2009.
[14]Locke,Patricia M.,and Rachel McCann,MerleauPonty:Space,Place,Architecture.Athens:Ohio University Press,2015.
[15]Mallgrave,Harry Francis.Architecture and Embodiment:The Implications of the New Sciences and Humanities for Design.Abington and New York:Routledge,2013.
[16]Mallgrave,Harry Francis,and Eleftherios Ikonomou.Empathy,Form,and Space:Problems in German Aesthetics,1873—1893,trans.and intro.Harry F.Mallgrave and Eleftherios Ikonomou.Santa Monica:Getty Center Publication Programs,1994.
[17]Merleau-Ponty,Maurice.Phenomenology of Perception,trans.Colin Smith.New York:Humanities Press,1962.
[18]Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,and Galen A.Johnson.The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader Philosophy and Painting.Evanston,IL:Northwestern University Press,1996.
[19]Minsky,Marvin.The Society of Mind.New York:Simon&Schuster,1987.
[20]Mitchell,William.City of Bits:Space,Place,and the Infobahn.Cambridge:MIT Press,1996.
[21]O rtega y Gasset,Jose.The Dehumanization of Art and Other Essays on Art,Culture,and Literature.Princeto n:Princeton University Press,1968.
[22]Pallasmaa,Juhani.The Eyes of the Skin:Architecture and the Senses.Hoboken:Wiley,2012.
[23]Pallasmaa,Juhani.The Thinking Hand:Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architectu re.C hichester:Wiley,2009.
[24]Pallasmaa,Juhani.The Embodied Image:Imagination and Imagery in Architecture.Chichester:Wiley,2011.
[25]Pérez-Gómez,Alberto."Architecture as Embodied Knowledge."Journal of Architectural Education,Vol.40,No.2,Jubilee Issue(Winter,1987):57-58.
[26]Plato.Timaeus.
[27]Sag redo,Diego de.Medidas del Romano.Toledo:Remón de Petras,1526.
[28]Scamozzi,Vincenzo.L'idea dell'architettura universale.1615.
[29]Sullivan,Louis H.Kindergarten Chats and Other Writings.New York:Dover Publications,Inc.,1979.
[30]Sullivan,Louis H.A System of Architectural Ornament New York:Rizzoli,1924.
[31]Van Eck,Caroline.Organicism in NineteenthCentury Architecture:An Inquiry into its Theoretical and Philosophical Background.Amsterdam:Arch itecture and Natura Press,1994
[32]Vesely.Dali bo r."Space,Simulation and Disembodiment in Contemporary Architecture."The Visible and the Invisible,OASE.Vol.58(2001):59-74.
[33]Vitruvius.Ten Books on Architecture,trans.and illus.Ingrid D.Rowland,Thomas Noble Howe,and Michael Dewar.New York:Cambridge University Press,1999.
[34]Wittkower,Rudolf.Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanities.New York;London:W.W.Norton&Company,1971.
(1)原文为"Wir wissen von keiner Welt als im Bezug auf den Menschen."见Johann Wolfgang von Goethe,Maxims and Reflections,trans.Elisabeth Stopp,ed.and intro.Peter Hutchinson(London;New York;Toronto:Penguin Books,1998),Artikel 1077.
(2)本文的研究范围从三个维度加以界定:其一,在地域维度上,聚焦西方建筑理论的发展脉络;其二,在文献选择上,研究对象不仅涵盖具有重要理论价值的著作和文章,尤其重视兼具建筑师与理论家双重身份的原创文本,同时亦纳入相关图像文献,包括插图与绘画等视觉材料;其三,本文以文本分析为主,原则上不涉及具体建筑案例的分析。通过对关键理论文本的系统梳理与阐释,力图揭示具身性概念在西方建筑理论中的演进路径及其背后的思想基础。
(3)Marcus Vitruvius Pollio,Ten Books on Architecture,tra ns.and illus.Ingrid D.Rowla nd,Thomas Noble Howe,and Michael Dewar(New York:Cambridge Unive rsity Press,1999),47.(本文作者译)
(4)J.J.Pollitt,Ancient View of Greek Art:Criticism,History,and Terminology(New Haven:Yale University Press,1974),15.
(5)Leon Battista Alberti,Joseph Rykwert,Neil Leach,Robert Tavernor,On the Art of Building in Ten Books(Cambridge:MIT Press,1988),有关阿尔伯蒂“身体”概念的讨论,见Françoise Choay,The Rule and the Model:On the Theory of Architecture and Urbanism ed.Denise Bratton,(Cambridge:MIT Press,1997).
(6)同(5),5.
(7)同(5),156.
(8)安德烈亚的“维特鲁威人”也成为列奥纳多·达·芬奇著名“维特鲁威人”的原型。
(9)关于“中心式教堂”(也称之为“复合式教堂”),见Rudolf Wittkower,Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanities(New York;London:W.W.Norton&Company,1971),part l.
(10)"capital"(柱头)一词的拉丁词源"caput"(意为“头部”)。
(11)《罗马度量》为首部西班牙语建筑论著。
(12)Diego de Sagredo.Medidas del Romano(Toledo:Remón de Petras,1526),22.另见Michael Hill and Peter Kohane,"'The Signature of Architecture':Compositional Ideas in the Theory of Profiles."Architectural Histories 3(1):18.
(13)Vincenzo Scamozzi,L'idea dell'architettura universale(1615),vol.2,bk5,146.
(14)Louis H.Sullivan,Kindergarten Chats and Other Writings(New York:Dover Publications,Inc.,1979),29.
(15)Louis Sullivan,A System of Architectural Ornament(New York:Rizzoli,1924);另见Caroline van Eck,O rganicism in Nineteenth-Century Architecture:An Inquiry into its Theoretical and Philosophical Background(Amsterdam:Architecture and Natura Press,1994),262-3.
(16)罗伯特·维舍尔的父亲、德国作家、戏剧家.艺术理论加弗里德里希·特奥多尔·菲舍尔(Friedrich Theodor Vischer,1807—1887)也曾经在其写作中提到共情这个术语,但罗伯特·威舍尔的论文是对共情这一确切概念进行系统论述的首部重要研究。见Harry Francis Mallgrave and Eleftherios Ikonomou,"Introduction,"Empathy,Form,and Space:Problems in German Aesthetics,1873—1893,trans.and intro.Harry F.Mallgrave and Eleftherios Ikonomou,(Santa Monica:Getty Center Publication Programs,1994),150;另见Harry Francis Mallgrave,Architectu re and Em bodiment:The Implications of the New Sciences and Humanities for Design(Abington and New York:Routledge,2013),122.
(17)维舍尔的共情概念可追溯到康德在一个世纪前提出的艺术审美判断命题。康德通过“合目的性”(Zweckmässigkeit)这一核心概念做出解答:即人类先天具有对世界和谐秩序的感知能力,这种预设的“目的性感知“构成了我们评价艺术(包括建筑)之美的基准。艺术作品个组成部分所呈现的内在和谐程度,直接决定其审美价值的认定层级。
(18)Heinrich Wölfflin,"Prolegomena to a Psychology of Architectu re."Empathy,Form,and Space:Problems in German Aesthetics,1873—1893,150.
(19)同(18),151.
(20)同(18).160.
(21)August Schmarsow."Essence of Architecture Creation,"in Empathy,Form,and Space,288.
(22)Gottfried Semper,"On the Attributes of Form Beauty,"in Wolfgang Herrmann,Gottfried Semper:In Search of Architecture(Cambridge:MIT Press,1984),226-227.
(23)同(22)。
(24)见Jose Ortega y Gasset,The Dehumanization of Art and Other Essays on Art,Cultu re,and Literature(Princeton:Princeton University Press,1968).
(25)Le Corbusier,The Modulor A Harmonious Measure to the Human Scale,Universally Applicable to Architecture and Mechanics(Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1958).值得注意是,这一判断并不适用于柯布西耶的全部作品,尤其是其职业生涯后期的创作。
(26)Le Corbusier,The Modulor:A Harmonious Measure to the Human Scale,Universally Applicable to Architecture and Mechanics(Basel&Boston:Birkhäuser,2004).
(27)有关梅洛-庞蒂的知觉现象学(不只包括梅洛-庞蒂的著作),见Maurice Merleau-Ponty,"Space."in Phenomenology of Perception,trans.Colin Smith(New York:Humanities Press,1962);Maurice Merleau-Ponty,"Cézanne's Doubt,"in Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Galen A.Johnson,The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader:Philosophy and Painting(Evanston,IL:Northwestern University Press,1996):59-75;Maurice MerleauPonty,1960."Eye and Mind."in Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Galen A.Johnson.The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader:Philosophy and Painting(Evanston,IL:Northwestern University Press,1996)121-50;Edward S.Casey."'The Element of Voluminousness':Depth and Place Reexamined."in Dillon M.C.,ed.MerleauPonty Vivant(Albany,NY:State University of New York Press,1991);Joseph Kockelmans,"MerleauPonty on Space Perception and Space."in Joseph J.Kockelmans and Theodore J.Kisiel,Phenomenology and the Natural Sciences;Essays and Translations(Evanston:Northwestern University Press,1970);Patricia M.Locke and Rachel McCann,Merleau-Ponty:Space.Place,Architecture(Athens:Ohio University Press,2015),and Renaud Barbaras,The Being and the Phenomenon(Bloomington:Indiana University Press,2004).
(28)Steven Holl,Foreword,in Juhani Pallasmaa,The Eyes of the Skin:Architecture and the Senses(Hoboken:Wiley,2012),7-8.
(29)Steven Holl,Juhani Pallasmaa,and Alberto PérezGómez,Questions of Perception:Phenomenology of Architecture(San F rancisco:William Stout Publishers,2006.
(30)Juhani Pallasmaa,The Eyes of the Skin.69.
(31)Juhani Pallasmaa,The Thinking Hand:Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture(Chichester:Wiley,2009).
(32)Juhani Pallasmaa,The Embodied Image:Imagination and Imagery in Architecture(Chichester:Wiley,2011).
(33)何星宇,王凯.重新揭示建筑意义的潜在维度:《分裂的再现时代中的建筑》与达利伯·韦瑟利的建筑现象学一阐释学思想[J].建筑师,2024(1):117-124.
(34)韦瑟利在文中的对象所是威廉·J·米切尔(William J.Mitchell)的著作《比特之城:空间、场所与信息高速公路》(City of Bits:Space,Place,and the Infobahn,Cambridge:MIT Press,1996)。需要指出的是,“远程临场感”(telepresence)的概念最早源自美国认知科学家与电脑专家马文·明斯基(Marvin Minsky),见其著作《心智社会》(The Society of Mind,New York:Simon&Schuster,1987年)。见Dali bo r Vesley,"Space,Simulation and Disembodiment in Contemporary Architecture,"The Visible and the Invisible,OASE,vol.58(2001):59-74.
(35)David Leatherbarrow."Space in and out of Architecture,"in David Leatherbarrow,Architecture Oriented Otherwise(New York:Princeton Architectural Press,2009),239-68.
(36)Leatherbarrow,"The Law of Meander,"in Architectu ral Oriented Otherwise,269-95.
(37)Alberto Pérez-Gómez,"Architecture as Embodied Knowledge."Journal of Architectural Education,Vol.40,No.2,Jubilee Issue(Winter,1987):57-58.
(38)Harry Francis Mallg rave,Architecture and Embodiment:The Implications and the New Sciences and Humanities for Design(Abington and New York:Routledge,2013).
(39)James Gibson,The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception(Hillsdale:Lawrence E rlbaum Associates.1986).
(40)George Lakoff and Mark Johnson,Metaphors We Live By(Chicago,The University of Chicago,2003);Geo rge Lakoff and Mark Johnson,Philosophy in the Flesh:The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought(New York:Basic Books,1999).
(41)“人宇同构”的哲学传统的思想渊源可追溯至公元前5世纪的前苏格拉底时期,特别是以伊利亚城为中心伊利亚学派(Eleatics)。该学派的代表人物巴门尼德(Pa rmenides)和墨利索斯(Melissus)发展了一套独特的一元论体系,其核心命题“万物归一”主张终极实在(ultimate reality)是同质(homogenous),不可分割的整体。在他们的理论框架中,真正的“存在”被赋予永恒性和超越物质性的基本特质。然而,这一本体论很快遭到根本性质疑。其中最具颠覆性的批评来自以被冠以“虚无主义者”之称的高尔吉亚(Gorgias)。他通过三重否定建构了彻底的怀疑主义(radically skeptical)立场:首先否定现实的存在;其次论证即便存在也无法被认知:最终指出即便能被认知也无法通过语言传达。这一认识论转向不仅动摇了伊利亚学派的理论基础,也为西方哲学开辟了新的思辨路径。柏拉图在《蒂迈欧篇》(Timaeus)中建构了一套二元人性体系,将人类本质解析为灵魂(psyche)与身体(soma)两个本体论维度。在他看来,灵魂作为神圣创造的永恒实体,与作为暂时物质载体的身体形成鲜明对比。基于这二元区分,柏拉图将人体定义为一种不完善且可变的存续状态,其完善机制依赖于“必然性”和“理性”之间的持续互动。值得注意的是,柏拉图的理论与维特鲁威的学说相似,二者都将人体理解为宇宙的微观映照。在这种类比关系中,人体与宇宙均被视为具有生命特质与智慧属性的有机整体,其结构与组成——无论在灵魂还是肉体层面——均展现出精确的数学秩序与完美的比例关系。与柏拉图的身心二元论形成鲜明对立,亚里士多德提出了灵魂(eidos)与身体(ousia)的统一本体论。在他看来,灵魂作为非物质性的实体形式,赋予身体以本质性的结构组织与目的性意义。这一学说对随后的斯多葛(Stoic)学派产生了范式转化式的影响,推动该学派发展出彻底的唯物主义哲学体系——主张包括人类灵魂、道德德性乃至神性本质(即“理性”或logos)在内的所有存在皆为物质实体。斯多葛学派由此确立了一种理性与物质完全统一的宇宙论模型,在这种范式下,身体与灵魂的传统分野被根本性超越,两者的界限变得非常模糊。这种哲学思想深刻塑造了维特鲁威的建筑理论体系,促使他将人体同时界定为物理结构的完美典范和理性秩序的物质载体。见Plato,Timaeus.51a-53d。另见Hans-Georg Gadamer,Dialogue and Dialectics,trans.P.Christopher Smith(New Haven:Yale University Press,1980),172-93;见Wittkower,Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanities,part I.
(42)关于中世纪与文艺复兴时期思想中的“大宇宙与小宇宙”的对应关系,可参考Rudolf Allers,"Microcosmus:From Anaximandros to Paracelsus."Traditio,vol.2(1944):319-407.
(43)比如人体与建筑/星象、人体不同部位与黄宫十二道,或者人体器官与宇宙结构的对应。
(44)Plato,Phaedo,100A.
基本信息:
DOI：10.26934/j.jzs.20260416001
中图分类号:TU-0
引用信息:
[1]丁力扬.西方建筑具身理论的发展与溯源[J].建筑师,2026,No.241(03):4-17.DOI:10.26934/j.jzs.20260416001.
2026-06-20
2026-06-20