2026-09-18T21:44:45Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/requestoai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/773232022-01-13T07:54:12Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023
N. John Habraken.
Saslaw, Ellen
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Architecture.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Architecture
2013-03-01T14:49:27Z
2013-03-01T14:49:27Z
1987
1987
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/77323
16358663
Thesis (M. Arch.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 1987.
MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ROTCH.
Vita.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 48-49).
What an architect does, designing, is a design act and not the making of an object, a design. A design act is an intentional act about built use. We give reasons for intentional acts and are responsible for knowing that the reasons we give for design acts are as relevant and correct as we can know them in terms of their built use. The reasons we give for design acts distinguish them from other acts, such as drawing, which is the making of objects. One of the reasons we may give for our design acts is that they are following a rule. For a design act to be following a rule, there must be a fit between the rule and what we do in practice. For a design act to be about construction, a form act, there must be a fit between the form act and what gets done in the field.
by Ellen Saslaw.
M.Arch.
[1], ix, 50 leaves
eng
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.I.T. theses are protected by
copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but
reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written
permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
Architecture.
Design acts
Thesis
application/pdf
false
Publication
unknown
unknown
<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="2938747e-2369-4fd7-bf54-8fc8be73a856">
<Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type>
<Language>eng</Language>
<Title>Design acts</Title>
<PublishedIn>
<Publication>
</Publication>
</PublishedIn>
<PublicationDate>1987</PublicationDate>
<Authors>
<Author>
<DisplayName>Saslaw, Ellen</DisplayName>
<Affiliation>
<OrgUnit>
</OrgUnit>
</Affiliation>
</Author>
</Authors>
<Editors>
</Editors>
<Publishers>
<Publisher>
<DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName>
<OrgUnit />
</Publisher>
</Publishers>
<License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License>
<Keyword>Architecture.</Keyword>
<Abstract>What an architect does, designing, is a design act and not the making of an object, a design. A design act is an intentional act about built use. We give reasons for intentional acts and are responsible for knowing that the reasons we give for design acts are as relevant and correct as we can know them in terms of their built use. The reasons we give for design acts distinguish them from other acts, such as drawing, which is the making of objects. One of the reasons we may give for our design acts is that they are following a rule. For a design act to be following a rule, there must be a fit between the rule and what we do in practice. For a design act to be about construction, a form act, there must be a fit between the form act and what gets done in the field.</Abstract>
<Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right"
>
</Access>
</Publication>