Відео

Is able to elucidate what people think is “beautiful” by asking what they think is “true”. Aristotle’s transcendentals really are reflections of one fundamental reality. Beauty/Truth/Goodness, linearly related… but in architecture… …So cool

Wow! This is priceless. If you need one more video editor, please, let me know.

"The One" lol 😊

Honest understanding?

Love listening to him talk. His books are amazing. RIP

Thanks for creating and sharing this!

Where can the full interview be found?

🤔

Hello Greg! Do you happen to know anything about the books Christopher Alexander was working on before he sadly passed away? I've heard something about that, but very very little, that he was working on some unpublished books that go way beyond the initial ideas he established in the 4 volumes of Nature of Order. Thanks!

Thank you for interviewing him and publishing this video

Amazing work done on this channel. Thank you

“Which picture best represents your true self?”

RIP GOAT

This is a gem

I feel as if I'm hopelessly in love with this video

Thank you! Thank you!

please can I know who is the interviewer? Is this a lesson or what ? It seems a a countdown. And he seem very young. what date?

First, I really appreciate the work you have been doing sharing this knowledge... I have been wondering, if there is a repository of unfolding sequences for the construction of different things, like the unfolding sequence for a Japanese Tea Ceremony Building described in the Nature of Order (I felt that was a particularly powerful example).

People can see but unaware what they see ...

Get a feel for what seemed to be the right thing to do here Only thing one was aware of Bricks Size is phenomenally I wasn’t interested because it was traditional Those bricks had feeling and other bricks don’t It’s meant to look pretty but it doesn’t because it’s all wrong It had disappeared why you would bother to do it It doesn’t have any thing to do with anything historical If you’re going to build a wall out of this stuff that’s what you do to make sense out of it The bricks need to be a more pure color When you try to do things the right way A way that has actual feeling in it I suppose you end up in a place That either is traditional or has the real character of tradition

Thank you so much for uploading this. Incredible

Delighted to find this. I spent five years working with Chris to build a house in the 80s, before he did the Sussex project. It was a treat to listen to his thoughts again, in this video.

soooooooooo correct of what Chris is pointing out.

Thank you Urbanology! More videos please!

Amazing! Thank you!

Such a profound thinker. Even today, very few understand the depth and the impact of pattern language could have on architecture.

What a brilliant man

Olá tem um perfil falso usando teu nome dizendo q vc e um soldado americano para enganar as pessoas .ok

Thank you for uploading. It would be great if the background noise is removed 😊 let me know if you need help with it

He should have done it. He was the one who would have done it the best

Such a great and thoughtful man.

This is exactly what I was looking for. The intersection of beauty and software. I just came across Christopher Alexander's work through a search for "pattern recognition." Thank you Greg.

Here's a natural science perspective on investigating the objectivity of perceiving 'life': www.rainmagazine.com/archive/2015/living-structure-and-cognition

The notions of 'objective' and 'subjective' are heavily discussed in the natural sciences. People are often surprised to learn that these are not technical terms, but rather considerations to be grappled with. Originally, an object is something seen, and a subject is someone seeing. But isn't a feeling or thought something real, that we can study objectively? Don't our subjective biases interfere with experimentation and observation? If I observe my own experience, is that subjective or objective? If someone reports their experience to me, isn't their report subjective, but the report's existence is objective, and my interpretation of it is subjective? Clearly we need to agree upon criteria for making progress in any complex scientific endeavor of this sort. Is it an objective or a subjective experience when I look into a light and have an afterimage on my retina? No one else can see the afterimage on my retina, but we assume that the experience exists, that it has a cause, that we can build enlightening theories about the experience and test them, and further investigate them. The study of all psychological phenomena must consider these issues if they are to make any progress, and many of the natural sciences need to constantly consider the influence of the observer on the observed. So Alexander is assuming that when someone says that something has 'life', or 'feeling', we can first assume that their experience is definitely real. Secondly, the stimuli that result in those experiences are definitely real. So the system that we're studying is the 'impression'. The structure of the stimuli, and the structure of the innate and developmental faculties in the brain that are responding, are then subjects of research. He found that, under particular conditions, the use of these descriptors in particular impressions is consistent with high correlation. This opens more questions, of course. This is a complex topic.

"It was very objectively visible" that is was not harmonious? No, it wasn't. You cannot prove it, therefore it is not objective. Try this one: "Everyone at the community meeting agreed that Picasso was a bad artist. They said that he was bad because paintings should be realistic. That wasn't a good reason, but they were still right, but it was "very objectively visible" that he was bad." The reason people try to come up with bogus reasons which sound objective is because our society increasingly recognizes the value of empiricism. Christopher Alexander is a philistine.