Building From Within | The Archetypal Roots of Architecture


Is there a connection between the development of Humans and the development of Architecture? We believe so, and we will outline our argument.



Collective Unconscious – First Stage of Development

The World of Archetypes – The World of Platonic Ideas: This is the starting point. The prevailing psychological theory is that a baby’s mind (psyche) is made up entirely of the collective unconscious, and its ego is not yet formed. This means that the filter of semantics does not exist yet. Everything is seen as a unified whole, rather than as separate entities (context – starting point). However, as Jung says, “differentiation is Creation,” and according to the natural progression of human life, symbols begin to gradually form. Just as with people, the design of any building starts from this collective whole – the Platonic-Euclidean world – from which simple forms are distilled to become the building blocks of future compositions. These forms are pure and unaffected by ego projections; they are recognized through the universal qualities of Platonic ideas – Triangle, Rectangle, and Circle.

In a similar vein, this approach of atomizing into the most basic forms, akin to Platonic ideas, allows for an understanding of the ontology of contextual existence in which something is created and articulated, laying the groundwork for the development of more Complex Compositions.



Persona 1.0 – Duality – Second Stage of Development – Deconstruction

The will is formed, and personal perspectives take shape. The once indivisible whole becomes dualistic. There is One “I” that is made up of Multiple internal elements, while the external Many, has a strong philosophical implication of the One.

Architecture exists in two dimensions: horizontal and vertical. It also has two ontological voids: doors and windows. It has two walls, one vertical, and one horizontal. These are some of the simplistic views on simple Dualism behind reduced Architectural work. However, these oppositions do create initial dynamics that stand as a basis for the nature of architecture.

Duality as the First Principle must be seen as a cohesive entity in order to convey its dynamic purpose.



Persona 2.0 – Second Stage of Development – Integration

“And those who want to remain pure must understand that they must cleanse themselves in dirty water” F. Nietzsche.

What does this sentence mean?

Our initial understanding is that “dirtying” oneself is a necessary component of growth and maturity. To lead a proper life, we must be open to both dirty water and swimming in it. Those who seek individuation must also be ready for conflict.

“Cleansing in dirty water” refers to the concept of the anti-example. With this non-example, Nietzsche introduces a broader ethical framework that is different from dualistic ethics (good-bad). Instead, it is a three-fold framework (good – not-good – whole).

We cleanse ourselves in dirty water, not pollute, as Nietzsche’s image shows. Nietzsche was ahead of his time when he understood this idea. Cleansing through conflict.

Analysis of the quote:

In our world, everything is imbued with meaning. This meaning encompasses not only the positive examples of a phenomenon but also its negative counterpart. These two polarities exist in a singularity, forming two sets and a relation in between. The concept of negation (anti-example) is therefore one of three ontological parts of the phenomena.

Although it can be challenging, it is possible to master the art of following positive examples. A moral compass is something we all strive for, but learning from negative examples is more difficult. These examples are not easily defined and are often reduced to our own interpretation and some form of representation, such as an image, sound, or language.

The negative example stands in contrast to the positive one, yet defining this contrast can be challenging. It encompasses everything that is not the positive example, creating a broad spectrum of potential negative examples. These examples, when understood, contribute to the foundation of our understanding, offering lessons that cannot be gleaned from positive examples alone. By embracing and interpreting these negative examples, we build the ‘intro-structure’ of our comprehension.

Given that negative examples are prevalent in our world, it is important for a wise person to learn how to use them. These negative examples, interpreted and located on the inside of infinity, are necessary building blocks for the intro-structure of our understanding. This delicate balance, once understood, shapes the foundation of our inner logic and guides our external expressions. It is in this nuanced integration, where abstract ideas meet tangible realities.