對話理論──博物學式的建築設計操作

Dialogism: An Operational Design of Architecture through Natural History

本論文在闡明吾人以「對話理論」作為設計教學之理論，以博物學作為對話理論的操作方法的設計教學。藉由Bakhtin對話理論中的多聲道與複調的觀點，讓學生在設計操作的過程中不斷思索議題、策略、概念與設計間之關係，藉由對話的過程來產生多元的視角與立場，以及理解社會環境與建築設計的對象，並藉此確立自我意識、自身的立場與態度來進策略的擬定與設計發展。
設計教學的案例一方面以博物學（自然史）的調查研究方法介入，在訓練中建立學生對自然環境、社會文化的認知體系；另一方面藉由與自然環境、社會文化的對話，進行建築設計操作。此為以研究導向為基礎而發展的設計操作理論，以連接建築理論、在地知識與建築設計。
透過不同與多重的他者對話，「對話理論」一方面避免Rapoport所認為之設計者服務使用者的（二元對立）立場，或是在社區營造中設計者角色的壓抑；另一方面再現「在地知識」的複雜性、多元性以及歧異性。藉以在「在地」與「全球」之外、探詢其他新的設計可能性。

The paper formulates my teaching methodology of architectural design in terms of Bakhtin’s dialogism as main theory and the result of fieldworks of natural history as conversation object. It is through processes of dialogues between issues, strategies, and design concepts, within which Bakhtin’s concepts of dialogism appears. By doing so, students are able to be aware of diverse visions and positions of the issue, and to understand the social environment and the design project, within which self-conscious and position are established.
In the case of this paper, fieldworks of natural history are vital to research methodology. Students, on the one hand, investigate natural environments and social conditions, and apply those knowledges to architectural designs by conversations between them. Therefore, this is an architectural design method based on research connecting architectural theory, local knowledge and architectural design.
Dialogism differentiates itself from Rapoport’s idea that designers serve users, or from designer’s repressed role in community building. Dialogism also represents the complexity, diversity and ambiguity of local knowledge. Through dialogism, we could discover‘other’possibilities of architectural design beyond a dichotomy between‘the local’and‘the global’.