從建構歷程探討建築空間的知識論問題──基礎特性、組成條件與運作方式

Exploring the Epistemological Issues of Architectural Space Through Its Constructive Process: Fundamental Characteristics, Compositional Conditions, and Operational Methods

建築似乎與空間關係密不可分，談論建築幾乎就等於談論空間，在建築的設計教育中也不斷強調著空間的重要性，並以空間之設計作為建築實踐的重點。在多數關於建築的書籍中，都以理解或創造空間作為主題，並且包含了一系列關於空間的問題，涵蓋了知覺經驗、活動場所、社會符號及歷史文化等主題，這種多樣性豐富了建築思考，也可能導致概念上的模糊與混亂。如果建築史可以被理解為關於空間的歷史，空間卻未必是建築歷史的一部份。由建築思想的歷史來看，空間直到19世紀末才進入建築理論的視野之中，經過20世紀初的現代主義建築之發展，直到1950年代才明確成為建築的標準語言。在這段過程中，建築空間從無到有、從模糊到清晰，發展至成為建築設計與思想的媒介。但如果建築對於空間的探討必須因應建築學自身的課題與需求，則建築空間就並非普遍意義，而是在建築思想的發展歷史中，逐漸對於空間知識擴充與整合所構成的產物，具備特殊的知識論觀點。因此，本文1主張建築空間並非普遍概念，其基礎特性、組成條件與運作方式皆源於建築學自身的知識建構歷程，並在具體化與抽象化的往返中持續演進，進而體現出建築空間的混合性與動態性之核心特徵。

Architecture seems inherently linked to space; discussing architecture almost equates to discussing space. Architectural design education consistently emphasizes the importance of space, placing spatial design at the core of architectural practice. In much architectural literature, the understanding and creation of space serve as a central theme, encompassing a wide range of issues related to perception and experience, activity settings, social symbols, and historical and cultural contexts. While this diversity enriches architectural thought, it may also give rise to conceptual ambiguity and confusion. While architectural history may be interpreted as a history of space, space itself is not necessarily intrinsic to architectural history. From the perspective of architectural thought, space did not enter architectural theory until the late nineteenth century. Through the development of modernist architecture in the early twentieth century, space was firmly established as the standard language of architecture by the 1950s. During this process, architectural space evolved from a marginal notion into a central conceptual category, from vagueness to clarity, and eventually became a medium for architectural design and thought. However, if the exploration of space in architecture must respond to the specific tasks and demands of the discipline, architectural space cannot be regarded as a universal or arbitrarily defined spatial concept. Rather, it is a product constituted by the gradual expansion and integration of spatial knowledge within the history of architectural thought, possessing a unique epistemological perspective. Therefore, this paper argues that architectural space is not a universal concept; its fundamental characteristics, compositional conditions, and operational methods all originate from architecture’s own process of knowledge construction. By evolving through a continuous movement between concretization and abstraction, it ultimately manifests the core features of hybridity and dynamism.