Dr. Omid Vernoos
The Role of Human Meta­phors on Urban Theo­ries and Prac­ti­ces

This rese­arch inves­ti­ga­tes how meta­pho­ri­cal com­pa­ri­son of city to human may help to describe urban theo­ries and solve city design chal­len­ges. To achieve this goal, meta­phors in theory and prac­ti­cal app­li­ca­tion in one hand and the anthro­po­lo­gi­cal urban theo­ries and prac­tice in the other will be dis­cus­sed. The dis­cus­sion on meta­phors com­pri­ses theo­ries, models and the under­stan­ding mecha­nism of meta­phors, and their app­li­ca­tion on archi­tec­ture and urban dis­cour­ses. While, the dis­cus­sion on anthro­po­lo­gi­cal urban theo­ries focu­ses on theo­ries and prac­ti­ces in which the city is com­pa­red to human and argued by means of ana­to­mi­cal arran­ge­ment, phy­sio­lo­gi­cal mecha­nisms or spi­ri­tual con­cepts. It is belie­ved that, meta­pho­ri­cally struc­tu­ring city by means of human con­cepts is bene­fi­cial as a com­pa­ra­tive method for arguing the archi­tec­ture of city and sim­pli­fy­ing com­plex urban dis­cour­ses. A chro­no­lo­gi­cal study of com­pa­ri­sons bet­ween city and human, from anci­ent Greek to con­tem­porary time, shows a par­al­le­lism bet­ween the know­ledge about human and the deve­lo­p­ment of anthro­po­lo­gi­cal urban theo­ries. Theo­re­ti­ci­ans and pro­fes­sio­nals have been bene­fi­ted this par­al­le­lism to argue their theo­ries or pro­jects. But, how this com­pa­ri­son may con­tri­bute to meet the urban plan­ning and design chal­len­ges is the gap, which this rese­arch tries to fill it by ans­we­ring to the fol­lowing ques­ti­ons:

  • What trig­gers phi­lo­so­phers, plan­ners and archi­tects to com­pare city to human?
  • How this com­pa­ri­son helps them to argue their theo­ries or pro­jects?
  • And how does it help to meet their plan­ning and design chal­len­ges?