Cabanel, Rudolph
Cailhon, Jean
Cailleteau
Cailleteau, Jean
Calamis
Calendario, Filippo
Callet "Pere"
Calliat, Pierre Victor
Callimachos
Camaron, Nicolas
Camerlain. Joseph
Cameron, Charles
Campanato, Simone
Campbell, Colin
Campedroni, Antonio
Campen. Jacob van
Canachus
Canina, Luigi
Cano, Alonzo
Canova, Antonio
Canterbury, Michael de
Caparra
Caracci, Agostino
Caracci, Annibale
Caracci, Ludovico
Carbonel, Alonzo
Cardi, Luigi
Caristie, Augustin Nicolas
Carpaccio, Vittore
Carpeaux, Jean Baptiste
Carpenter, John
Carr, John
Carter, John
Cascalles, Jaime
Caspar, Eugenius
Castell, Robert
Castellamonte, Amadeo Conte di
Castille, Colin
Cattaneo, Danese
Caus, Salomon de
Cavalcanti, Andrea di Lazzaro
Cellini, Benvenuto
Cellini, Giovanni
Cephisodotus
Cervia, Berenguer
Cesariani, Cesare
Chabat, Pierre
Chalgrin. Jean-François Therèse
Chambers, Sir William
Chambiges, Martin
Chambiges, Pierre (I)
Chambiges, Pierre (II)
Chambres, Thomas des
Champollion, Jean-Jacques
Chanterel, Jacques
Chantry, Sir Francis Legatt. R. A.
Chapu, Henri Michel Antoine
Chapuy, Nicolas Marie Joseph
Chares of Lindos
Chelles, Jean de
Chelles, Pierre de
Chersiphron
Chillenden, Thomas
Chippendale, Thomas
Chrismann, Franz Xavier
Chrodegand, Saint
Churriguera, Don Josef
Cibber, Caius Gabriel
Cimabue, Giovanni
Ciprés, Pedro
Civitali, Matteo
Claperos, Antonio
Clarke, George
Claus de Werve
Clayton, Joseph
Clemént, Michel
Cleomenes
Cloit, Christian
Cockerell, Charles Robert
Cockerell, Frederick Pepys
Cockerell, Samuel Pepys
Coducci, Mauro
Coelmann, Egidius
Colard de Givry
Colas, Anthoine
Colin, Alexander
Colombe, Michel
Colyn, Jacob
Cominelli, Andrea
Conrad
Contant, d'Ivry, Pierre
Contini, Antonio
Contreras, Rafael
Cooley, Thomas
Coqueau, Jacques
Corbie, Pierre de
Cormont, Reynaud
Cormont, Thomas de
Coroebus
Correggio, Antonio Allegri
Cors, Guillermo de
Cosmati
Cossutius
Coste, Pascal-Xavier
Cotman, John Sell
Cotte, Jules Robert de
Cotte, Robert de
Courajod, Louis Charles Léon
Cousin, Jean
Coustou, Guillaume
Coustou, Nicolas
Couture, Guillaume
Coysevox, Antoine
Cozzarelli, Giacomo
Craig, James
Cronaca, Il
Crundale, Richard de
Crundale, Roger de
Cunningham, General Sir Alexander
Cuntz
Curradi, Raffaele
Cuvilliés, François de (I)
Cuvilliés, François de (II)
Cyrus
| |
peter's canon
2008.08.22 17:50
Popular interpretation views the heliocentric theory as a reality that ultimately downgrades humanity's stance within the larger scheme of things due to the Earth's disposition from the center of the universe. This negative view, however, is only superficially correct. In actuality, the heliocentric theory elevated humanity's consciousness, and it is this positive effect that relates directly to a transcendence from duality into singularity. Copernicus managed to shift humanity's perception of reality when he brought oneness to the age old religious and philosophical duality that fundamentally separated worldly appearance from actual reality. Myths and religious doctrines invariably render a separation between the realm of the divine and the realm of mortals, and, since Plato and Aristotle, philosophy has maintained that the physical characteristics of the world are only "shadows" or "imitations" of the 'true' reality that resides either in the realm of Ideas (Plato) or beyond the orbit of the moon in the realm of the fifth element (Aristotle). When Copernicus removed the Earth from the center of the universe and placed it between the orbits of Venus and Mars, and, along with these two planets, had the Earth orbiting around a central sun, the opposition denounced his theory as profane and heretical precisely because he positioned the Earth within the upper realm of God and pure reality. This assumption of a moving and non-central Earth, however, furnished a much simpler and aesthetically superior system for computing the future position of planets in the night sky. In the end, it was simple astronomical observation that resolutely confirmed the Earth's position within the realm of 'true' reality, and, henceforth, appearance and reality became one. The heliocentric theory, therefore, successfully resolved a duality deeply rooted in human thinking, and, thus, instituted a new consciousness for humanity.
Lauf
For the preeminent ancient theorists of the cosmos, Plato and Aristotle, physics was not fully mathematizable because only whatever was perfect (the Ideas or the fifth element) could be perfectly mathematical. The main rival doctrine to theirs in physics--atomism--seems not to have been conceived as mathematizable either, perhaps for the same reason--as a description of a universe of chance, it was obviously 'imperfect.' The mathematical functionalism that became the rule in Hellenistic astronomy took this dualism so seriously that it ceased to try to describe cosmic reality, as such, at all. It may be that this attitude even influenced Stoicism, if Blumenberg is right that Cleanthes, the leading Stoic, accused Aristarchus of impiety just because he presented his heliocentric model as more than a fiction, thus profaning the "mystery" of the cosmos. It appears, then, that a mathematical description of a homogeneous reality was not going to be possible until (again, through Nomilalism) the idea of an omnipotent God Who creates "from nothing," and thus has the same 'immediate' relation to everything, had destroyed the dualism of matter and form that runs through these older doctrines. In response to the question why such a dualism should have been the first form taken by self-conscious reason in our tradition, Blumenberg suggests that it represents a pattern of "relapses" into "the double-layered relationship that exists, in mythical thought, between what one sees and what really happens--between the flat appearances in the foreground and a 'story' in the background." For whatever reason, it does seem to be the case that the idea of a homogeneous and mathematizable reality is a unique characteristic of modern European thought; and it is certainly a necessary precondition of a theory like Copernicus's.
Wallace
excerpts from "(chronosomatically) Contemplating the Navel"
Both Einsenman's and Koolhaas's designs reflect the assimilating and metabolic imaginations. Yet Eisenman's designs remain mostly still-born, whereas Koolhaas's designs are reaching puberty.
|