SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 1

Reflections of Scientific Paradigms in Ancient Greek And Egyptian Architecture

BİLİMSEL PARADİGMALARIN ANTİK YUNAN VE MISIR MİMARİSİNDEKİ YANSIMALARI

Tonguç Seferoğlu(ARDAHAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ARDAHAN İNSANİ BİLİMLER VE EDEBİYAT FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-8604-7851
Pages
105–118
Publication Date
2025-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of this analysis, it can be stated that paradigm shifts in science influence the emergence of novel art forms and the assumptions that comprise a paradigm are reflected in works of art, especially in architecture.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The influence of science on art is attracting considerable critical attention.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Recent studies on their relationship have shown how the metaphysical, epistemological and evaluative commitments embedded in a scientific paradigm shape aesthetic perception and artistic production.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of this analysis, it can be stated that paradigm shifts in science influence the emergence of novel art forms and the assumptions that comprise a paradigm are reflected in works of art, especially in architecture.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:bilim · sanat · paradigma

Abstract

The influence of science on art is attracting considerable critical attention. Recent studies on their relationship have shown how the metaphysical, epistemological and evaluative commitments embedded in a scientific paradigm shape aesthetic perception and artistic production. However, the mechanisms underlying those influences remain poorly understood. The primary aim of this paper is to explore the influence of a scientific paradigm, or a disciplinary matrix, on art and to review briefly available evidence from Egyptian and Greek architecture. This review indicates that the metaphysical and technical commitments of a paradigm play a pivotal role in structuring the design of architectural works. As a result of this analysis, it can be stated that paradigm shifts in science influence the emergence of novel art forms and the assumptions that comprise a paradigm are reflected in works of art, especially in architecture.

Özet

Bilimin sanat üzerindeki etkisi ciddi eleştirel ilgi çekmektedir. Bu iki uğraş arasındaki ilişkiye dair yapılan son çalışmalar, bilimsel paradigmanın içerdiği metafizik, epistemolojik ve teorilerin değerlerine dair kabullerin estetik algıyı ve sanatsal üretimi nasıl şekillendirdiğini göstermektedir. Ancak bu etkilerin ortaya çıkmasına neden olan mekanizmalar hâlâ yeterince anlaşılmamıştır. Bu makalenin temel amacı, bir bilimsel paradigmanın, bir disipliner matriksin, sanat üzerindeki etkisini Mısır ve Yunan mimarisinden bazı örnekleri bu açıdan gözden geçirmektir. Bu inceleme, bir paradigmanın metafizik ve teknik kabullerinin, mimari eserlerin tasarımını şekillendirmede önemli bir rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Bu inceleme ışığında, bilimdeki paradigma değişimlerinin, yeni sanat biçimlerinin ortaya çıkışını etkilediğini ve bir paradigmaya ait kabullerin yansımaların sanat eserlerinde, özellikle mimaride, bulanabileceği söylenebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Seferoğlu, T. (2025). Reflections of Scientific Paradigms in Ancient Greek And Egyptian Architecture. Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi, Sayı: 1, 105–118. https://ajindex.com/articles/1140178

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (23)

  1. Assmann, J. (2002). Resurrection in Ancient Egypt. In T. Peters, R.J. Russell & M. Welker, Michael (Ed.), Resurrection: Theological and Scientific Assessments, (pp. 124-135). Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans.
  2. Bohm, D. (2012). On Creativity. London and New York: Routledge.
  3. Bullot, N.J., Seeley, W.P. and Davies, S. (2017), Art and Science: A Philosophical Sketch of Their Historical Complexity and Codependence. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 75, 453-463.
  4. Drake, S. (1970). Galileo Studies: Personality, Tradition, and Revolution. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
  5. El-Bizri, N. (2019). Art and Science: Historical Confluences and Modern Dialectics. In S. Wuppuluri & D. Wu (Ed.), On Art and Science, (pp. 11-30). Cham, CH: Springer.
  6. Gürer, T. K. and Yücel, A. (2005). Bir Paradigma Olarak Mimari Temsilin İncelenmesi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 84-96.
  7. Hafner, E. M. (1969). The New Reality in Art and Science. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 11(4), 385–397.
  8. Hendrix, J. (2003). Architectural Forms and Philosophical Structures. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
  9. Kepes, G. (1956). The New Landscape in Art and Science. Chicago: P. Theobald.
  10. Kragh, H. (2012). Geometry and Astronomy: Pre-Einstein Speculations of Non-Euclidean Space. http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4909
  11. Kuhn, T. (1962/1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  12. Kuhn, T. (1977). The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  13. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In I. Lakatos & A.
  14. Musgrave (Ed.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, (pp. 91–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Masterman, M. (1970). The Nature of a Paradigm. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Ed.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, (pp. 59–90). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Purtill, R. L. (1967). Discussion Kuhn on Scientific Revolutions. Philosophy of Science, 34(1), 53–58.
  17. Corinna, R. (2004). Architecture and Mathematics in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
  18. Shapere, D. (1964). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The Philosophical Review, 73(3), 383–394.
  19. Strosberg, E. (1999). Art and Science. Unesco Publishing.
  20. Voss-Andreae, J. & Weissmann, G. (2019). Finally Fresh Air: Towards a Quantum Paradigm for Artists and Other Observers. In S. Wuppuluri & D. Wu (Ed.), On Art and Science, (pp. 157-180). Cham, CH: Springer.
  21. Watkins, J. W. N. (1970). Against ‘Normal Science’. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Ed.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, (pp. 25–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  22. Yıldırım, B. (2024). Sanatın Thomas Kuhn’un Paradigma Kavramı Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi. AHBVÜ Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 31-42.
  23. Zhmud, L., Windle, K., & Ireland, R. (2012). Pythagoras and the Early Pythagoreans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.