Since the publication in 1948 of Norbert Wiener’s Cybernetics, this thought model has exerted a profound influence in contemporary knowledge. Such influence has been decisive for a paradigm shift in the profession of architecture and particularly for the rise of a computational perspective in architectural design. This article explores the link between the cybernetic paradigm and the conception of architectural objects as performative, responsive, intelligent, and sentient artifacts—the visions of buildings that have been central to the development of digital architecture since its early stages. This connection shows that the dominant visions of design problems associated with the development of a computational perspective in architecture have not been exclusively the result of the introduction of computer pragmatics in architectural design. On the contrary, following such scholars as Bruno Latour and Katherine Hayles, these developments must be considered as the result of a particular feedback process that includes technical aspects as well as the definition of design problems around an informational ontology and epistemology. The understanding of the intellectual foundations of digital architecture is crucial not only to promote a critical regard of its productions but to imagine scenarios for a viable cybernetic practice of computer-mediated architectural design.
KwinterS. Lecture excerpt: what is life? In: KuboMOrtegaL (eds) GSD platform 08. Cambridge, MA: Harvard School of Design, 2008, pp. 40–47.
2.
MorangeM. What history tells us. J Biosciences2005; 30(3): 313–316.
3.
WaddingtonCH. The strategy of the genes. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1957.
4.
BretonP. L’utopie de la Communication: Le Mythe du Village Planetaire. Paris: La decouverte, 1995.
5.
MitchellWMcCulloughM. Digital design media. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1995.
6.
HeimsSJ. Constructing a social science for postwar America: the cybernetics group, 1946–1953. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993.
7.
HaylesNK. How we became posthuman: virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature and informatics. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1999.
8.
BowkerG. How to be universal: some cybernetic strategies, 1943–70. Soc Stud Sci1993; 23(1): 107–127.
9.
LafontaineC. L’Empire Cybernétique. Des Machines à Penser à la Pensée Machine. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 2004.
10.
LyotardJF. La Condition Postmoderne: Rapport Sur le Savoir. Paris: Minuit, 1979.
11.
EdwardsPN. The closed world: computers and the politics of discourse in Cold War America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.
12.
PiconA. Digital culture in architecture: an introduction for the design professions. Basel: Birkhauser GMBH, 2010.
13.
OxmanR. Theory and design in the first digital age. Des Stud2006; 76: 229–265.
14.
ManovichL. The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.
15.
MurrayJ. Inventing the medium. In: Wardip FruinNMontfortN (eds) The new media reader. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press, 2003, pp. 3–11.
16.
LatourB. Nous n’Avons Jamais Été Modernes: Essai d’Anthropologie Symétrique. Paris: La decouverte, 1992.
17.
KellerS. Systems aesthetics: architectural theory at the University of Cambridge, 1960–1975. PhD Thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 2005.
18.
RochaAJM. Architecture theory 1960–1980: emergence of a computational perspective. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2004.
SimonHA. The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press, 1996.
21.
BertalanffyLV. General system theory: foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller, 1968.
22.
WienerN. Cybernetics: or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Paris: Hermann & Cie; Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1948.
23.
LaszloE. Le systémisme. Vision nouvelle du monde. Paris: Pergamon Press, 1981.
24.
KwinterS. Architectures of time: towards a theory of the event in modernist culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.
25.
NeumanEGrobmanYJ (eds). Performalism: form and performance in digital architecture. London; New York: Routledge, 2008.
26.
SchumacherP. Architecture’s next ontological innovation. In: Ruel-BergeronS (ed) Not nature, tarp: architectural manual. New York: Pratt Institute, 2012, pp. 100–107.
27.
HenselM. Performance oriented design from a material perspective: domains of agency and the spatial and material organization complex. In: GrobmanYJNeumanE (eds) Performalism: form and performance in digital architecture. London; New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 43–48.
28.
RahimA. Catalytic formations: architecture and digital design. Oxon: Taylor & Francis, 2006.
29.
LynnG. Animate form. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999.
30.
EisenmanP. Autonomy and the will to the critical. In: EisenmanP (ed.) Written into the void: selected writings, 1990–2004. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007, pp. 79–86.
31.
ReiserJUmemotoN. Architecture performing itself. In: GrobmanYJNeumanE (eds) Performalism: form and performance in digital architecture. London; New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 171–182.
32.
KayLE. Who wrote the book of life? A history of the genetic code. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000.
33.
HogewegP. The roots of bioinformatics in theoretical biology. PLoS Comput Biol2011; 7(3): 1–5.
34.
MitchellM. An introduction to genetic algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
35.
HollandJ. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
36.
WolframS. A new kind of science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media, 2002.
37.
FrazerJ. An evolutionary architecture. London: Architectural Association, 1995.
38.
ChuK. Metaphysics of genetic architecture and computation. Archit Design2006; 76(4): 38–45.
39.
SilverM. Building without drawings: Automason 1.0. Archit Design2006; 76(4): 46–51.
DerixC. Genetically modified spaces. In: LittlefieldD (ed.) Space craft: developments in architectural computing. London: RIBA Publishing, 2008, pp. 44–53.
42.
WaldropMM. Complexity: the emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992.
43.
De LandaM. Material complexity. In: LeachNTurnbullDWilliamsC (eds) Digital tectonics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2004, pp. 14–21.
44.
SpuybroekL. NOX diagrams. In: GarciaM (ed.) The diagrams of architecture. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2010, pp. 161–176.
45.
BalmondC. Element. Munich; Berlin; London; New York: Prestel, 2007.
46.
HenselMMengesA. Designing morpho-ecologies: versatility and vicissitude of heterogeneous space. Archit Design2008; 78(2): 102–111.
47.
MengesA. Material computation: higher integration in morphogenetic design. Archit Design2012; 82(2): 14–21.
48.
AlexanderCIshikawaSSilversteinM. A pattern language: towns, buildings, constructions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
