Abstract
The role of theory is generally assumed, from a certain way of understanding, as theory as an instrument or know-how that would lead practice to an appropriate and successful outcome. Consequently, the basic concern of a great number of instructors and numerous scholarly papers in many applied disciplines including architecture is “integrating”, “connecting”, “linking” or “bridging gap” between theory and practice. As a matter of fact, this seems as a “pseudo-problem” because the disparate circumstances of natural science and design are overlooked. While the essential mission of natural sciences is to reveal the “hidden pattern” in nature, the essence of architectural design is the bringing of a hidden pattern into being. Thus, it is necessary to establish a new sort of relationship between theory and practice which will lead to the successful outcome in architectural design processes, instead of dealing with a pseudo-problem. This article aims to conceptualize a new relationship between theory and practice in literature searches and the inferences acquired from them. There is a generative tension during the design process between theory and practice in which neither of them accepts the dominancy of the other. This new conceptualization proposal is the preservation of this generative tension, consequently the autonomies of both theory and practice rather than uncritically accepting the guiding role of theory.
