Journal of Researches in Islamic Architecture

---

The recognition of main urban elements, specially the holy monuments, have had changed a lot in the image of the Islamic city since past to present. Façade, height and position of building are some of the ways of making recognition. In each period, some of the buildings with specific activities are recognized. Buildings which was mosque, bazaar, monastery, tomb, bath, reservoir, mounth, school or citadel, now is transformed to political, administrative, commercial or sometimes residential and religious one. It has root in the mind of the governors or the builder of the buildings that which one is more recognized. Among all of urban activities, the recognition of religious buildings is the most disputed one. The aim of this research is the typology of recognition of the main buildings of the city centre, specially the religious ones, in order to be beneficial for the contemporary urban design.
This research initially tries to distinguish different types of recognition of special elements in the image of city, with the phenomenological approach from theory to practice. Then it attempts to assess them with theoretical and cultural criteria.
According to the consequences, tWo types of encounter with the recognition of urban image can be distinguished. The first type is need – oriented and functionalist which follow emergence and recognition of buildings in plan, much more than image and dosent pay much attention to aesthetic preferences. This type of recognition was more common in the earlier periods of Islamic civilization (Khorasani Style) such as Naeen city centre. In the second type, the emphasis is on the aesthetic recognition of buildings, specially the religious ones. Cities which belong to this type, last two periods of conflicting identities. This evolution reached a balance between these orientations in the safavid period. This research tries to introduce the safavid period as a balanced tendency in consideration of proper recognition of each building and suggest the continuation of its patterns.
 

---

Today, the increasing realities that have occupied architects in other fields related to architecture, have caused the designer's attention to deviate from the theoretical thinking that was considered at the beginning of the design process. Architectural software has expanded the visual dimensions of the human mind and created the conditions for the designer's thinking to be limited to imaginative forms. Although innovation can be considered the main feature of products obtained from software that go beyond the drawings and in order to create cyberspace, but the product of all of them can not be considered creative works. Because creativity manifests itself with a concept called meaning and theoretical thinking, with designers focusing on the use of computer facilities, although facilitating and accelerating the visualization and visualization of ideas; But this early embodiment is also a threat to the idea and meaning of the truth underlying the work. Therefore, recognizing the process of cognition and creation in architecture is a necessity that must have evolved from idea to form in order to always be able to reveal the damage that has been done to the systemic structure of architectural design today. From the moment an architect decides to create a work until his design is ready for the execution stages, at the heart of his movement is the creative production of an idea and its transformation into a concept and ultimately an architectural product, and in this regard as " The whole problem-solving "is raised. In other words, the architect is on the path of identifying the problem until finding a solution. The main problem in architectural design is the "idea" that all creative processes try to achieve this concept, and on the other hand, interaction in the design problem and its solution shows that analyzing the problem and recognizing its various dimensions is the designer's mental ability and thought. Strengthens the basis for the solution, the "concept". An architectural work results from the understanding and creation formed by the creator as the agent as a result of their worldview. As the architect's paradigm, this worldview plays an essential role in directing the ultimate cause, namely idea; formal cause, namely concept; and material cause, namely the architectural work. The important thing, however, is the hierarchy of the senses and the way an idea transforms into a form in the paradigm of the architect. This study seeks to extract the semantic identity of the idea and concept (theme) from western, Islamic, and philosophical paradigms in order to clarify the process of understanding and creating architectural works through the "four causes" and contrast creation of architecture works in the local (Islamic) and non-local (western) paradigms. The goal is to introduce the direction that the concept takes through the transformation of an idea into an architectural work.

---