This rese­arch inves­ti­gates how meta­pho­rical compa­rison of city to human may help to describe urban theo­ries and solve city design chal­lenges. To achieve this goal, meta­phors in theory and prac­tical appli­ca­tion in one hand and the anthro­po­lo­gical urban theo­ries and prac­tice in the other will be discussed. The discus­sion on meta­phors comprises theo­ries, models and the under­stan­ding mecha­nism of meta­phors, and their appli­ca­tion on archi­tec­ture and urban discourses. While, the discus­sion on anthro­po­lo­gical urban theo­ries focuses on theo­ries and prac­tices in which the city is compared to human and argued by means of anato­mical arran­ge­ment, physio­lo­gical mecha­nisms or spiri­tual concepts. It is believed that, meta­pho­ri­cally struc­tu­ring city by means of human concepts is bene­fi­cial as a compa­ra­tive method for arguing the archi­tec­ture of city and simpli­fying complex urban discourses. A chro­no­lo­gical study of compa­ri­sons between city and human, from ancient Greek to contem­porary time, shows a paral­le­lism between the know­ledge about human and the deve­lop­ment of anthro­po­lo­gical urban theo­ries. Theo­re­ti­cians and profes­sio­nals have been bene­fited this paral­le­lism to argue their theo­ries or projects. But, how this compa­rison may contri­bute to meet the urban plan­ning and design chal­lenges is the gap, which this rese­arch tries to fill it by answe­ring to the follo­wing ques­tions:

  • What trig­gers philo­so­phers, plan­ners and archi­tects to compare city to human?
  • How this compa­rison helps them to argue their theo­ries or projects?
  • And how does it help to meet their plan­ning and design chal­lenges?


Kontakt: Omid Vernoos:


© 2019 FG Städ­tebau und Sied­lungs­wesen