Sense, Form, Meaning: Redefining Tradition in Architectural Education Through Santayana’s Three-Level Model

Abstract

Contemporary architectural education in Iran faces a profound disconnection from its indigenous aesthetic tradition, a challenge rooted in the largely uncritical adoption of Western modernist models. Within this dualistic context, a fundamental question arises: Can traditional Iranian architecture, despite having developed without explicit knowledge of Western aesthetic philosophy, embody a rich and multidimensional aesthetic structure? Using a combined analytical–interpretive approach grounded in comparative case analysis, this study examines the hypothesis that traditional Iranian architecture implicitly operationalized the same three levels of aesthetics defined by George Santayana—sensory, formal, and symbolic—even before the emergence of this model in Western thought. Data were derived from two sources: (1) theoretical texts, including the works of Santayana, Kant, Pallasmaa, Böhme, Zumthor, and Iranian theorists; and (2) actual architectural cases, including the courtyard of Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque in Isfahan, the Soltaniyeh Dome in Zanjan, and Fin Garden in Kashan. Data were analyzed using a three-stage qualitative content analysis procedure comprising open, axial, and selective coding. The key findings indicate that: (1) in the Iranian courtyard, the sensory level is experienced through the warmth of stone, the sound of water, and diffused light; (2) the formal level is manifested in geometric proportions, axial symmetry, and spatial rhythm; and (3) the symbolic level is expressed through a sense of tranquility, place attachment, and connection with spirituality. Rather than operating independently, these three levels interact dynamically to create a “living” space—one that corresponds to what Santayana described as a “complete aesthetic experience.” The findings suggest that Santayana’s framework should not be regarded as a model to be imported into Iranian architectural education, but rather as an analytical lens through which implicit Iranian architectural knowledge can be articulated explicitly. This perspective offers an approach to “returning to tradition without imitation.”