Architectural discourse has begun to explore a new domain of discussion regarding Posthuman theory, Speculative Realism, New Materialism, and Object-Oriented Ontology. The response within academia to these relatively new areas can be seen in architectural school pedagogy, studio topics, syllabi, scholarly works, and projects published by academics and architects. Therefore, speculating about a probable architectural domain or an experimental domain of architectural theory carries significant value in terms of its potential contributions to architectural theory and criticism. Since objects have always been the focus of the architecture profession by the nature of the discipline, architecture has never considered humans as objects until the emergence of Object-Oriented Ontology. Engaging Object-Oriented Ontology in the architectural domain is often understood as a literal translation of philosophy to architectural design. Although Object-Oriented Ontology can be discussed during the design process in terms of positioning humans as objects, aesthetics of objects, and the representation of objects, it is not possible to design an Object-Oriented Architecture due to its level of abstraction. Hence, Object-Oriented Ontology can engage with architecture in three different ways: (1) questioning objects with architectural theory and criticism, namely Object-Oriented architectural criticism, (2) creatively thinking about the methods of representation of architectural objects, and (3) intentionally misreading it and experimenting on the intersection of philosophy and architectural design. This thesis explores the probable architectural domain by discussing the philosophy of Object-Oriented Ontology with architectural objects, and intentionally misreads and misconceptualizes Object-Oriented Ontology by highlighting the potential of the creative dislocation of the philosophy in architectural design.

Architectural discourse has begun to explore a new domain of discussion regarding Posthuman theory, Speculative Realism, New Materialism, and Object-Oriented Ontology. Therefore, speculating about a possible architectural domain, or an experimental domain of architectural theory, carries significant value in terms of its potential contributions to architectural theory and criticism. Since objects have always been the focus of the architecture profession by the nature of the discipline, architecture has never considered humans as objects until the emergence of Object-Oriented Ontology. Engaging Object-Oriented Ontology in the architectural domain is often understood as a literal translation of philosophy to architectural design. Even though Object-Oriented Ontology can be discussed during the design process in terms of positioning humans as objects, aesthetics of objects, and the representation of objects, it is not possible to design an Object-Oriented Architecture due to its level of abstraction. However, we can intentionally misread it and creatively experiment on the intersection of its philosophy and architectural design. This thesis explores the probable architectural domain by discussing the philosophy of Object-Oriented Ontology with architectural objects and intentionally misreading and misconceptualizing Object-Oriented Ontology by highlighting the potential of the creative dislocation of the philosophy in architectural design.

Master of Architecture