The architecture of humanism; a study in the history of taste

THE MECHANICALFALLACY

117

moreadequately inalaterchapter,

but

evenif

our

scientific assailant refuses

to admit the distinction

between knowing and feeling to be important, and

claims—for to this it

seems he is reduced

—

^that

aestheticfeelingisconsequentonallweknow,andthat

architecturalbeauty

lies,infact,intheintelligibility

ofstructure,hisposition

—

^anditseemstobethelast

—

issimplymet. ^Forifitistobeacase

of

fullunder-

standing,thechainswhich tiethedomearepartof

whatweunderstand. Whyarewetoconjureupthe

hiddenforcesofthedome,and

refusetothinkof

the

chains which counteract theni

?j

But, granted the

chains,thestructureisexplained,andtheknowledge

ofthefactshould givethe scientificcriticthesatis-

factionhedesires. Andifourpleasurelies

inintel-

lectuallytracing,notthemeansbywhichthestructure

ismadepossible,buttherelationofthestructureto

its purpose, then this pleasure would be

derivable

from theworkof the Renaissance architect no

less

thanfromthatofthe

mediaeval

one.

For,giventhat

theend proposedbythe formeris understoodto

be

different

—

^and

we

have shown that it wasdifferent

—

^fromthatproposedbythelatter,then

thedifferent

methodschoseninthe

two casesarenolessexactly

adjusted
to

theirendsintheonecasethaninthe

other.

Nodoubtwhenthe

aestheticsenseisatrophied,when

theattentionisconcentrateduponscientific

curiosity,

whenthe Renaissance

architectis.conceivedtohave