Praxis in Landscape Architecture

Landscape architecture academics frequently debate the role of “theory” in the discipline. There is a sense that landscape architecture cannot mature without a body of theory supporting it. Some authors have sought out and expounded upon theories from other disciplines that apply to ours, and others have articulated theories that are unique to landscape architecture. What this debate suggests, though, is that practice is not enough. Especially on university campuses. Doesn’t this give practice short shrift? The excerpt below, from the praxis page of the Encyclopedia of Informal Education , points to the origins of this separation.

Practice is often depicted as the act of doing something. It is usually contrasted to ‘theory’ – abstract ideas about some thing or phenomenon. In this ‘theory’ tends to be put on a pedestal. From theory can be derived general principles (or rules). These in turn can be applied to the problems of practice. Theory is ‘real’ knowledge while practice is the application of that knowledge to solve problems. In many ways, this is a legacy of Aristotle and his three-fold classification of disciplines as theoretical, productive or practical. The basis of the distinction lies in the telos, or purpose, each serves. In brief:

The purpose of a theoretical discipline is the pursuit of truth through contemplation; its telos is the attainment of knowledge for its own sake. The purpose of the productive sciences is to make something; their telos is the production of some artefact. The practical disciplines are those sciences which deal with ethical and political life; their telos is practical wisdom and knowledge. (Carr & Kemmis 1986: 32)

No doubt, theory is on a pedestal in the academic setting, but is it the only “real” knowledge as the Aristotelian classification suggests? I think that landscape architecture manifests itself in ways that are both “productive” and “practical,” with specific projects leaning one way or another. Theory then would be derived from reflection on the productive and practical actions. A form of grounded theory, perhaps? The problem comes with the idea that theory gives us rules for what to expect in certain situations. Landscape planning and design problems are generally considered site-specific, so broadly applicable rules (not necessarily general principles) have proved elusive. Two points from the Encyclopedia of Informal Education relate to this idea:

Thus, for Aristotle, praxis is guided by a moral disposition to act truly and rightly; a concern to further human well being and the good life. This is what the Greeks called phronesis and requires an understanding of other people.

and

It is not simply action based on reflection. It is action which embodies certain qualities. These include a commitment to human well being and the search for truth, and respect for others. It is the action of people who are free, who are able to act for themselves. Moreover, praxis is always risky. It requires that a person ‘makes a wise and prudent practical judgement about how to act in this situation’ (Carr and Kemmis 1986: 190).

Citation: Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming Critical. Education, knowledge and action research, Lewes: Falmer.