The specialised and highly relevant topic to which Spatial Thinking2 is dedicated deserves to be accessible by a wide array of scientists, philosophers, and architects.
Upon careful consideration following numerous requests, we have extended the deadline for abstracts to the 31st of July.
We hope this extended call will encourage more voices to be heard and promote the opportunity offered to engage in a promising, stimulating, and visionary discussion and exchange.



What roles do consciousness and feeling play in the experience of architectural space? Consciousness is one of the most astounding faculties of the human brain - physical matter creating the immaterial realities which we humans experience as the world. Researching consciousness is one of the greatest challenges for modern science. Spatial Thinking2 embraces this challenge in view of architectural relevance and by addressing human consciousness, inevitably needs to focus on all facets of the human mind.
Clearly an exclusively scientific and materialistic approach towards an encompassing explanatory model is insufficient to explicate the complex phenomenon of the relationship between human (and self) and world.
Complementing the experimental strand followed by empirical research, a philosophical school of thought aiming for a new epistemological debate has evolved. Neurophilosophy integrates neuroscientific data and furnishes its philosophical theories with empirical results. Does the neurophilosophical approach hold value for an architectural context and what can cognitive neuroscience contribute to architectural discourse?
Spatial Thinking2 aims to discuss both theoretical philosophies and empirical experimentations.

Our perceptive systems rely on the fluctuating reciprocity of perception and apperception, interoceptive and exteroceptive attention, wakefulness and rest. Architectural design aims to address all facets of the perceptive spectrum. How do automated developments elicit change in the perception of space and in which way will architecture as a discipline respond?
Theoretical occupations however only address one aspect of this highly complex topic. Possible modes of technical and experimental real-space implementations of the aforementioned need to be investigated, which is why our interests focus on the following:
The rapid evolution of technology does not only determine methods available for observation and assessment, but also influences and changes the relationship between human user and architectural space as such, by introducing a constantly growing assortment of factors and parameters. Do technological virtualities and interactive, reactive, and responsive systems present potentials (and equally dangers) for architectural creation or does their merit merely lie in their being tools for experimentation and evaluation?