Biofilia is love (philia) to nature (bio). This term was popularized by Edward Osborne Wilson in a book of the same name published by Harvard University Press 1984. In his book Wilson describes biophilia as a natural tendency to turn our attention to living things. Erich Fromm uses the concept of biofilia as the inverse of necrophilia, while other authors oppose biophysics to biophilia. therefore, biofilia, would be the need or satisfaction for life, which also understands "nature" since Biology is the study of life and not nature, logical that life is possible only by nature, but when it is spoken of in love for nature, seems exteriority as not being part of the psychic constitution of man. Enviado do meu iPhone

Hello Fernando and many thanks for your response. Personally I feel close to Wilson's idea about Biophilia and especially about bios = life (as this word comes from Greek language and terminology). However I deal with some students' projects in which new designs promote plants and trees without considering that people's health and well-being should be vital part of their proposed solutions for contemporary and future cities. This is the reason that I have started this discussion. Many thanks again for your participation.

I do understand your point of view. More, considering the given explanation on your students' projects, I believe that it is an interesting way, i.e., picking up the idea that new projects can promote plants and trees, releasing them from the centrality of 'people's health and well-being' in architecture solutions.

I do find this pedagogical approach as more innovative than other alternatives more exclusively focused on the canonical principles of today's discussions.

Many thanks for your comments, Fernando. In fact, in the last 2-3 years, I have been teaching students in a way that they could be directed towards the right kind of employment to help communities rather than big trusts.

Eleni thanks for starting this great discussion. There might be a very interesting point occurring from the translation of the term. Indeed most of the times, people translate and use the term in a context similar to what Fernando has described above. However, if somebody is familiar with the ancient greek language and philosophy then it is obvious that the translation bio=nature and love=nature is inaccurate. Contrary, your translation and definition is to the spot.

This brings me to the second point. When the term was introduced it was indeed about affiliation (more friendship, closeness and understanding than love) to forms of life (and life is not necessarily nature as not all nature is in Bios, ie. alive).

And the third point that I would add to this trail, is affiliation to lives other than ours. Here is an area of great interest, especially since there might be occasional conflict between the health vs healthcare sectors/disciplines. Because, we are not yet at a level where we could describe either our healthcare or our hospitals as healthy or respectful of other forms of life.

Thanks for your thoughts, Evangelia. In fact, health and well-being should be to our hearts if we think about healing places; placemaking should consider indoors and outdoors in a way that human life is at the top of the agenda for planning, not only capital gains.

Thanks Eleni for the fantastic topic which is a hot area of discussion and collaborative empirical research among architects, planners, psychologist, physicians and whoever interested in the bondage between built environment and human health and well-being. From my point of view, and based on 18 months of investigations and site visits to historical and current healthcare facilities. I can assure it is all about human genetics. I went through the long history of healing spaces and discovered that the exposure to natural features has magical effect on the restoration/recovery of human health and well-being physically, emotionally, psychologically and mentally. This type of linkage and how nature can be an active catalyst to boost our health is now in the process of recalling. It was there before when Florence Nightingale stated three centuries ago :" such thing; medicine is the surgery of functions, as surgery proper is that of limbs and organs. Neither can do anything but remove obstructions; neither can cure; nature alone cures. Surgery removes the bullet out of the limb, which is an obstruction to cure, but nature heals the wound. So it is with medicine; the function of an organ becomes obstructed; medicine so far as we know, assists nature to remove the obstruction, but does nothing more. And what nursing has to do in either case, is to put the patient in the best condition for nature to act upon him."

We have some emerging showcases of healthcare facilities which implemented some attributes of biophilic design. However, we need more and more studies to take these trials to the next step and to become a trend in design constructed upon robustness and empirical reasoning.

Thanks Mohamed. This is what many young designers/architects designing contemporary healing spaces should think about. But also your comments are supporting what I am currently thinking: to get students from a variety to contribute and work to create innovative places for care and healing. We have got to think that public places should be a continuity of home, facility and services environments. We have to think holistically and act in teams with people from various disciplines.

Thanks Eleni, yes of course. our architectural education programs should raise more attention towards this area.

Dr. Stephen Kellert, the pioneer of Biophilic Design, intended to foster the creation of built environments that connect people to nature, natural systems & processes and to each other, rather than designs that further alienate us. Many people work, live, heal and learn in hermetically sealed buildings, seeing primarily with artificial light, breathing mechanically driven air, living sedentary lifestyles and eating over-processed foods often in the name of technological progress or efficiency. Obesity, ADHD and depression are on the rise. The research and evidence are mounting that support the need to change the patterns we have created. I agree Eleni, that this shift will require a holistic approach across most disciplines. Although green and blue infrastructure are part of biophilic design, it is so much more.

I agree Elizabeth; the entire construction industry should change to promote materials which are both sustainable, but also considering human health and wellbeing.

You are welcome Eleni.

Thank you also for the fruitful discussion.

All the best,

Fernando

Eleni，Thanks for your wonderful question. It is fantastic concept as it is my first time to see the word Biophilic Design which means a lot for contemporary urbanization process in China. I also check the CNKI, a similar product like google scholar, only 10+ paper talking about that, and only three having the word in the title. I attached the result of semantic analysis on such Chinese papers. A Chinese scholar have a similar comment: only when the frogs swing in the pool, the dragonfly flying in the sky and every kinds of animals living with us, we could call it a Eco-city. Because nowadays, we nearly could not see them in cities，many Eco-city in China is still focusing on real estate and economic oriented.