The paper is an attempt to revisit the concept of beauty which is analyzed in reference to Vitruvian principles of architecture supplemented with idea, the fourth principle. the holistic approach to architecture may be the vehicle to explain universal patterns of beauty, possible to be understood as complex system – both the discipline and constructs created as a result of architectural ideas. one can argue that architectural entities start their existence with initial idea, then its purpose is defined, to be encased in structure and form. all these principal bricks architecture is built with exist on multiple layers, as abstracts or as physical manifestations. the beauty is therefore the perceptive phenomenon, in which man is able to decipher and comprehend expressed or tacit properties of the universe and convert them into his own interpretation of the environment and man-made culture or social patterns.
This paper is a tribute and humble contribution to pay respect to professor carlos Brebbia (1938–2018), whose grasp of complex reality opened many inspiring paths within science and animated multiple connections within scientific community for the benefit of knowledge and understanding of the nature.
architectural idea (concept), architecture, beauty, complexity
 Graham, G., Philosophy of the Arts: An Introduction to Aesthetics, Routledge, Oxon and New York, 2005. See pp. 165–168.
 Pevsner, N., The Cities of London and Westminster: The Buildings of England, Vol. 1, Harmondsworth, Penguin, London, 1972.
 Scruton, R., The Aesthetics of Architecture, Methuen and Co.: London, 1979. See pp. 263.
 Hendrix, J., Theorizing a contradiction between form and function in architecture, South African Journal of Art History, 27, pp. 9–28, 2012. (Cf. discussion on Quatremere de Quincy’s views on classical Greek architecture, which, in his eyes, integrated the domain of the physical and the ideal. See p. 12.)
 Heisenberg, W., Inner Exile, Birkhauser, Boston, 1984. See pp. 143–144.
 Tatarkiewicz, W., Historia estetyki. Estetyka starozytna, Vol. 1, Arkady, Warszawa, 1985. See pp. 57–59.
 Alexander, C., New Concepts in Complexity Theory Arising from Studies in Architecture: An Overview of the Four Books of The Nature of Order with Emphasis on the Scientific Problems which Are Raised, Katarxis, No. 3, 2003, available at www.katarxis3.com/ (accessed 10 March 2018, pp. 24. See 7–8.)
 Mehaffy, M. & Salingaros, N.A., Architectural myopia: designing for industry, not people. On the Commons, pp. 5 & 9–10, 2011.
 Burgess, S. C., The physical structure, optical mechanics and aesthetics of peacock tail feathers. Design and Nature, WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol. 57, eds. C.A. Brebbia, L. Sucharov & P. Pascola, WIT Press, Southampton and Boston, pp. 435–443, 2002.
 Gell-Mann, M., Plectics: The study of simplicity and complexity. Europhysics News, 33(1), pp. 17–20. https://doi.org/10.1051/epn:2002105
 Alexander, C., The Timeless Way of Building, Oxford University Press, New York, 1979. See pp. 126–136.
 Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A. & Augustin, D., A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgements, British Journal of Psychology, 95, 489–508, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811
 Webber, M.W., Planning Problems are Wicked Problems. Developments in Design Methodology, ed. N. Cross, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 135–144, 1984.
 Barelkowski, R., Verbal thinking in the design process. Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal, 4(5), pp. 127–138. https://doi.org/10.18848/1833-1874/cgp/v04i05/37953
 Hekkert, P., Design aesthetics principles of pleasure in design. Psychology Science, 48(2), pp. 157–172, 2006.
 Op. cit.: Graham (2005: 167).
 Harries, K., The Ethical Function of Architecture, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1997.
 Sauchelli, A., Functional beauty, architecture, and morality: a beautiful Konzentrazionslager? The Philosophical Quarterly, 62(246), pp. 128–147, 2012. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2011.00020.x
 Sadri, M., Kavandi, M., Jozepiri, A., Teimouri, S. & Abbasi, F., Bionic architecture, forms and constructions. Research Journal of Recent Sciences, 3(3), pp. 93–98, 2014.
 Battle, G. & McCarthy, C., Sustainable Ecosystems and the Built Environment, Wiley-Academy, Chichester, 2001. See pp. 15–17.
 Ma, L., From Bionic Design of the High-Rise Buildings, 2nd International Conference on Civil, Materials and Environmental Sciences (CMES 2015), London, the UK, pp. 730–734, 2015.
 Op. cit., Battle and McCarthy (2001: 102–103).
 Huerta, S., Structural design in the work of Gaudi. Architectural Science Review, 49(4), pp. 324–339, 2006. See pp. 330–332. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2006.4943
 Latour, B., On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(4), pp. 228–245, 1996. See pp. 229–230 and 239–240. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca0304_2
 Schlaich, M., Elegant structures. The Structural Engineer, 2015, pp. 10–13. See p. 12.
 Barelkowski, R., Design process as complex system. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 13(1), pp. 46–59, 2018. See pp. 48–51. https://doi.org/10.2495/dne-v13-n1-46-59
 Del Giudice, E. & Tedeschi, A., Science and aesthetics: how beauty can emerge from matter. International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 6(4), pp. 282–285, 2011. See p. 283. https://doi.org/10.2495/dne-v6-n4-282-285
 Nicolescu, B., Methodology of transdisciplinarity – levels of reality, logic of the included middle and complexity. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 1(1), pp. 19–38, 2010. See p. 24.
 Ibid. 27.
 Baranger, M., Chaos, Complexity, and Entropy: A physics talk for non-physicists, 2000, available at necsi.edu/projects/baranger/cce.pdf (accessed 3 April 2018, pp. 735–747. See pp. 741–742.)
 Stein, S. & McMordie, M., Beauty and character: values beyond beauty in architecture. Interchange, 33(2), pp. 183–191, 2002. See pp. 184–185. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1016552320002