Question

Analyze the passage below discussing late twentieth-century architectural theory. After reading, match each specific detail cited by the author to the primary rhetorical function it serves within the argument.

In late twentieth-century architectural discourse, a salient theoretical schism emerged between Structuralists, who pursued autonomous formal systems, and Phenomenologists, who advocated for the primacy of embodied experience. Structuralists, drawing heavily upon linguistic analogies, approached architecture as an abstract system of signs fundamentally independent of human perception. For instance, Peter Eisenman’s early residential projects, often pejoratively characterized as 'cardboard architecture,' were generated through rigorous geometric permutations that conspicuously subordinated material resonance and functional logic to syntactic complexity. Conversely, phenomenologists such as Juhani Pallasmaa diagnosed the prevailing architectural orthodoxy with an 'ocularcentric bias'—an entrenched over-reliance on visual composition at the expense of other sensory modalities. Pallasmaa championed an architecture that engages the entire human sensorium, citing Alvar Aalto’s meticulously sculpted leather doorknob at the Villa Mairea as a paradigm of design that prioritizes the haptic over the optic, thereby anchoring the discipline back into the phenomenological reality of the physical body.