The function of a thing and its ornament are not two separable features; they are inseparable.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Ornament and function are simply two versions of one more general phenomenon.claim0.877
  The conclusion of the argument that no real separation exists.
• Ornament and function are indistinguishable.claim0.856
  New cosmological assumption #6: both are aspects of the field of centers.
• separation of ornament and functionconcept0.854
  The cosmological assumption that ornament and function in a building are separate, with function being mechanical and ornament arbitrary, stemming from mechanism.
• Tacit Assumption 7: Ornament and function in a building are separate and unrelated categories.claim0.848
  Seventh assumption, a cosmological split that leads to arbitrary decoration and dead functionalism.
• Ornament is not trivial; it summarizes everything about living structure within its laws.claim0.807
  Claim that understanding ornament means understanding the principles of living structure.
• Ornament and function arise from a single evolving morphology; in a living building they are one.claim0.807
  The alternative to the mechanistic split, crucial for a vital architecture.
• Ornament is not extra or extraneous; it is a necessary continuation of the same process of completing the field of centersclaim0.799
  Rejects the distinction between function and ornament; ornament is simply the smaller stuff created at the last stage to perfect the field.
• I feel the WHOLE building as an ornament. ... the whole building is an ornament—whose rooms, passages, staircases, windows, ceilings, paving, benches, lamps are all extensions, pieces of that ornament.quote0.774
  Load-bearing articulation of Alexander's redefinition of ornament.