Design intentions of the Parthenon’s creators regarding visual effects

Ascertain, through historical evidence, whether the Parthenon’s designers intended its curves and irregularities to produce straightness or regularity, alternative aesthetic effects, or other outcomes.

Background

The paper argues that many ‘optical correction’ claims presume specific intentions on the part of Ictinus, Callicrates, and Phidias, despite the absence of contemporary records stating such intentions.

It explicitly notes that the creators’ goals—whether rectilinear appearance, visible curvature, strict regularity, measured irregularity, or evocative effects—are unknown.

References

Unfortunately, there is no contemporary record of any intentions behind the features of the Parthenon (or for that matter any classical Greek temples or constructions). We simply do not know the thought process of its creators or if they meant for the building to appear straight, curved, perfectly regular, slightly irregular, or evoke any particular feeling.

— The illusion of illusions: There are no optical corrections in the Parthenon (2510.16831 - Goriely, 19 Oct 2025) in Section 7.1 (Discussion — Fallacies — The intention fallacy)