ABSTRACT
In Part One there was a description of the four levels upon which the mind perceives urban environment. Now in the context of policy it is necessary to develop from this level of analysis to the broader milieu comprising the medley of architectural sequences and complexity of spaces. The proposition is for an environment which, to return to G. A. Miller, provides 'tensions to keep us occupied and entertained', and 'surprise' to contribute 'to mental health and growth'; this is what is summed-up as dynamic urbanism, which, in an almost literal sense, means applying a force to the mind. This force causes the mind to react positively to external stimuli, either by formulating a motor strategy in an effort to satisfy curiosity drives, or solve problems posed by the milieu, or create images of possibilities latent in fragmentary disclosures. Altogether it is all about environment which stimulates arousal by challenge or novelty. For this reason the urban dynamic agenda is considered to be a prophylaxis for the malign aspects of system-maximization and subliminal perception.
