Geometry. Pure Form. What are the limits of these concepts in architecture? To what extent can they be realized through constructive means? To the architect, these concepts are often the originating forces driving their work, but their nature is intangible, and can be best understood through reason. There exists then, a dichotomy that the architect is left to resolve: that which is solely of an intelligible nature and that which can exist within the physical limitations of our reality. While architectonic limitations are that of the physical, Architecture itself exists within both of these realms, the duality of the mind and of the body, and it is the charge of the architect to reconcile their inherent contradictions. The limitations of the mind and the body are incompatible at an absolute level, but there exists a degree of overlap within which architecture is found. Place is a catalyst that can trigger this dissonance. The intelligible exists in a placeless space, a space that was given a framework by René Descartes in his notion of extension, and exists as a free body. In contrast, the architectonic is contingent on placement and the forces of gravity. They are simultaneously contradictory and co-related. This thesis pursues the limits of this contradiction; its culmination more akin to an architectural follie than the original intent: a modest hiking shelter. / Master of Architecture / This thesis explores the duality and contradictions that arise when the realm of reason and the realm of that which is built coincide. The framework through which this exploration takes place is in the conception and design of a small structure in the mountains of Ticino, an Italian canton of southern Switzerland. It is a building whose purpose is pleasure, nothing more. The pursuit of ideal form in place is a catalyst for the series of contradictions that exist within not only this thesis, but the realm of architecture. Place and space. Mind and body. Intelligible and sensible.