Architecture & the Language of Physical Design: Response to Raschid Majbour, MSc

 I couldn't agree more with your comments regarding the relationship of civil engineering to architecture. My only regret is that you relegate architecture to the appearance created. Appearance simply symbolizes the many questions that must be asked and decisions (hundreds if not thousands) that must be taken to lead from an inquiring client and a blank piece of paper.

I cannot blame the audience. Architecture has focused on style rather than the substance of improving knowledge contribution for a very long time. They have not had a language that would permit them to measure, evaluate, and forecast the implications of shelter capacity decisions. These are the decisions that can address sprawl and excessive physical intensity. The deficit symbolizes our inability to speak in an architectural language that can correlate what we sense, evaluate what we see, and convince those we address. 

PS: I have discussed the new quantitative language and forecast models of Shelter Capacity Evaluation on many occasions in my essays on Linked-In and my blog at www.wmhosack.blogspot.com. It applies to all physical design disciplines concerned with the design, development, and evaluation of shelter in the Built Domain - and to those who govern, invest in, sell, advocate, and judge the product.