Posted by  shwan on June 22, 2002 at 10:53:49:

In Reply to:  Re: psychology and architecture posted by nadia on June 22, 2002 at 10:32:25:

i think you have misunderstood my whole argument here.

["How can you disagree with facts? "

i am not disagreeing with facts, i am disagreeing with your interpretation of them]
my interpretations are based on factual basis here. I am not fabricating nor voicing an opinon.

Furthermore i understand completely the complexities behin architectural firms and orginisations as i am part of one, and i do realise the shoe string budget that architects are on when it comes to state contstruction. You have to understand that i am not aganist social housing at all, i just think that the psychological aspects that are integrated into its design is not progressive enough. Social housing is a very important aspcect of a city from a humanitarian point of view in the short term but not in the long term, unfortunately right now there is no short term answer, so society will always be affected by the effects that state housing has on society. As for architects being powerful members of society I completly disagree with your comment because architects can shape societies and have done in history. Corb is one of key people in shaping what me and you live in today. I think you should read the article i wrote in response to simple simons question, there is more of an elaboration on what I mean.

as for this comment: "It is not the fact that human beings can not get along living with each other that I am criticizing, but the amalgamation of architecture and psychological implications."

people CAN get along living with each other

i think i better not comment, just re-read what you worte, you are agreeing with what i said.

Responses:

• Re: psychology and architecture nadia 11:06:32 6/22/2002 (0)

Post a Response -