Discussion questions/keywords/summary from/of:
"The Profession and Discipline of Architecture: Practice and Education," in The Discipline of Architecture, Julia Robinson and Andrzej Piotrowski, eds. by Standford Anderson
*I'm sorry this is being posted so late. I went home for the weekend and the weather on the way back to the cities was pretty bad, so the ride back took longer than expected :(
1.) In this article, Anderson basically says that a doctorate in architecture would not be beneficial to anyone or anything. Do you agree or disagree? Why?
2.) Anderson also says that architecture, though it stands in relationship to many other areas of knowledge like science and art, it cannot be called a composite of those areas. However, I know someone who double majored in art and math as an undergrad and is now in graduate school for architecture. Couldn't you argue, then, that architecture is truly a composite of many different subjects?
1.) architecture as a "discipline" - Architecture as a discipline uses a "collective body of knowledge that is unique to architecture and, though it grows over time, is not delimited in time or space." It more involves the research and study of different architectural elements/aspects and is not about synthesizing them in material buildings.
2.) architecture as a "profession" - Architecture as a profession involves synthesizing a physical artifact (a.k.a. a building). In the profession of architecture, you must pay attention to concerns that are not "intrinsically those of architecture while certain forms of architectural knowledge are strategically excluded."
This excerpt covers the key differences between architecture as a discipline and architecture as a profession. Though varied, the two are directly related. They are described as running perpendicular to each other, with the profession running horizontally and the discipline intersecting vertically. The key difference (as I see it) between the them is that the profession deals with the actual application of architectural skill and other knowledge into building and creating while the discipline is concerned more with covering research and specific aspects of architecture. It is not concerned with producing structures. Standford also touches on the subject of a potential doctorate in the field of architecture. While some are all for this proposal, he describes it as an "unfortunate example of degree inflation." He says that the architectural education already overqualifies its graduates and that striving for a doctorate is not necessary and could even be detrimental to the profession and discipline aspects. He does say, however, that additional research in architecture could be beneficial if proper funding is generated and if the architectural society would be willing to accept and embrace it's findings.