ABSTRACT
As a result of these attributes, the author argues that there is no one method of design review but a variety of ways and modes. This demanding condition requires that design reviewers be cognizant of the spirit of the time and the place in which the design emerged. They should also be sensitive to the problems and the circumstances involved in the design and especially have a strong professional understanding of what design stands for in practical and academic tenns. Yet, for the purpose of the review, reviewers should distance themselves from the design itself and remain skeptical. Reasonable doubt enables reviewers to undertake a cueful scrutiny of the design from an uncommitted position.
