ABSTRACT
Studies of architects’ theories are seldom clear on what basis designs are created. What are their assumptions about the relationship between people and the environment and between buildings and the environment? Architects’ conjectures are largely implicit in their theories. Where explicit the arguments are largely unintelligible to most people. George Orwell in his essay, “Politics and the English Language” believed that the multiplicity of meanings of the words used by politicians and artists alike has utility. Arguments simply descend to agreements or disagreements about what people like and dislike (Orwell 1961). If, however, one takes seriously the United States Supreme Court declarations that decisions that affect the public realm have to be based on evidence not suppositions (for example, Daubert v Merrell Dow, US Supreme Court, No. 92-102, 1993), then we architects need to rethink the way we present and argue for our designs (Stamps 1994).
