RESEARCH QUESTIONS
UNIT 2
/ What are the possible implications of technological advancements in the field of architecture, and how would this affect the future integrity of the profession?
/ Would AI's in architecture remove the architect from the design process altogether, and would there be any purpose for the human aspect in design in a world of technological superiority? Would this world be a more efficient and effective one?
/ What parameters are there for the human to technology ratio in architecture, and should these be re-examined in order to ensure the future of coexistence with the human and the technological?
REFLECTION
Overall the comments received for these questions were as guessed, or as well as they could be through interdisciplinary questioning. The topic, being innovative to some degree, would distract anyone outside the field of architecture almost immediately, becoming sidetracked with the notion of AI, AR and other forms of technological advancements, while architecture students showed a higher level of concern for these questions. Any question that stated technology posing a possible threat to designers was met with hesitation by architecture students, while anyone outside of architecture thought of these changes as positive innovations rather than negative ones. I found these relationships interesting but also found them to be quite natural given the participants. Technological advancements are often seen as positives amongst the greater subsect of the community, but if these advancements infringe upon your livelihood/profession, you might find yourself changing your views rather quickly. The levels of engagement between the multiplicity of demographics were also supportive of this, anyone within the school of architecture had an articulate, and defines opinion on the matter, while anyone from other disciplines had a more vague understanding of the possible implications to our field. Understandably so, the only thing I had expected more of were tie-ins across of the disciplinary platforms, surely these types of technological changes would affect other disciplines. I'm sure that if I were to expand the test group size there would be cases for my claims.
/ What are the possible implications of technological advancements in the field of architecture, and how would this affect the future integrity of the profession?
/ Would AI's in architecture remove the architect from the design process altogether, and would there be any purpose for the human aspect in design in a world of technological superiority? Would this world be a more efficient and effective one?
/ What parameters are there for the human to technology ratio in architecture, and should these be re-examined in order to ensure the future of coexistence with the human and the technological?
REFLECTION
Overall the comments received for these questions were as guessed, or as well as they could be through interdisciplinary questioning. The topic, being innovative to some degree, would distract anyone outside the field of architecture almost immediately, becoming sidetracked with the notion of AI, AR and other forms of technological advancements, while architecture students showed a higher level of concern for these questions. Any question that stated technology posing a possible threat to designers was met with hesitation by architecture students, while anyone outside of architecture thought of these changes as positive innovations rather than negative ones. I found these relationships interesting but also found them to be quite natural given the participants. Technological advancements are often seen as positives amongst the greater subsect of the community, but if these advancements infringe upon your livelihood/profession, you might find yourself changing your views rather quickly. The levels of engagement between the multiplicity of demographics were also supportive of this, anyone within the school of architecture had an articulate, and defines opinion on the matter, while anyone from other disciplines had a more vague understanding of the possible implications to our field. Understandably so, the only thing I had expected more of were tie-ins across of the disciplinary platforms, surely these types of technological changes would affect other disciplines. I'm sure that if I were to expand the test group size there would be cases for my claims.
Comments
Post a Comment