Can it be done so smoothly that a person would be subconsciously inclined to be social without having to make an effort to enter something or check into something? IMO, the strongest project will be so subtle that a person likely won’t even realize that they crossed a planned threshold.

I agree! That is what I want to achieve as well. Now I am having ideas that made me think about that detox center. I guess I do need further research about this. Thank you! I will definitely watch black mirror to get those research energy in.
Thank you!

And god forbid someone actually try’s to solve a problem that can have some sort of financial incentive for the one financing it....that would be way too realistic and useful. Instead, academia would rather pretend that these projects exist in some socialist utopia.

Thank you for this. Yes, I would avoid the latter one! I would want my research study to be interesting and well though of.

Thank you for this. Yes, I would avoid the latter one! I would want my research study to be interesting and well though of.

No I do need research about this. I asked this question because I am having doubts about this topic. It may not get approved, or something. But I do have a feeling that this topic has potential, I just need to justify why, and research more. Thank you!

No I do need research about this. I asked this question because I am having doubts about this topic. It may not get approved, or something. But I do have a feeling that this topic has potential, I just need to justify why, and research more. Thank you!

Now*

Sorry wrong comment this was for tduds*

As I said I need further research.. but I do think that technology has affected face-to-face conversations. In fact we can experience it. For example, you are diningg at a restaurant with a friend. Your expectation is for you to have some catching up, but then, in reality: cellphones. Cellphones all throughout the day and you didnt even talk.

As I said I need further research.. but I do think that technology has affected face-to-face conversations. In fact we can experience it. For example, you are diningg at a restaurant with a friend. Your expectation is for you to have some catching up, but then, in reality: cellphones. Cellphones all throughout the day and you didnt even talk.

I think that that observation is not ebough for it to be justified. It just gave me an idea that maybe technology/social media may be one of the causes of the disappearance of social interaction. What are your thoughts about this? And what do you think are other factors that cause disappearance of social interaction? Thanky you
! x

Study how communications have changed behavior in the past, that will give you a starting point. Whether or not or how it ties into architecture, particularly a rehab center (rehab from media?) is another thing.

Thank
you for this! I will look into it as well.

As I said I need further research.. but I do think that technology has affected face-to-face conversations. In fact we can experience it. For example, you are diningg at a restaurant with a friend. Your expectation is for you to have some catching up, but then, in reality: cellphones. Cellphones all throughout the day and you didnt even talk.

I think that that observation is not ebough for it to be justified. It just gave me an idea that maybe technology/social media may be one of the causes of the disappearance of social interaction. What are your thoughts about this? And what do you think are other factors that cause disappearance of social interaction? Thanky you
! x

You are correct about the "smartphones", just last week we watched a short documentary at my son's school, it was about a mother struggling with their teenage kids and their use of technology,she goes around trying to find out how is it going for other people; some do go to a rehab type of house without tech, some others find balance and do other things like sports and science clubs; so Yes, for a generation that's coming up now, the sole existence of this technology can be a problem, but it's also a necessity - to be connected to their peers at all times. (It's called Screenagers)

I wrote a lot more but this website appears to be failing, no surprise there - other 2 things: individualism and competitiveness ingrained in a generations mind, selfishness and not sharing your crayons. And also, police state and a false sense of safety or danger from strangers and public spaces. The internet becomes the plaza, because you're in your safe space, but not so much anymore.

I would take this as a consideration for my study. Thank you very much! Will update this thread if ever I have made progress in continuing this topic (which I hope I can continue).

.

Schools are still trying to operate as if there is no technology. And we let these people teach???? From ignorance? What I am saying is why aren't schools changing? Again, this has to do with architecture, but trying to solve problems like this architecturally is futile. Kids are smarter than schools give them credit for. Architects should stick to bricks and steel, but it's unfortunate that architects are the only profession who regularly practices the "what if?" thought progression. 

Technology means school should look different, way different. Why should a student have to sit through a lecture when they can watch a class online? What I am saying is that students know they can just google stuff and learn that way. Schools want to have a monopoly on learning, they want to say in Freshman English, you must read Lord of the Flies for instance so they can check their little boxes. Schools operate as if the point of school is not for learning, but for schooling. Sorry, don't have time for an essay... 

Meanwhile, technology has given us all this insight into the brain and schools are like, but that's not how we doooo it!!!

I believe that it is important to know some basic cultural stuff... imagine you were an architect and a client asked you a question and your response was - "hang on - let me google it." The whole point of school is that there is a system that is supposed to ensure that you know some important basics. How is a kid supposed to know what is important and what is not?

Individualize education. You can get anything individualized but education, where it actually makes the most sense. But it involves paradigm-busting.

You can learn by googling, not "hold on let me google that".

I am afraid that individualized education in the trupian era of alternative facts will not be beneficial for a society that has to function within the context of a singular nation state that is based on ideas and principals not race or ancestry. Having educational standards and putting people through similar academic programs has the potential to give society a basic foundation of facts. Discourse, if it is to be civil and productive, is greatly enhanced when people have some accepted and understood facts laid out at the start. The danger with home schooling and over customization of education is we further self segregate into more distinct and often less compatible tribes. If we allow too much customization of education based on individuals wants we insulate people from new and unfamiliar ideas. The exchange of ideas can be served with common education to a point where we have laid solid foundations for more complex discourse and discovery of new more complex ideas. We can only get to those ideas if we can start with some common understanding achieved from a basic/standard education.

Individualize the processes, not the content (but some individualizing of that too, just not the focus.)

What?

You don't know what a paradigm is, do you? Where did you go to school?

Of course I know what a paradigm is... what I'm saying is that "individualize education" is essentially saying homeschooling; i.e. don't let the government educate your kids, rather you educate your kids. That is a libertarian stance...

Oh, it doesn't have to mean that, see that's a paradigm. Break the box. I'm talking about reaching students, engaging them instead of running them through obstacle courses and then grading them on it (grade A, like a steak). If all students need different things, why do they mostly get the same thing? If the point of school is learning, why aren't students learning? We know they can learn, they learned to walk, talk, play, all before attending school. If we know classrooms and schools aren't that great of a place to learn, why do we keep insisting on doing it that way?

I agree. I think that somehow we are afraid that kids are going to lose their social skills hehe

Ha ha! Yeah! An important part of high school is to get knocked up, hence the on-site daycares! Progress!

Great idea! I would just caution against the idea that architects can be social engineers...

I think we do engineer social behavior in our work and we do so overtly. For example the design decisions in many new urbanist developments to have detached garages is a form of social engineering. Also the creation of informal meeting spaces on the new technology company campuses is another design feature meant to change social behavior.

Yes - but we can never force people to behave in certain ways... empty plazas in front of skyscrapers are an example...

I agree our powers are limited. Also consider the empty plaza may be the intended designed result.

I hadn't heard the name William Whyte in years, yet he came up in a discussion I had with a coworker yesterday and now here, I am so going to read his work and watch that movie again in the coming days. Thanks for the reminder!