It doesn't sound like an issue of intelligence, but motivation. For me, it's unrealistic to think once you start a project, you should be motivated every day until the project is complete—there will be some days when you're simply unmotivated.  If you find yourself completely lacking motivation, then maybe you should search harder to find your passion in the field.

ditto to thecyclist. 

i'm a student (too?) and i often feel the same in my projects, and i like to think its not my lack of intelligence, either.  I'm not sure if its just the stress of schoolwork at times or just not always finding that personal spark in my studies that makes architecture resonate.  I find exploring new methods...taking each project in completely different (extreme?) directions to learn new things and see what inspires me to go on.  It's all about learning anyways.

hope you feel better ^_^

its called a short attention span.  if you can't go a half hour without checking your phone, facebook, or twitter, you have one.  the first few months of a full-time job for me were hell-- besides final projects at school i don't think i've done anything for more than 4 hours at a time besides internet in the past 5 years.

I think this has more to do with the fact that actually starting work on any project is pretty much the hardest thing about the whole process - making those first steps towards a product that has to be and look complete and final at the end. Coupled with the "finishedness" you see while researching, it makes it a whole lot harder to confront the blank piece of paper.

I have seen two general approaches toward a new project: one is by concentrating on the brief and assembling the functional elements (rooms and spaces) in such a way that they make the most sense. Then, you go from there and try to derive a sort of architecture to the building. I find this method limiting and kind of mediocre, but it works when you don't have a distinct concept to develop and you have to start somewhere. Also, it makes you really explore the function, which can't be harmful to the project, and you're going to have to do it at some point anyway. Finally, it's relatively easy because it usually resembles working on a crossword where you want to find the best fit as opposed to design where there can always be a better "fit".
The second approach also involves some initial familiarizing with the brief (clearly), but that is only to substantiate any concept you might come up with - that is, the main thing here is to focus on a single, holistic idea about your project and then go from there.
Essentially one method is "inside out" and the other is "outside in".
I usually find focusing on a single idea much more motivating and productive. It gives me a better urge to start working on the puzzle too.

Needless to say, the same principles apply when you're working on urban masterplans and such. It's just a different interpretation of those principles.

simply motivations as mentioned , you have to keep on fire , trying to transfer something which only exist in ur vision to a model where people can see and experience.

def'ly not smart enough.

or your job sucks.

rock n hard place.

or yr moms ugly?

always good to have an excuse.

blame whitey.

man's got you down?

too bad: simpsons did it.

5 topics started, all about having trouble with architecture school. Stop wasting everyone's time and change your major, or go get a job.

I think there is something to be said about how we stay inspired/motivated.  I found school to be more exciting (less parameters controlled by others like code, clients, budgets, liability), but still there were days when nothing clicked.  It was great to have friends around both in and outside the program who could talk me through those times (when even visiting great architecture wasn't enough).  There's a value to understanding why you love doing what you do and having a good support group of people who mutually feed on each others energies in a productive way.