or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The Architecture Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Architecture Thread - Page 126

post #1876 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

1) I was about to chime in with, "That's your false dichotomy" but Foo beat me to it. At the very least SH should cut Foo some slack because SH accused him of creating a false dichotomy when it was quite reasonable to read SH as having created it. Foo was only working with what SH provided.

2) I was not going to mention this the other day but I think saying, "...because he was trying to exploit its form-making potential in a structural way that was ahead of the construction technology that was needed in order to pull it off with a gracefulness..." as if he was at fault of something is like applying 21st century Western attitudes to the role of women in the Dark Age society.

1. Foo created it because he couldn't understand what I was implying, an error it seems you shared. So congrats to you guys.

2. There are many processes in concrete construction that allow slimmer, stronger concrete components which might have reduced the size of those mullions and made them more graceful, either through better steel reinforcement or chemical additives in the cement, but they require a chemistry degree to understand so it wasn't worth trying to explain what little most architects know about them.
post #1877 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordecai View Post

I think it's more like saying that the designer of the Phaistos Disc was brilliant but ultimately unsuccessful because movable type isn't really a good idea when only 20 people can read and write.

This was my second choice of comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordecai View Post

What is with you guys? Are you both willfully obtuse in order to win internet arguments or do you really need everything to be perfectly spelled out for you?

I am obtuse due to genetics so I would appreciate if you did not hold that against me.

Sometimes you have to cater your level of exactitude to the poster. IMO, SH likes to set out grand parameters and then scoffs at the concept of them possibly not being correct. This is not to say I do not enjoy his posts, nor find him less than informative quite often, but he does like to play end off against the middle when one points out that quite possibly he has not laid out the grand unifying theory of Good Taste.
post #1878 of 3396
Sorry buddy, but I think it reflects poorly on you and foo, not SH, when he gives you the benefit of the doubt and you mistakenly identify not having your hand held through an entire argument as a logical flaw with that argument.
post #1879 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordecai View Post

Sorry buddy, but I think it reflects poorly on you and foo, not SH, when he gives you the benefit of the doubt and you mistakenly identify not having your hand held through an entire argument as a logical flaw with that argument.

Oh man.

You think it is likely SH gave the benefit of the doubt to Pio and me (or anyone else)? Things have truly taken a turn for the bizarre.

He's so obvious.
post #1880 of 3396
By the way, any architect worth his salt wouldn't make fun of "accent lamps" in a rental apartment. The space being unlighted and predetermined means any new tenant is likely to need new lighting to properly suit it. If you have to pick a new lamp, why shouldn't it be one with an aesthetic you enjoy?

Yet, SH would have us all believe that good design and architecture only happen when people accidentally acquire nine-foot tall bird-shaped beds on the way home from work, in the course of "honest living."


Edited by mafoofan - 6/18/13 at 4:25pm
post #1881 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordecai View Post

Sorry buddy, but I think it reflects poorly on you and foo, not SH, when he gives you the benefit of the doubt and you mistakenly identify not having your hand held through an entire argument as a logical flaw with that argument.

That's just not how the interaction between Foo and SH happened and SH's initial explanation seemed to me to be pretty...concrete. You know what would have been giving "the benefit of the doubt?" For SH's reply to be, "I did not mean to say concrete was the only material available to prevent the use of an interior column. I meant to say because concrete was used..." I certainly would have accepted that vs. just the accusation Foo went out of his way to create a false dichotomy.
post #1882 of 3396
Also, if you look back, I think you can agree I was perfectly polite and civil in my initial response to SH. I was wrong to think I could have a conversation with him. That was me giving him the benefit of the doubt.
post #1883 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post



You think it is likely SH gave the benefit of the doubt to Pio and me (or anyone else)? Things have truly taken a turn for the bizarre.
.

Yeah of course. I was able to read what he was saying. So was Skinny Goomba and SH is pretty relentless with him. You're making yourself seem like you have really shallow comprehension. What do you get out of it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Also, if you look back, I think you can agree I was perfectly polite and civil in my initial response to SH. I was wrong to think I could have a conversation with him. That was me giving him the benefit of the doubt.

What you've been doing is more like what Gletkin did in Darkness at Noon. Cordial enough, but I don't think I'd call it conversing.
post #1884 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Oh man.

You think it is likely SH gave the benefit of the doubt to Pio and me (or anyone else)? Things have truly taken a turn for the bizarre.

The only people who I'd need to walk on a leash to explain this are those that:

1) have never seen a structural window in something other than concrete, such as this one below

or

2) people that don't know concrete columns are already primarily given strength through steel reinforcement within them, making the logical assumption that steel can hold up windows itself an easy one to make

or

3) the eternally pedantic.

You're only insulting yourself with your argument, to your own ignorance.

post #1885 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Also, if you look back, I think you can agree I was perfectly polite and civil in my initial response to SH. I was wrong to think I could have a conversation with him. That was me giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't cordially tell flies to leave before I swat them.
post #1886 of 3396
Wright's Detroit house was built in 1955. You specifically alluded to the limits of technology at the time. I have no shame in admitting I have very little inkling as to what was possible back then or not. However, you asserted that concrete was chosen for the purpose of making a column unnecessary. Giving you benefit of the doubt, I assumed there would have been no other feasible way.

Also, I'm not sure what the need for steel reinforcement has to do with anything. Nothing I've stated or argued with you indicates I didn't know that. Hasn't every kid who's been through eight grade learned that it was only steal-reinforced concrete that allowed buildings to get taller and taller into the 20th century?

You are using red herrings to create the illusion of intelligence. Maybe others can't see through your bullshit. Others, however, obviously can.
post #1887 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


Yet, SH would have us all believe that good design and architecture only happens when people accidentally acquire nine-foot tall bird-shaped beds on the way home from work, in the course of "honest living."


If you didn't see the bird bed post as tongue in cheek I don't know what can be done for you.
post #1888 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

By the way, any architect worth his salt wouldn't make fun of "accent lamps" in a rental apartment.

I can assure you he wouldn't need to start a thread asking how to do it.
post #1889 of 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenHero View Post

I don't cordially tell flies to leave before I swat them.

Again, so obvious.

You must be a colossal, epic failure of some sort. Otherwise, why so aggressive a need to put down the people you deem beneath you? It seems you'd have bigger fish to fry if you were any good at frying them. Sad.
post #1890 of 3396
Rhetorical question:

Does anybody in the entire universe take himself more seriously, possessing less humor, than foo?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The Architecture Thread