Fellow INTJs, please help. Architecture.

[Daniel]

This post by "Amaranth" got my really worried.

„I worked as an architectural consultant for two firms near NYC for more than a year. I loved the work, hated the interpersonal dynamics. In my experience, architecture *in practice* is more about red tape and meetings and office politics than it is about design, unfortunately. I was constantly expected to comply with decisions that didn't make sense because most architects don't seem to take criticism. I entered architecture wanting to design, and all I discovered was that

!!!!!....it's 98% red tape and BS, 2% design !!!!!

!!!!!…..architecture is a very EQ-demanding field!!!!! "


I‘m a 1st year architecture student, however my EQ is very low and I‘m a total ideas/living inside my head kind of person. Most people I meet seem not interesting to me.
Most of other architecture students seem alien to me – they constantly do meaningless small talks and are so unlogical.
I entered architecture only hoping to realize my ideas – create energy efficient, sustainable design, environmentally friendly buildings, also buildings which would stimulate the creativity of grownups (as toys stimulate the creativity of children).
Architecture just for beauty seems absolutely meaningless to me and no way would I like to do it only for beauty.
However I do appear to have talent for drawing, water color, sculpture and graphic design (and I do get a lot of pleasure out of them).I‘m very precise, analytical, accurate, my works a very clean (realistic and not messy).I seem to have an advantage on that against all other architecture students. However I don‘t like architectural composition and design – I‘m always thinking not as much about the look of the building, as how it would work , how different parts would connect with each other, I imagine moving parts in buildings. It’s more of an invention/mechanism than a static thing. And my lecturers constantly criticize me on that. They force me to do that I consider meaningless- to do only simple aesthetics with planes and surfaces.
Despite how things turn out I‘m firm that I‘ll have (currently now I imagine that it will be my second degree) a bachelors degree in either mechanical engineering or physics (maybe civil or structural engineering, but these don‘t seem to be as meaningful as the first two).
I don’t get pleasure from mathematics (despite this I perform very well at it), but I get a lot of pleasure from physics and especially various interesting theorems. I like that physics puts this chaotic world into categorized boxes. I also adore drafting and I‘m crazy about cad programs.


If you are an INTJ related to architecture, or maybe have INTJ architect friends I would tremendously appreciate your opinions and thoughts as I‘m a bit in a crisis right now.

[Rei]

I wanted to be an architect. I have similar interest in physics, maths, and have pretty good skill with the drafting/building aspect. I didn't end up going for it because it is PRICEY as hell.

Anyway...
First of all, what I have to say about not being interested in 'the others' and interpersonal dynamics is to suck it up. There aren't any "high level" jobs out there that don't require a good amount of that. If you are an INTJ, your EQ shouldn't be throughly horrible as you should be alright at judging people intuitively. You just have to learn to use that to your advantage. Being social is something introverts have to learn and will learn if he/she is willing. So don't worry about it.

Your dilemma is more of a problem with rank. No one ever listens to first years... you can't expect any kind of respect when you're on the bottom of the food chain... especially in engineering-related fields.

Aesthetics is an important part of architecture, and even if you think something else is more important (and it is), you better learn to put function together with looks. I think that is the whole point of architecture is learning to put those two things together, not just making things efficient. If you are more interested in the practical aspects, I recommend you look into a more purely engineering program.

[Daniel]

I wanted to be an architect. I have similar interest in physics, maths, and have pretty good skill with the drafting/building aspect. I didn't end up going for it because it is PRICEY as hell.

Anyway...
First of all, what I have to say about not being interested in 'the others' and interpersonal dynamics is to suck it up. There aren't any "high level" jobs out there that don't require a good amount of that. If you are an INTJ, your EQ shouldn't be throughly horrible as you should be alright at judging people intuitively. You just have to learn to use that to your advantage. Being social is something introverts have to learn and will learn if he/she is willing. So don't worry about it.

Your dilemma is more of a problem with rank. No one ever listens to first years... you can't expect any kind of respect when you're on the bottom of the food chain... especially in engineering-related fields.

Aesthetics is an important part of architecture, and even if you think something else is more important (and it is), you better learn to put function together with looks. I think that is the whole point of architecture is learning to put those two things together, not just making things efficient. If you are more interested in the practical aspects, I recommend you look into a more purely engineering program.



Thank you for the reply, Rei.
Learning to be interested in people that are unlogical? But it sounds so artificial. Maybe INTJ is not meant to do that. The thing that worries me is that in Architecture other students and lecturers often are extremely unlogical..As an opposite all physicists I know are very logical. I don‘t have a lot of engineer friends (so it’s difficult to judge) but I have an illusion people are more logical / INTJ friendly there as well. My only fear is that architecture may be socially a unfriendly environment for INTJ’s.
I am quite quick to meet new people, but my expectations are so high that only a few percent are interesting to socialize with. My only hope is that unlogical architects somehow are doomed to stay in low positions and only INTJ‘s / INTP‘s have the potential to become famous architects which can then realize their ideas without somebody unlogical standing in the way.

[vision]

I work in an Architects practice on the technical side rather than the design side, so I’m not an Architect, but a technician. With regards to INTJs, I am positive there are no other INTJ in the office (workforce is around 50-75) apart from me. I can’t say much about INTJ friendliness, as I experience that in life generally anyway.
In the commercial world of architecture I would agree, it is more about red tape than design innovation. There is so much bureaucracy and standardization; and of course, there so many related disciplines that work alongside architects that I often wonder what architect actually do!

[INTJoe]

If you are an INTJ related to architecture, or maybe have INTJ architect friends I would tremendously appreciate your opinions and thoughts as I‘m a bit in a crisis right now.


Not sure what your underlying question is here...but I'm assuming it is "Is this profession right for me?" Correct me if I'm wrong.

First off, you sound very smart and passionate, and it sounds like you already have strong opinions about what you like. I think you are over-reacting to one person's post.

I'm INTJ, and I have an accredited B.Arch degree, and am currently taking my professional licensing exams. My goal is to be a registered architect by late next year.

Let me just make a few things clear. Yes, there are a lot of bourgeoise types in this industry who love mingling at get-togethers with wine and cheese and talking about impractical stuff that doesn't matter. This isn't for me, either. But I do enjoy going to these events and looking at/talking about beautiful design.

Don't fret that you aren't into superfluous "phoo-fy" type ornamentation or cheesy stuff on buildings. You sound like a misplaced modernist, which is what I consider myself. Many people think there is a lot of beauty found in a clean, simplistic, functional design. There is always a market for these type of designers.

And I'm surprised you think INTJ's are rare in this profession. I'm almost certain corporate architecture firms are littered with INTJ/INTP types. My two closest friends in the industry are INTJ/INTP. What is great about this industry is that I believe a wide variety of types can make it. The industy is so vast, and creative that there is almost a niche for any type.

The ISTJ types can write specification manuals and enjoy it and make pretty good money (because nobody else wants to do this!)

The INTJ's can strategize the best way to manage a large project.

The "EF's" can enjoy meeting with the clients and kissing their ass. The "ESF's" would probably get their kicks from showing the drawing set to the building committee's and handling all the absurd questions from those who don't know what they're talking about!

I could go on and on, but if you enjoy what you do, I'd say stick with it. You will find your niche in this profession! We don't get paid much, and we work hard, but I can't think of many things more fun, challenging, and fulfilling than designing shelters for humanity!

[Santana28]

I have some experience in the subject. My father is an electrical engineer and he got me started drafting electrical schematics and such when i was 10 years old. In my school district we were luck enough to have drafting classes from Junior high through high school - i took ever single one of them, back to back. My school district also had a 2 year vocational school that you could enter into for your junior and senior year. I did this, for Architectural drafting. By the time i graduated i had essentially 6+ years of board drafting and had worked extensively on AutoCad versions 9 through 2000. My instructor at the vocational school specifically reccomended me to take her position at a modular homebuilder upon graduation. I loved the work. My job was particularly enjoyable considering that the homes were actually built ON PROPERTY and then assembled on site. If a question on a design came up, all i had to do was walk down some stairs and onto the assembly line and into the portion of my house that was being constructed.

I loved the job. It paid VERY well, considering it was my first job out of high school. But i ran into similar problems - the work environment SUCKED. I discovered architects to be among the laziest human beings i have ever met. Everyone was completely self-centered, and worked on their own time frame - nothing or no one could make them work any faster than they wanted to. When i ran out of work, no one was even remotely interested in keeping me busy - i was just expected to basically sit in my cubicle and stare out the window. Which was made all the more difficult considering they had me working 60 hours a week, for some unknown reason - there was no work at all on some days. I just came in, sat at my desk, and prayed for something to fall on my desk.

The people were generally friendly, but most were quirky obsessive types who did not work well with others. And office gossip was another issue... when the cat is away... the mice will play...

Another funny story - i moved to Illinois after i quit this job. I started applying for temp drafting positions at comparable companies. I went in for one interview after the temp agency person had told me they had reviewed my resume and they were "very, very interested" in me and "very impressed with my experience." I sit down at the table with the old german guy who ran the company. He looked at me, looked at the paperwork, looked back at me and asked dead seriously "Are you sure you shouldn't be babysitting instead?"

I walked out, and i haven't looked back since. Oh... and apparently none of my experience matters in a state where you have to have a minimum Associates degree to get in the door ANYWHERE.

[Rei]

Thank you for the reply, Rei.
Learning to be interested in people that are unlogical? But it sounds so artificial. Maybe INTJ is not meant to do that. The thing that worries me is that in Architecture other students and lecturers often are extremely unlogical..As an opposite all physicists I know are very logical. I don‘t have a lot of engineer friends (so it’s difficult to judge) but I have an illusion people are more logical / INTJ friendly there as well. My only fear is that architecture may be socially a unfriendly environment for INTJ’s.
I am quite quick to meet new people, but my expectations are so high that only a few percent are interesting to socialize with. My only hope is that unlogical architects somehow are doomed to stay in low positions and only INTJ‘s / INTP‘s have the potential to become famous architects which can then realize their ideas without somebody unlogical standing in the way.
;) *illogical

Anyway... yes it's artificial. That's what I thought too. But the thing is, it makes the other person feel a lot better, plus it makes things easier for yourself in the future. Not meant to do that? There is no what is meant to be done... the issue is what you want to accomplish, and what you're willing to do/sacrifice to get there. If you want it enough, you have to sacrifice a few minutes of your time and a few breaths of air to socialize with boring people. Such is the life we live.
I think most people in architecture tend to be more artistic than logical. More superficial than functional (no offense to any architects). You should keep in mind that architectural education is supposed to teach how to incorporate the logic into the aesthetics; I'd expect it to get more logical as you progress (don't quote me on it though).
I think you have to remember that your career and your social life are separate. It's healthy to have friends outside of your own field. In my opinion, I don't have to be interested in the people I work with... I just have to get along with them. If I could only work with people I found interesting I would probably get no where because frankly, I haven't met too many people I found interesting either.

My advice is still:
Calm down and think, suck it up, and look into mechanical/civil/structural engineering.

Side note:
Once you get there, you can do whatever you want with your 'title'
If you aren't satisfied with the extent of architecture now, you could be the first to expand it to a certain aspect. Don't limit yourself to the bar the majority sets.

[Amaranth]

I entered architecture only hoping to realize my ideas – create energy efficient, sustainable design, environmentally friendly buildings, also buildings which would stimulate the creativity of grownups (as toys stimulate the creativity of children).

Interesting. I went into architecture for similar reasons - I was all about sustainable design (have you read Cradle to Cradle?). One of the firms I worked for focused solely on sustainable design, getting NYC & surrounding areas up to LEED ("green" building) standards. At the other firm, which did some sustainable design but also historical preservation, I did more generic stuff. I got frustrated because I wanted to design innovative structures and I realized I wouldn't get to do that if I made a living as an architect (ironically enough).

One particular conversation stuck with me - I was speaking to an architect on the way to a conference, and she told me: "If you don't love architecture itself...if you don't get all giddy about buildings...if you only love a very specific kind of architecture, I don't think you'll find satisfaction as an architect. It's a passion for architecture as a whole that'll help you cut through all the BS." Obviously, I concluded that my heart was more in sustainability than it was in architecture, but you may feel otherwise. I did end up finding something else to work towards: sustainable agriculture, which allows me to design living systems for maximum productivity and self-regeneration. Permaculture, for example, is all about designing human habitats based on ecological principles and good sense.

Anyway, it's better that you ask these questions now, rather than on the day before you graduate from architecture school!

[INTJoe]

I discovered architects to be among the laziest human beings i have ever met. Everyone was completely self-centered, and worked on their own time frame - nothing or no one could make them work any faster than they wanted to.

You worked for a modular home-builder. That is not architecture. Did you even work for an architect? Or just some guy who was a "designer" for KB Homes and called himself an architect?

Architects are the complete opposite of lazy. They are some of the hardest working professionals out there, imo. How can you be lazy when your client is building a $40 million high school or whatever? The clients are always very very demanding and expect answers and results all the time, and on time. Most expect too much (because they aren't usually well-trained in the commercial design/construction industry) and have little clue as to how long it takes and how difficult it is to produce a building from scratch in this era.

To a previous poster who wondered "what architects do?": Architects act on behalf of the owner in the Owner-Contractor construction agreement and have the authority and responsibility of being the mediator during the construction process of the building. This is because the Owner usually would have no clue if the Contractor was building something wrong, or substituting cheaper products. Very common, especially in large complex buildings.

The Architect also approves payment requests from the Contractor. If the Contractor requests payment for 10% of the overall fee, but the Architect has deemed they have only built 5% of the building, the Architect will reject it, and cause the Owner to only have to pay 5% at that time. This is a never-ending struggle because the Contractor always wants more money now and the Owner always wants to keep more money now. The architect decides, as a knowledgeable professional, what amount is to be paid.

The architect obviously meets with the building committee (sometimes up to 20+ people) early on to determine what their program requirements are. The architect and Owner come together on what program will "work" for their building (and budget).

The architect designs the building during three main stages: Pre-design (photographing the site, survey, procuring soil boring tests, geological information, easements, deed restrictions, etc.) Shematic Design: The very basic layout of the building. Relating the large important spaces to one-another and laying out the general parking scheme, etc. Design Development: Putting all the drawings into AutoCad and getting down to the details of it all and specifying building materials, finishes, fixtures, paint colors, etc.)

Then the architect assists the Owner during the bid process which is when a bunch of contractors bid for the job. Architect and Owner decide who wins the job and then the Architect performs Contract Administration which is what I described in the first two paragraphs.

Oh, I forgot to mention the fun part. The architect hires (and pays for, out of their fee) consultants such as Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, and Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Engineer. They meet with these professionals and coordinate the systems to all fit in and work with the building's design. This is probably the most difficult task. Engineers are great and smart folks, but they lack the "vision" of the architect and building owner and just want to design stuff as efficiently (and ugly) as possible. This would never work, so it is a never-ending struggle to get the rigid engineers to stop questioning everything and learn to fit their stuff in. So the architect has a heck of a lot of responsibility, and works very hard all the time. When not working, they are likely thinking about their work, so it isn't like a apples-to-apples comparison to most jobs.

To Rei: Surprisingly, I don't think many architecture schools get much more practical as you progress through your coursework. I can only speak for mine, but ours was very heavily theory-based and impractical. It was very much about exploring ideas and being able to back them up with a good design concept. We do have to perform 3 full-time years of internship before we can be qualified to get our license, and so the school's theory is generally "We teach you to fantasize and live in the clouds, and your intership will teach you how to apply what you've learned here."

Put another way, we know almost nothing coming out of school, but we do understand how to design abstractly. And that takes a long time, 10 5-credit courses to be exact! It takes a looong time to learn to design. And many just never "get it" and get booted from school.

OK, I NEED TO GET BACK TO WORK! lol. :)

EDITED: To add, they have to do all of this while satisfying the prescriptive International Building Code, with local amendments (which means each city can add to the code, oh joy! So the same exact building in two different towns could require diffrent criteria), Internation Fire Code w/local amendments, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Federal Fair Housing Act, the National Energy Code, Plumbing Code, and some others if applicable.

Being a very good architect is a very difficult undertaking, yet very rewarding to be able to produce something amazing that will live on after you are gone.

[Amaranth]

My experience resonates with INTJoe - architects are not lazy. Arrogant, perhaps, but certainly not lazy. Architecture is a very demanding career, and that's why it's important to be sure you are committed to it, and do whatever you can to make it a fulfilling career for you (including developing interpersonal skills, since as INTJoe points out, a lot of what an architect does is coordinate).

Daniel - I forgot to mention that if you're interested in sustainable design, there's also innovation going on in engineering (i.e. ecological engineering). Check out John Todd's "living machines" for example:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It might be worth looking into.


Overall, it seems like you have two choices:

(1) Accept that architecture requires a lot of EQ, and stick with it as long as the benefits (i.e. your passion for alternative design) outweigh that cost for you. This is what Howard Roark did in "The Fountainhead."

(2) Consider an alternative that has a better cost/benefit ratio if you're not willing to accept a career in architecture for what it is (rather than what you want it to be).

Amaranth added, 6 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...

My only hope is that unlogical architects somehow are doomed to stay in low positions and only INTJ‘s / INTP‘s have the potential to become famous architects which can then realize their ideas without somebody unlogical standing in the way.

Keep in mind that clients can be very illogical as well. They may want a certain design and not care that it doesn't make sense. An architect gets paid to provide a valuable service: combine the desires of the client (which are sometimes sensible, sometimes not) with the functionality of the structure (INTJ heaven). Rarely will a client give you a budget and ask you to do whatever you think is logical. Even Frank Lloyd Wright had arguments with his clients because they wanted a certain feature and he didn't think it made sense, and he was, well, Frank Lloyd Wright!

[Daniel]

Interesting. I went into architecture for similar reasons - I was all about sustainable design (have you read Cradle to Cradle?). One of the firms I worked for focused solely on sustainable design, getting NYC & surrounding areas up to LEED ("green" building) standards. At the other firm, which did some sustainable design but also historical preservation, I did more generic stuff. I got frustrated because I wanted to design innovative structures and I realized I wouldn't get to do that if I made a living as an architect (ironically enough).

One particular conversation stuck with me - I was speaking to an architect on the way to a conference, and she told me: "If you don't love architecture itself...if you don't get all giddy about buildings...if you only love a very specific kind of architecture, I don't think you'll find satisfaction as an architect. It's a passion for architecture as a whole that'll help you cut through all the BS." Obviously, I concluded that my heart was more in sustainability than it was in architecture, but you may feel otherwise. I did end up finding something else to work towards: sustainable agriculture, which allows me to design living systems for maximum productivity and self-regeneration. Permaculture, for example, is all about designing human habitats based on ecological principles and good sense.

Anyway, it's better that you ask these questions now, rather than on the day before you graduate from architecture school!


That's depressing - I mean sustainable architecture. Who the heck creates sustainable innovations then?
I always had these good feelings for buildings. I was/probably still am (but not as much) excited by skyscrapers and old mansions or even old monastery buildings. But that's like mostly me then I was 6-14teen.Now all the buildings seem so meaningless as I see the future context. I guaranty 100percent that in the future there will be no humans. Computers/quantum computers, nanotechnology, artificial neurons, technologies that at present don't even exist will make a next logical evolutionary step. Our whole planet will be one super "computer" being - new form of life. Theoretically all the possible minds of the people who lived on earth could be simulated. It would be a being with intelligence beyond our imagination. Nothing similar that we can think of. It’s like monkey can't understand how we humans think. The box on our shoulders is not a ghost - its matter - it can be replicated, enhanced and made in large quantities. Do we actually believe we are like the perfect life form.
These are the logical thoughts in my head.
In this context doing architecture as a form pleasing aesthetical sense of a life form which in the future will cease to exist as natural evolution will take place seems meaningless. It’s like building sand castles - you know they will be destroyed by the waves eventually. What’s the point of doing it then..
Then I think this way, it seems I should put all my analytical abilities into making this evolution happen in a most quality way – therefore I should work on artificial intelligence.Physics?
The paradox is that I don't feel comfortable in laboratories or computing laboratories-I don't feel good there. These are such dark and cold places (metaphorically speaking).Architecture and engineering feel better. It’s not so cold - more creative, more colours.But I'm constantly aware that these will become obsolete in the future and that there are things to do, which are more important as will have the impact on humanity.
I got attached to sustainable design as it was the most meaningful thing (in my perspective) I could push out of architecture. I would do engineering but I don't know which one, as all my early life I was mostly attached to buildings, either building them with my hands or looking for information about them. Moreover I feel that as being an engineer I will only be able to do small things-work on specific projects: constructions, engine parts et cetera...Architecture as I saw it was the only way to impact the lives of people big time. My goal was to create buildings which would stimulate creativity and therefore would help bring up a new generations of creative people who would make our evolution into “the mind in a quantum computer” more organic.

I'm really scared that I will be misunderstood now, or will appear as a weirdo, but hey -here I have the best change of being understood.

P.S. When I think better I wasn’t only interested in buildings – I always liked technologies, documentaries , a big fan of discovery channel, string theory…et cetera – I like gathering information and generating ideas. As a kid I used to play with electronics: electric motors, batteries, switches, light bulbs, led trying to design a new model of a car or a robot. But it was never something specific, as for ex. some people really like cars and they become mechanical engineers.
I want to construct (like lego) and gather information to synthesize ideas.
I picked architecture because I was so passionate about building until until some 16 years old. It theoretically should have incorporated my both: feeling/artistic and hardcore analytical, scientifical trends – like the synthesis between art and science. However, as time passes by and I gather more information I see that it is not scientific or analytical at all. :(

[EvilRobotDrew]

I work in a Civil Engineering firm (we do a lot of roadway, and smaller land development projects) as a draftsman (actually, i am called an AutoCAD tech, i hate that title). I have only been in the field for about 2.5 years, but i have noticed that INTx personalities are very well accepted. the most brilliant and successful engineer i have ever worked with, probably the smartest guy i have ever met, was an INTJ. there are still office politics, and engineers can be Prima Donnas, but overall, it is a good career match for my personality.

only you know what is best for you, but taking an elective or two and seeing if engineering is your cup of tea may not be a bad idea.

[Amaranth]

That's depressing - I mean sustainable architecture. Who the heck creates sustainable innovations then?

Two examples that jump to mind are:

William McDonough, architect
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

John Todd, ecological engineer
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Rei]

zero house (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

This was an interesting idea my friend came across a while ago.

I'm absolutely drooling over how nice it looks and how efficient it sounds.

EDIT:
Disclaimer: When I say my friend came across, I mean she came across on the internet, not the actual idea.

[INTJoe]

zero house (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

This was an interesting idea my friend came across a while ago.

I'm absolutely drooling over how nice it looks and how efficient it sounds.

Rei, this looks and sounds nice. The reason why we don't see this stuff implemented yet, to any kind of mainstream extent, is because the general population is "afraid" to go against the grain, even if it's for their own good.

A lot of people are afraid to live in something so different looking, for fear of poor resale value, etc. Fear of the unknown...scared to have a compost heap under their home, yadda yadda...The unfortunate truth is that severe changes in the built environment are verrrrrry slow, like molasses. It's different from, say, the technology industry, among others.

Look at the built environment...roadways, houses, commercial buildings...you can take a 100-year swatch from any point in history and you won't see a huge amount of change. This is definitely one of the pitfalls of said industries.

INTJoe added, 4 Minutes and 18 Seconds later...

I guaranty 100percent that in the future there will be no humans.

Wait...what? I agree if you're talking about when the Sun burns out, but you're only gonna be here 80 years or so. Don't be so pessimistic. The Egyptian pyramids at Giza have been around for about 5,000 years with relatively little wear-and-tear.

There are all kinds of things you can do in your lifetime that can leave an impact on the culture for years and years beyond your death.

[Rei]

Rei, this looks and sounds nice. The reason why we don't see this stuff implemented yet, to any kind of mainstream extent, is because the general population is "afraid" to go against the grain, even if it's for their own good.

A lot of people are afraid to live in something so different looking, for fear of poor resale value, etc. Fear of the unknown...scared to have a compost heap under their home, yadda yadda...The unfortunate truth is that severe changes in the built environment are verrrrrry slow, like molasses. It's different from, say, the technology industry, among others.

Look at the built environment...roadways, houses, commercial buildings...you can take a 100-year swatch from any point in history and you won't see a huge amount of change. This is definitely one of the pitfalls of said industries.

If I could afford it, I'd definitely want that house. And heck... who cares about resale value?! It looks so spectacular that I'd want to live in it for the rest of my life!

Anyway... something else to add. Perhaps skewing from architecture itself into efficiency in general.
I'm currently taking an Animal Science course, and my prof told us interesting things about future agricultural building ideas. Apparently someone has worked out an plan to build a multi-story ruminant housing building, a completely robotized dairy cattle facility etc. It's very well thought out and honestly could work. Probably won't be realized for another 10 years or so though.

[Amaranth]

Anyway... something else to add. Perhaps skewing from architecture itself into efficiency in general.
I'm currently taking an Animal Science course, and my prof told us interesting things about future agricultural building ideas. Apparently someone has worked out an plan to build a multi-story ruminant housing building, a completely robotized dairy cattle facility etc. It's very well thought out and honestly could work. Probably won't be realized for another 10 years or so though.

I'm not the biggest fan of livestock confinement operations but I understand that if people keep demanding cheap food, producers will find more efficient ways to provide it. There's another (quite different) trend developing in agriculture leaning towards low-infrastructure, high density grazing methods which buffer livestock operations from drought by storing more water in the soil. The nice thing is it can be done with no equipment or infrastructure except a portable electric fence!

[Daniel]

zero house (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

This was an interesting idea my friend came across a while ago.

I'm absolutely drooling over how nice it looks and how efficient it sounds.

EDIT:
Disclaimer: When I say my friend came across, I mean she came across on the internet, not the actual idea.

That's very nice

[GOD]

This post by "Amaranth" got my really worried.

„I worked as an architectural consultant for two firms near NYC for more than a year. I loved the work, hated the interpersonal dynamics. In my experience, architecture *in practice* is more about red tape and meetings and office politics than it is about design, unfortunately. I was constantly expected to comply with decisions that didn't make sense because most architects don't seem to take criticism. I entered architecture wanting to design, and all I discovered was that

!!!!!....it's 98% red tape and BS, 2% design !!!!!

!!!!!…..architecture is a very EQ-demanding field!!!!! "



ALL commercial things are like this, think of it like democracy... those with higher numbers swing the "cultural orientation".

The world revolves around "pressing the flesh" more than we'd like to believe.

You'd be surprised at how much work goes around on who knows who... ability is only maybe 50% of the equation.

[terencec]

ALL commercial things are like this, think of it like democracy... those with higher numbers swing the "cultural orientation".

The world revolves around "pressing the flesh" more than we'd like to believe.

You'd be surprised at how much work goes around on who knows who... ability is only maybe 50% of the equation.

I don't think it is 50%, it is much less especially in big Coop.





terencec added to this post, 12 minutes and 21 seconds later...

If you are an INTJ related to architecture, or maybe have INTJ architect friends I would tremendously appreciate your opinions and thoughts as I‘m a bit in a crisis right now.

Any career has to deal with politics more or less. Any high level job, you have to deal with it. The higher you go, the more you have to deal with it!

For Architecture student, you are lucky if you are asked to design a chair. Nobody will believe in you to design a building even after you graduate without experience. You have to accept that you may never be able to design anything you like. You may only design a table or chair.. I heard Architecture takes 5 years to finish and the pay is not very good, much less than engineers (consider engineers are not paid very high but it is relatively better than most careers). Unless you really like it, Personally, I don't think it is worth the time and money to get the degree. You are lucky that you are only 1st year student, you have time to change your major.

The Math in Physics is much more challenge than any math in my math courses (included the graduate level math classes). So, if you don't like math, you won't like physics. I recalled I was struggle to solve the math problems in physics and forgot what I was trying to understand the real physics problems.

Please do yourself a favor, don't get a physics degree. I guarantee you will have very difficult time to find a job (in physics or other fields) after finish your PhD. Most likely you will be unemployed after you graudate. This will be waste Human Resources I heard someone told me that a CalTech PhD student could not find a job after graduate (I am sure he was honest to me because he was a physics student from the top physics university) There are very few jobs for physics major. Every physics job, there are 1000+ applicants apply for it (Most of them have PhD).

Mechanical engineer is easier to find a job. I hope you talk to others and career counselors before you choose your major. If you make a mistake, you will waste a lot of money and time.

I am not happy I stuck in my field so I know how it feels. I regret that I have not done my career research carefully before I chose the major! At least the paid is decent.

Read this article To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Even though you are not a woman, it will be still helpful.

[Daniel]

I found out that Industrial design engineering is quite interesting.It incorporates both , design and mechanical/electronical engineering.
Has anyone had experience in the field?

[terencec]

I found out that Industrial design engineering is quite interesting.It incorporates both , design and mechanical/electronical engineering.
Has anyone had experience in the field?

I heard Industrial engineering. Never heard Industrial Design engineering. Never heard Design Engineering also.

In EE field, one of the hottest fields is Analog Circuit Design or Mix Signal Circuit design, but not the "Digital Design". It has good future, salary and the job will stay in US for long time.

[ankeshkothari]

I'm not an architect - nor do I know any INTJ architect. But I do have a passing interest in it (especially dual-utility furniture.)

ALL the fields have a lot of red tape in it. There are basically 2 paths you can take:

1. The Buckminster Fuller way: Don't care about it at all. Do your work. Invent your ideas. And let them be there for the world to see. When the world is ready for it - they'll start using it. (Unfortunately, Bucky's product ideas are still not as widely used as they should be.)

2. The Edison way: Play the game as it is played. Learn the rules even if you hate it. Learn a few words like "how interesting - and - tell me more about it" so that you can do the usual chit-chat and boring small talk. Give people what they want - even the useless designs that have very little utility.

There is a slight tug-of-war between what you love to do. And what the society wants you to do. So play the game in the beginning. And then change the rules when you make it big.

[curious1]

I have considered architecture but I am also considering architectural illustration. Interestingly, I found that some architectural illustrators make more than architects. Is this true?

[iamnotspock]

Interesting. I considered architecture as a career path. I had got rave reviews in some classes I took while in school. I liked the concepts ideas. I liked the software we used. However . . .

#1. I did not have great aesthetic design skills. I was all conceptual-abstract stuff. I believe that a typical architect is going to be an excellent draftsman. Good with visio-spatial skills. I wasn't. And the world only needs a couple iconoclastic neo-cubist visionaries.

#2. It don't pay squat. My cousin is a partner in a NYC firm. I think he pulls in about half what I did as a newbie software developer. Keep in mind, he was a licensed professional with a grad degree and years of experience. I was a hack with a PC and an internet connection.

#3. Stress. It rates very high on the stress-o-meter. Probably b/c clients are often total dicks. People get sued all the time.

So I think you might want to look at various kinds of engineering if you can handle the math.

[AntimonyLegault]

Architecture is about making buildings that people will buy.
Most people do not know very much about the value of buildings by eye.
Most people want 'cost effective buildings' (which is why we still live in rectangles).
Simply put, architects aren't in demand by other architects, but by economists.

[terencec]

US news and report.

Architect is one of overrated careers.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Paul V]

There is a widespread tendency among the rich people, which is to build something aesthetically pleasing, disregarding the cost or the functionality. That is where architects truly shine nowadays. Well, that, or innovating the old rectangle box so it has the same functionality but looks different.