Architecture is one discipline within the Humanities because architecture involves design, which

is artistic. The Humanities address what it means to be human, including the big questions such
as what happens when we die, why we’re here, what the “good” life is, what we should do with
our lives, etc. Humans express their ideas regarding these questions through the Humanities
disciplines, including architecture.

The humanistic disciplines study man in what makes him different from
other entities.

They study only man, but as a whole, in philosophy and history. Man is the “talking
animal”; language is man as articulated coex-istence, consciousness, and self-
consciousness, and literature is a unique type of reference to language. And finally
man as man is a conscious project. The search for the ultimate meaning of human life
and of all reality is theology, as the reflective articulation of religion.

The humanistic disciplines are therefore philosophy, history, language,

literature and theology

We may question the above explanation, especially on grounds of its relevance in society
today, but it carefully elaborates that the humanities are not just an aggregate collection
of subsidiary fields of studies, but more importantly the essence of man’s sense of
order and purpose in the world.

But how does that find a place in the field of architecture?

As a discipline that consists of interrelated and interdependent fields of enquiry,

architecture calls for a negotiation and dialogue between a wide spectrum of practical,
theoretical, social, political, cultural and technological concerns.

So, humanities in architecture is derived out of the the articulation of these

concepts into paradigmatic space. As a discipline that acts as a quiet blanket to
civilization, architecture has the power to shape the subconscious and give direction to
society. It's capacity in moulding minds has been utilized since time immemorial,
whether it was the Gothic Era with its high towers and intimidating ornamentation to
subjugate the population to the powers of the church, or the Renaissance which brought
light to the amalgamation of spheres of knowledge to attain enlightenment. Historically,
movements in architecture have been in sync with the spirit of the place, to help the
metamorphosis of society into a different system of thinking. This was only attainable
because of the "humanities in architecture" - which gave the science of
building a holistic manifestation and embodied the essence of existence and
time.

However, the contemporary practice of architecture is witnessing a

paradigm shift.

From the conception of design idea, to the influences, references, and finally to the
manifestation into built environment - there is a constant tug between practicality
and imagination- which often translates into the tug between the technological
aspect and the artistic aspect of architecture.

The long standing debate of whether architecture is a "science" or an "art" is an

inconsequential journey that only results in bifurcation of fields of analysis, and the
unnecessary bestowal of importance to either aspect. Arroyo's criticism of the largely
followed assumption that humanities act as resisting forces against science and
technology also finds its implications in architecture, as the debate between "artistic"
and "scientific" design.

Unfortunately, against the backdrop of the modern technological age, with the
increasing emphasis on material and environmental aspects of sustainability,the
scientific outlook has tended to have the upper hand.

Perhaps then, the real question is, what is humanities in architecture today? Does it
have latent implications? Or are architects no longer necessary in this world of civil
engineers and builders?