I find it interesting that issues that are subjective—let's be honest, while we can say we think we know what good design is, we don't really know if it's good for its clients or users without experiencing it or for that matter asking them—still, some persist in passing judgments on their fellow practitioners in terms of what constitutes 'good design.'

Today we live in a world where it's far too easy to cast negativity about in just about every arena out there, from politics and religion to intellectual pursuits and the definition of what has value and what doesn't have value. The tendency to be judgmental has always always bothered me. Perhaps one could even say that I am judgmental about those who judge. Still, it seems we are trapped in a society, and for architects in a profession, that is closing in on itself, narrowing its boundaries and hyper-defining its limits. It's far easier to be negative than not to, to say what is wrong than to discover what is right, to criticize than to remedy.

What would be the consequences if, instead of letting loose with 'I object to' or 'I dislike,' we asked, 'what does this mean to its users?' or 'what about this works?' What would happen if we challenged ourselves to be more open and more interested in perspectives, work or whatever that is different from our own? I think we'd learn. In fact, I know it. And I can guarantee that this inquiry would not lower our standards of what constitutes good design, but actually would elevate it.