Morphology happens over time. It's not necessarily a bad thing.

The idea of morphology of languages is something that I'm really interested in.

I think architecture could be understood as the construction of realities, or the construction of worlds.

One of the reasons why architects are often attracted to philosophers, partially, has to do with making sense of the world around us as well as the making of worlds.

In order for architecture to experience its ongoing evolution as a language, there has to be a lot of adjusted copies between how architects draw, think, engage bylaws and constraints.

I think of architecture as language, and I look within the intra-communication between architects.

As a visual discourse, architecture requires trained individuals to work on the refined philosophical debates. School gave me the necessary training, and I've built on this based on my own aesthetics, as most do.