Re: HAbitat and Professionalism

> I was just wondering why we do not wish to
> allow for the possibility of a person who is capable of meeting both
> standards (both from the licensing point of view as well as the
professional
> quality point of view).  I do not understand the argument that enforcing a
> separation eliminates vested interests - which would prevail, albeit in
> another form.

a person capable of meeting both standards is quite an exception, so i
didn't bring it up. besides, i am weary of red carpets layed out in
anticipation of geniuses! red carpets are abused by vested interests. i have
to deal with a couple supposed "geniuses" who've blown pigs all their lives,
they talk of f*** and s**** all day and the joint-stock-company called Delhi
Academic Community supports them. in February i asked about some capable
guys who used to teach regularly, and publish, and had recognition in
international circles, and the j-s-c told me "un ko to bhaga diya", they
were chased away so that the supposed geniuses can walk red carpets "yeh bhi
kar sakte hain, aur yeh to hamare hain". i guess i've gotten cynical :-), a
capable profession will recognise capable persons, i guess.

the argument is, institutions must enforse seperations, take punitive steps
against people who violate the norms, and so on -- in other words, exercise
their authority. a separation by itself won't eliminate anything, but an
exercise in seperation will help institutions restore their reputability.
the CoA and IIA should seem to be doing something; and providing frameworks
so that individuals can act and sharpen the issues along disciplinary lines.

a clear seperation between certification courses and degree courses has to
be obtained (i imagine a number of architects getting a second,
ersatz-planning certificate) for self-evident reasons.