Form per our fragmented cultures can follow the function of materials proved to work through our fragmented physics and building sciences. We rely highly on statistics in building sciences. In interpreting culture and evolution of culture, we have little to no consensus.
If form follows the function of the users’ eyes, this is being shaped by evolving, generated, and uncovered cultures each day, both per our arts, sciences, and social sciences and our tools, technologically modern and whatever else may go in, on or roughly near our buildings. This is something a user may assume from the perspective of belonging to a collective, perceive collectively and perceive individually. This should be acknowledged in a contemporary roster of design constraints.
An architect’s role is complicated and there are many constraints to push through to finalize a work of art and something a client is pleased with. An engineer’s role is similar in providing technological proofs which do not block the architect’s voice, but may give strength to or be more significant than the architect’s voice per this same roster of constraints.
Again, we need to continue to think about property in terms of completeness of expression. With Falling Water as an example, we can build the perfect building for the perfect locale, building our impoverished neighborhoods more per a unique identity, rather than more like our more luxurious neighborhoods. We can look closer at who has lived where now and over the past thousands of years. Again, each of our buildings, regardless of where placed, should be reflecting in multiple dimensions, having something shared with the corporate center, the national center, the metropolitan center, and the international center, both informing and being informed by these hubs. And once again, we have an ever complex future to look up to as we live and work today.