Q & A

Q: I just read your interesting Call for papers (http://ispaconference.wordpress.com/) and have a question. Being both a philosopher and partner at an office for architecture I was wondering if you would also welcome presentations from the point of view of architectural practices. (To put my  question as a worry, one could think that the fact that you ask for submission of “full papers” suggests that you want to “squeeze” them into the philosophers’ way of presenting rather than having them explain in their own visual way the philosophical roots, background or stance taken in their projects/architectural interventions. You might attract more architects if you don’t request the submission of full papers. )

A: The idea behind asking for full papers is to publish them in the conference proceedings, and also to ensure that presenters have spent an appropriate amount of time thinking about what they are going to say. Some, for instance, are known to write their presentations on the train on their way to the conference. Whilst this is not necessarily a recipe for disaster, it usually treads dangerously close to the boundary.
 
I take your point that architects may feel ‘squeezed’ to write an entire essay revolving around a philosophical position, but a descriptive essay of work is completely and totally acceptable as long as it deals with philosophical issues at some point and at a good level. The intention is more to show that the architect knows the buildings they are going to talk about and to push them to attempt to verbalise their thoughts and position before formally presenting it. …It should be noted though, that we would not expect you to present exactly what you initially write. Your thoughts might change and that’s more than OK. If not, that is also OK. …Although people will be most likely be attending the presentation with a set of specific expectations according to the paper published in the conference proceedings.