site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1119 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for April 25, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The book is intended to convey the architectural fundamentals that make good buildings.

No it doesn't. It has rules that will help you build a neoclassical house instead of a pastiche called McMansion, but that's the limits of its scope. What it lacks is exactly the architectural fundamentals that make good buildings in any style. Or in no specific style at all.

It has rules that will help you build a neoclassical house instead of a pastiche called McMansion, but that's the limits of its scope.

Hardly. The proportional system it describes stems from the classical system, but it talks about plenty of ways to alter the style of the house, from choice of materials to shapes and forms (or indeed absence) of decorative elements. To the extent that it describes the proportions of the classical system, it does this because western architecture is generally founded on those proportions far beyond mere neoclassicism.

What it lacks is exactly the architectural fundamentals that make good buildings in any style.

This is indeed outside the scope of the book. This is in the scope of an architectural degree program.

The book is not for experts or for those wishing to become experts, the book is for those wishing to avoid easily avoidable mistakes at the expense of not pushing the envelope.

Or in no specific style at all.

We can see the effects of building in no specific style at all throughout the country.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats