During the last fifty years a giant effort by social scientists have been presented in the international meetings by EDRA, IAPS, PAPERS, etc. The main objective of this effort was to build up a dialogue between designers and social scientist devoted to architecture and urban planning practices and theories, and this has been a failure in general terms. Increasing dialogue between ecology, engineering and environmental physical issues, on the one hand, and designers, on the other hand, has produced, in relation to social sciences, much more confrontation that dialogue. The wall that does not exist between designers and engineers is growing between social scientists and architects and urban planners.

Our papers will argue about the origins, and the bases for a change, of this situation bad for everybody, starting with the users. Our hypothesis will include a political explanation, since both, social scientists and architects are confronted on a power game in this matter. However, we think that, a new dialogical social and physical paradigm could help at this point if, and only if, some developmental environmental attitudes able to destroy the wall and to build a cognitive and political bridge, begin to exist.

We will explain which are these cognitive and political new attitudes regarding architecture and urban planners, in order to uncover a common ground for the dialogue between social scientists and designers, in general, and between psychosocial analysis of the environmental social behavior and designers, in particular.

At this point, it is surprising that a dialogical use of the computer spatial analysis can help to the understanding of the key aspects of the problem, since for both, social scientists and designers, the computer demands abstraction, and this can help to a better common ground for discussion.

The paper will end with some ethical considerations, also linked to the dialogical dimensions of architecture and urban planning. The need for a critical thinking is clearly uncovered, because of the very specific qualities of architecture and urban planning, where the aesthetic content is necessarily related to social and personal environmental behavior.

Muntañola, J.; Saura, M.; Méndez, S.; “The Education of the Architect on the XXI Century: Psychosocial New Findings and Environmental Sustainability Challenges.” In the , La Coruña, 2013.

Muntañola, J.; Saura, M. (2011) “Bakhtin, Architectonics and Architecture”. . Bolonia, July 2011.

Muntañola, J. et al. (2012a) “Architecture on the wild” in , num. 24. Barcelona: Iniciativa Digital Politècnica UPC Barcelona, 2012.