de Sola Morales’ argument for aesthetics as a peripheral, referential system within the contemporary society is appropriate in its recognition of the paradigm. de Sola Morales considers this “a privileged position within the system of references and values of contemporary culture.” While he portrays post modern art and artifacts in such a light, saying”the present day artistic universe is perceived from experiences that are produced at discrete points, diverse, heterogeneous, to the highest degree,” the architecture of the post modernists, for example Rossi and Meier, is considered “nothing more than pure historicism.” Here, and in his criticism of Frampton’s Critical Regionalism, de Sola Morales abandons disciplinary structure of systems in architecture for something far more ephemeral. While I understand his reasoning for “weak architecture,” with the inclusion of temporality and tangency in the environment and a focus on the aesthetic, he undermines a critical typology in architecture that has really only come to the forefront of architectural design in the last sixty or seventy year, that of the dense urban condition and site in general. This typology may even be weak in its own definition of the paradigm, but that does not mean it must adhere to de Sola Morales’ requirements, such as always being decorative. Finally, the argument for weak architecture acknowledges and encourages what I believe to be a glaring deficiency. While embracing the temporality, it is decidedly fleeting where architecture is physically permanent. A disconnect here is apparent and incongruous with the end goal of aesthetics.