Why or How, What do I prioritize now?

In the reading by Giancarlo, he talks about the CIAM and its attempt to solve the housing crisis after the First World War. The proposals that this resulted in led to a ripple effect and its effects are seen even today. He interestingly notes that while they were right to take the problem, they were in fact wrong in thinking they had invented it. He then goes on to detail the situation to be directed by two clear trains of thought - the “how” and the “why”. The CIAM architects focused only on the “how” - in this case just arbitrarily trying to reduce living spaces to “existential” i.e. the bare minimum. These “solutions” ended up becoming a disaster and didn’t really solve anything. So what went wrong? This incident, like many others, has shown us how architecture and architects themselves are powerful tools, and if in the wrong hands, can be reduced to nothing but political propaganda. How can we stay relevant and avoid this from happening? As stated in the text, “Working on the “how” without vigorous control of the “why” excludes reality from the process. Proposals for a solution stand in between the definition of goals and the evaluation of its effects.” So for a well rounded, tailored solution, a clear question must be defined. I think that many times as architects we get so caught up in our egos and God complexes that we automatically assume we know the question (the problems being faced) and immediately start trying to work out a solution. So to define the actual question, like the author suggests, it is more sensible to consider the “why’s” and the “why nots” and let that influence the “how”.