The debate arose in India, when Professor Paknikar in a 1959 seminar on architecture practice said: With the increasing influence of science and technology, they (architects) are termed as ‘scientists with a background of art’ rather than ‘artists with a background of science’. This sets off the discourse on the importance of architectural theory and how there is a difference between designing architecture than merely, buildings. The concerns that architecture theory is not the basis in which architecture student thoughts grow from suggests the confusion in recognising architecture, together with the lack of critical thinking amongst architects. Passing of a building cladded in sustainability / green features does not make it architecture, if it is merely dressing and posing as architecture, with little narrative and ticking off boxes for sustainability criteria, for example. This lack of debate and not creating a nurturing ground for debate in Malaysia on architectural theories and philosophies reflect a lot of what architecture schools are not doing in teaching the foundation of the architectural thoughts and theories. Where does the problem lie if we do not care to have this important discourse? Some thoughts are being discussed in the podcast. © 2020 Talk Architecture, Author: Naziaty Mohd YaacobArt work in podcast is by Liew Yee Hua, UM design thesis 2018-19Drawing  © Copyright: Universiti Malaya, Author: Liew Yee Hua