The concept of empathy is therefore central to both an interpretation of 'architecture as identity' and to the newly emergent human science. Though the architect and the scientist may put the concept to a different purpose - the architect empathises with a people and a place in order to give form to that identity, the scientist in order to understand, describe or explain that identity - our understanding of the processes of empathetic reasoning, or 'indwelling' as [Michael] Polanyi calls it, is therefore likely to become of increasing importance both to our conception of the new human science itself, and to our understanding of how it is that people come to 'feel at home' and identify with a place, which may be a single room or a whole region. My own conviction is that the key to the explanation (rather than the simple description [Harold] Proshansky and Norberg-Schulz have settled for) of place identity, lies with something like Polanyi's theory of empathy as a process of tacit knowing. The same also goes for how architects acquire the complex skill of design in the first place. The art of architectural design, I maintain, lies with architects' tacit skills and not, as the advocates of design methods would have us believe, with the availability of complete and explicit knowledge.

From: 'Vico and Herder: The Origins of Methodological Pluralism,' in R. Jacques and J. Powell (eds), Design: Science: Method, Westbury House (1981), pp. 57-58.