建築作為一門專業「技術」與建築作為一種專業「營建行為」，在人類的歷史中有不甚相稱的發展歷程。建築是人類與生俱來的生存「技能」。因此在人類文明的發展過程中，建築必須因應實質生活需求而不斷演進。但隨生活需求不斷複雜化，當觸及美學與價值判斷等形上意識的論述時，建築不再只是一種營建行為或建造遮風避雨的棲身之所的技能。弔詭的是，「建築師」的專業身份角色實際上並不是驅動建築進化的主要動力，從整個發展歷程來看反而是相當後設且被動的。
本文以戰後（1945年）臺灣建置建築師制度的歷程作為時間軸線與論述架構討論：政府如何藉由現代化建設落實建築師制度，巧妙迴避「新式」建築與「傳統」營建的文化衝突。引發長期以來大眾對於建築的專業內容始終有眾說紛紜的理解，與政府以公權力規範的專業制度處處顯示出虛無的情況產生。理應經過轉化過程的「新式」建築與「傳統」營建尚未釐清彼此的分野，就在「現代化」的運作下粗糙的成為「取代」。相對於專業制度，本文以戰後建築媒體（主要是紙本）的論述主張作為對照，就可清楚地顯示出，建築人對不斷演變的建築發展，是以後設的姿態追趕，而非以專業的身份驅策，形成媒體論述理想與專業制度現實的落差。
建築師制度、譜系、現代化
Architecture as a professional technique and as a professional construction behavior have quite different development path throughout human history. Construction is an innate survival "technique" of mankind. Thus, as human civilization develops, construction has to evolve according to actual real-life demands. But as real-life demand grows complex and touches the metaphysics of atheistic and value judgement, construction is no longer merely a construction behavior or techniques that provide shelter for mankind. Paradoxically, the professional identity of architects is in fact not the main driving forces behind the evolution of architecture. Seen from the perspective of development, it is rather retrospective and passive.
This article uses the development of Taiwan architects' regulation system after the Second World War as the timeline for discussion on how government, by using modernized construction to implement the architects' regulation system, evaded the clashes between "new" architecture and "traditional" construction culture. This evasion of the clashes have caused the general public's failure to understand the professional content of architecture, and caused the authority's regulation system became meaningless. Before "new" architecture and "traditional" constructions can figure out their boundaries through organic interaction and transformation, traditional construction was substituted under the name of Modernization. In comparison with professional regulation system. This article uses the discourse of media (mainly paper) in the post-World War II era as references to clearly show that, facing the everchanging architecture, architects chase it in a retrospective posture instead of pushing it in a professional way. Thus, creating the gap between media discourse idealism and the reality of professional regulation system.
architects' regulation system, lineage, modernization
