Abstract

This paper argues against the second course of title change for interior design (from ‘interior design’ to ‘interior architecture’). Heuristic reasoning based on design theory argues that interior design is an architectural discipline. Interior design experiences professional embarrassment (based on its marginalisation within the architectural profession) over the decorative aspects of its ontology, resulting in a situation where the discipline attempts title change to differentiate itself from a ‘less professional’ occupation (i.e. interior decoration) to assert its legitimacy. Title change may lead to artificial differentiations between ‘interior design’ and ‘interior architecture’ which will eliminate decoration from the discipline’s repertoire, leaving it impoverished. If interior design is defined broadly, differentiation between interior design and interior architecture will be redundant.