in understanding the wider context of influencing environments in terms of architecture, both natural, man-made or shaped and described as person observable in preference to pertaining form and properties will give useful conceptualisation towards causations of violence beyond the individual. in its own right the environment as architecture can both be a positive, negative and seemingly indifferent influence on how human violence might play out. arguably how the individual can also choose to exist in their surroundings or with existing architecture will inherently shape how persons interact with each other.

however existing long enough within the wrong environment(s) will likely negatively effect how individuals interact with each other and so where able to yet not to significantly improve the surrounding architecture would become baffling. through this understanding the importance of the individual becomes essentially associated with the equal importance of being peacefully harmonious with environments defined as beneficial. relevantly Items of architecture (pertaining form and property) might by incident have prescribed manmade workloads/demands and use, which is either positive, negative, distractive or indifferent to the person involved with them..

a workload/demand is simply one example of an items property, which can by its task frustrate or alleviate and even weaponise (by its form) an action considered to prevent, minimise or promote violence. an example of an item’s workload (or task associated with use) are extensive written commands typed on sizable documents – arguably the priority associated with the words may distract, tire and frustrate. in some sense a relevant factor contributing towards violence could also in part be a byproduct of an item of architecture or the environment as architecture.