I think children, therefore I am

One of the important achievements following the French Revolution was the emergence of modern architectural education and the rise of formal architectural movements. 
The establishment of the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris in 1807 marked a decisive shift toward the liberalization and institutionalization of architectural knowledge. Architecture was no longer solely a royal or religious duty but became a professional and intellectual discipline.
However, something fundamental was overlooked. It is not enough to change the driver of the bus or its direction; the essential question is: who is the passenger?
For centuries, architects designed cities based on an abstract notion of “society,” which in practice reflected adult needs, desires, and perceptions. Children were largely invisible in architectural thinking, urban planning, and design strategies. None of the major architectural movements since the 19th century has placed children as a central design principle or primary user group.
Even as rational thought reshaped modern knowledge rooted in ideas from thinkers like René Descartes, who famously declared in 1641 “I think, therefore I am” this rationality remained adult-centered. The “thinking subject” in architecture was implicitly an adult.
Today, this raises a critical question: if modern architecture was built on a limited definition of the human subject, should we rethink the foundations of how we design cities?
Perhaps the next shift in architecture is not about new styles or technologies, but about redefining who we design for. Reconsidering children not as secondary users but as fundamental participants may correct a long-standing blind spot in architectural theory and practice.