I find most home inspectors fall into one of two camps:

1. You treat the house as a means to an end to make a living space for a person.

2. You treat the building construction itself as your craft, with the house being a vector for your craft.

The people who typically have the most negative things to say about buildings fall into camp #2 where cheap unskilled labor is streamlining a large part of what they considered their art while enabling people in group #1 to iterate on their developments faster.

Personally, I fall into the first camp.

No one has ever made a purchasing decision based on how good the pipes inside the walls are.

The general public does not care about anything other than the square footage and color of your house. Sure, if you mess up and one of the houses collapses then that'll manifest as an outcome that impacts the home owner negatively.

With that said, I do have respect for people in the latter camp. But they're generally best fit for homes where that level of craftsmanship is actually useful (think: mansions, bridges, roads, things I use, etc).

I just feel like it's hard to talk about this stuff if we're not clear on which types of construction we're talking about.

The general public does not know how to identify or care about the pipes in the walls. They do care when they bust and cause tens of thousands of dollars of damage. Thats why they hire someone with a keen eye to it to act on their behalf.

Brilliant

>Sure, if you mess up and one of the houses collapses then that'll manifest as an outcome that impacts the home owner negatively.

lol