I would side with Protopiro due to the fact that Didascalo is basically trying to eliminate this idea of where you have the freedom to be able to create or use traditional forms. Didascalo is basically talking mainly on how buildings just need to be simple and not have all these designs on them. For example, when he mentions the fact if the roof is being held up by the wall or the columns and if by wall then what’s the point of having the columns present which just takes away almost everything of the idea of what architecture is. He thinks that having all of these different types of designs are unnecessary and should just get rid of it once and for all. Though Protopiro stands his ground and tells him he is basically going against the best architects there ever was and the idea of architecture in general. For that reason I feel as though Protopiro has a reasonable response and I side with him.