I agree with this quote, that the building can change the human. The changes that I want to emphasize here are not the visual material change itself but rather a change in human behavior. A person who lives in a closed and dilapidated building with a person living in building has health conditions. We can be sure that people living in the first building will be less energetic and depressed than people who lived in the second building
I saw this question earlier, and I didn't answer at first, because I wanted to think about it some more. Is it true? It can be. If we build an apartment building, and include a large area where people can come together and hang out, that's going to influence our activity. But whether we choose to have a common area or not is going to depend on how much importance we assign to such a thing.
I also do agree with Ihsan Jasim's comments, but I also think it's a slightly different issue, as dilapidation isn't a design consideration, but a quality or economic issue, and so I think it deserves its own question: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_does_the_relative_quality_of_our_living_conditions_impact_our_lives
Yes, I think that there is much truth in such statement. Look at the concrete apartment blocs that were build in the 1960s / 1970s / 198os in many countries, which favored anonymous life like in a sardine can.
As a transportation engineer, i think the building, together with the environment can shape the way people live. If there are nice buildings which make places liveable, many people will want to be there. This shapes people by increasing their walkability and reduces their dependence on automobiles.However if building and streets are designed to favor the automobile, people will be forced to use them.