Gary F., List: Science as a discipline of engineering? That’s too much of a stretch for me > ... It would be like claiming that mathematics is a discipline of > physics. Only more so. J >
Well, I acknowledged that it is a provocative notion. The point is that science is pursued with the same basic motivation--transforming dissatisfaction into satisfaction--as engineering and any other human endeavor. > Engineering, as I understand it, always involves some technology, some > manipulation of the physical world for some conscious purpose other than > discovery of its nature. > Why should discovering the nature of the physical world be privileged over all other conscious purposes? > The conception or selection of that purpose, of the end to which the > engineering project is the means, is the job of the normative sciences, > which are themselves only part of science in the Peircean sense. > This reflects the status of engineering as almost purely instrumental--clients and managers dictate what engineers do, rather than engineers themselves. My writings on engineering ethics attempt to explore whether and how engineers might someday escape this "social captivity," as Steven L. Goldman has called it. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
