|
Loading... The Essential Engineer: Why Science Alone Will Not Solve Our Global…by Henry Petroski
None. while science and technology have both been the causes of advances in civilization Petroski feels that the engineers have often been treated as second-rate to the scientists; we need engineers to make science usable; science is about knowing, engineering about doing  lindap69 | Apr 5, 2013 |  "Science is about knowing, engineering is about doing." The author works, in this book, to explain the difference. Important issues are discussed in this book. Henry Petroski asks how decisions affecting our lives, lifestyles and world are made. How do we gather information, how is the data collected, and then who fixes the problems that have been identified. I am happy I stumbled upon this book. Think about all the big technical and political problems that face us in the 2010s and begin to think about how we deal with these problems. There are sensible ways to approach technical problems. It does not mean the technical problems can all be fixed or that the right decisions will always be made. But, we do know how to approach technical problems, if we think about it and use the lessons of human life in the last few centuries. I enjoyed chapter 11, where the author talks about C. P. Snow's lecture "The Two Cultures." This conceptualization of the difference between those who know something about the hard sciences versus those who know about humanities and literature is still relevant today. Although it probably could be updated and modified, we certainly see differences in groups of people who believe in hard sciences and other groups of people. The author and Snow correctly, I believe, point out the similarity in approach that links those separated by this divide and point to possible ways to bridge the gap. Petroski lists the 14 challenges defined by the National Academy of Engineering. This list addresses some of the big problems we as a civilization should be seeking answers to, and include: restore and improve urban infrastructure, reverse-engineer the brain, and prevent nuclear terror. The book concludes in chapter 14, titled "Prizing Engineering." This concluding chapter argues for encouragement of young upcoming and existing engineers. Also the author ends with the obvious, but vitally important conclusion, that the biggest problem for humanity is not the need to improve science and engineering, but the need to improve how humans understand and use technology and each other. (  ) superant | Jul 11, 2011 | no reviews | add a review
Amazon.com Amazon.com Review (ISBN 0307272451, Hardcover)Amazon Exclusive: Henry Petroski on Science, Engineering, and Culture Science is by its very nature global. In fact, it is galactic, even universal. This is because science deals with universal laws, like the law of gravity. No matter where on earth I jump, gravity will pull me down according to the single law of universal gravitation. And no matter where an apple falls, it falls toward the ground. We believe that it has always been so, regardless of culture. But this is not to say that practicing science is independent of culture. It is proper to speak of American science, as distinct from, say, Japanese science. Indeed, at least one Japanese scientist has taken note of the fact that his culture has yielded a paucity of Nobel laureates. This has been attributed to the deference that the Japanese culture expects of the young toward the elderly. Prize-winning scientific breakthroughs often depend on rebellion against the prevailing paradigm, not deference to it. At the same time, the Japanese excel in technological endeavors. Their automobiles and consumer electronics are admired and bought around the world. The disciplined Japanese culture is well suited to the mass manufacturing of excellently engineered and highly reliable products. Those products that are exported fit nicely into the target culture; those that are for home consumption are distinctly Japanese. So there appears to be a significant difference between science and engineering and how they relate to culture. A commonly cited difference between the two endeavors is that science seeks to understand what is, whereas engineering seeks to create what never was. It is wrong to describe engineering as mere applied science. There is some extra-scientific component to engineering, something often referred to as the creative or artistic component. The engineer designing a bridge does not deduce its form from scientific laws and mathematical equations. Rather, like a poem or a painting, the bridge is formed first in the engineer’s mind’s eye. It is only then that the hypothesized structure can be given a scientific or mathematical litmus test. In engineering, analysis follows synthesis--not the other way around. It is essential that the similarities and differences between science and engineering be kept in mind when identifying and attacking global problems. Scientists and engineers come from different technical cultures as surely as Americans and Japanese do from different social ones. --Henry Petroski (Photo © Catherine Petroski) (retrieved from Amazon Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:35:24 -0500) No library descriptions found. |
 Google Books — Loading...RatingAverage: (3.4)
Is this you?Become a LibraryThing Author. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wikipedia in English (1)
1