Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Toward a Practical Philosophy of Engineering: Dealing with Complex Problems from the Sustainability Discourse

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Philosophy of Engineering, East and West

Part of the book series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science ((BSPS,volume 330))

  • 616 Accesses

Abstract

This article characterizes the current philosophical approach to engineering and professional limitations in coming to terms with highly complex, socio-economic-technological problems, such as those that emerge from the sustainability discourse. It compares the philosophy of science which has for more than 70 years been vigorously involved with science. The result proposes a set of philosophical principles to enable the engineering profession to engage with the sustainability discourse. While some see engineering as an essentially values-free discipline, whereby science is harnessed for the common good, this paradigm has become outdated and engineers need to come to terms with the belief, values, and moral standing that characterize many of the problems facing twenty-first-century society. We need a “Copernican revolution” in engineering practice. In order to engage adequately with highly complex problems, engineers must see themselves as a part of the problem and the environment in which the problem exists, not as separate from it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Austin, John L. (1950). “Truth,” Supplement to the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 24: 111-128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, Roy. (1998). “Philosophy and Scientific Realism.” In Margaret Archer, Roy Bhaskar, eds., Critical Realism: Essential Readings (London: Routledge), 16-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, David. (1973). “Wittgenstein and Mannheim on the Sociology of Mathematics,” Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 4(2): 173-191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, David. (1996). “Idealism and the Sociology of Knowledge,” Social Studies of Science, 26(4): 839-856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, Francis H. (1909a). “On Truth and Coherence.” Mind, New Series, 18(71): 329-342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, Francis H. (1909b). “Coherence and Contradiction,” Mind, New Series, 18(72): 489-508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brocklesby, John and Stephen Cummings. (1996). “Foucault Plays Habermas: An Alternative Philosophical Underpinning for Critical Systems Thinking,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(6): 741-754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, Alan. (1988). “Is Bhaskar’s Realism Realistic?” Radical Philosophy, 49: 18-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Winston S. (1944). My Early Life: A Roving Commission. London: The Reprint Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, Donald. (1990). “The Structure and Content of Truth,” Journal of Philosophy, 87(6): 279-328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, D., Santayana, G., Sellars, R.W. et al. ed. (1921). Essays in critical realism: A co-operative study of the problem of knowledge. London, UK: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, Paul. (1975). Against Method. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, Daniel B. (1995). “Postmodernism Comes to Program Evaluation II: A Review of Denzin and Lincoln’s Handbook of Qualitative Research,” Evaluation and Program Planning, 18(3): 301-310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flood, Robert L. and Norma R. Romm. (1996). “Diversity Management: Theory in Action.” In Robert L. Flood and Norma R. Romm, eds., Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice (New York: Plenum Press), 81-92.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Michael. (1998). “On the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge and Its Philosophical Agenda,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 29(2): 239- 271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, Wendy. (1996.) “Dealing with Diversity.” In Robert L. Flood and Norma R. Romm, eds., Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice (New York: Plenum Press), 37-61.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haack, Susan. (1987). “Realism,” Synthese, 73: 275-299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, Ian. (1981a). “Introduction – Scientific Revolutions.” In Ian Hacking, ed., Scientific Revolutions (New York: Oxford University Press), 1-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, Ian. (1981b). “Lakatos’s Philosophy of Science.” In Ian Hacking, ed., Scientific Revolutions (New York: Oxford University Press), 128-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlyn, David W. (1962). “The Correspondence Theory of Truth,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 12(48): 193-205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hector, Donald C., Carlton B. Christensen, and Jim Petrie. (2009). A Problem-structuring Method for Complex Societal Decisions: Its Philosophical and Psychological Dimensions European Journal of Operational Research, 193(3): 693-708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, Michael C. (1985). “Social Systems Theory and Practice: The Need for a Critical Approach,” International Journal of General Systems, 10: 135-151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, Norman and Pippa Carter. (1991). “In Defence of Paradigm Incommensurability,” Organization Studies, 12: 109-127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kincheloe, Joe L. and Peter L. McLaren. (1994). “Rethinking Critical Theory and Qualitative Research.” In Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications), 138-141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). “Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?” In Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, vol. 4 (London: Cambridge University Press), 1-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, Imre. (1974). “Science and Pseudoscience,” Conceptus, 5-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, Imre. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamprecht, Sterling P. (1922). “Critical Realism and the External World,” The Journal of Philosophy, 19(24): 651-661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, Larry. (1981). “The Pseudo-science of Science?” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11: 173-198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, Larry. (1982). “More on Bloor,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 12: 71- 74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, Gerald. (1996). “The Ideal of Unity and the Practice of Pluralism in Systems Science.” In Robert L. Flood and Norma R. Romm, eds., Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice (New York: Plenum Press), 25-36.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, John. (1980). “Towards an Appropriate Social Theory for Applied Systems Thinking: Critical Theory and Soft Systems Methodology,” Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 7: 41-49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, John. (2000). “The Contribution of Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy for OR/MS and Systems,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51: 1256-1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, John. (2001). “Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology,” Information Systems Research, 12(3): 240–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, John and John Brocklesby. (1997). “Multimethodology: Towards a Framework for Mixing Methodologies,” IOmega, nternational Journal of Management Science, 25(5): 489-509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Cynthia. (2004). The Role of the Professional Engineers and Scientists in Sustainable Development. In Adisa Azapagic, Slobodan Perdan, and Roland Clift, eds., Sustainable Development in Practice: Case Studies for Engineers and Scientists (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley), 29-55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newberry, Byron. (2007). “Are Engineers Instrumentalists?” Technology in Society, 29(1): 107-119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, Ilkka. (1999). Critical Scientific Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponterotto, Joseph G. (2005). “Qualitative Research in Counseling Psychology: A Primer on Research Paradigms and Philosophy of Science,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2):126–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl R. (1940). “What is Dialectic?” Mind, New Series, 49(196): 403-426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl R. (1972). Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Hilary. (1977). “Realism and Reason,” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 50(6): 483-498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Hilary. (1981). “The Corroboration of Theories.” In Ian Hacking, ed., Scientific Revolutions (New York: Oxford University Press), 61-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, Nicholas. (1974). “Foundationalism, Coherentism, and the Idea of Cognitive Systematization,” Seventy-First Annual Meeting of the American Philosophical Association Eastern Division.,The Journal of Philosophy, 71(19): 695- 708

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Bertrand. (1946). History of Western Philosophy: and its Connection with Political and Social Circumstances from the Earliest Times the Present-day. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sainsbury, Mark. (1998). “Philosophical Logic: Truth.” In Anthony C. Grayling, ed., Philosophy 1: A Guide Through the Subject (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 105-114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Frederick F. (2004). “Truth: An Introduction.” In Frederick F. Schmitt, ed., Theories of Truth (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd), 1-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt, Thomas A. (1994). “Constructivist and Interpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry.” In Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications), 118-137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, John R. (1995). The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellars, Roy Wood. (1924). “Critical Realism and Its Critics,” The Philosophical Review, 33(4): 379-397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, Peter F. (1950). “Truth,” Supplement to the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 24: 129-156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Werner. (1983). Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Werner. (2003). “Beyond Methodology Choice: Critical Systems Thinking As Critically Systemic Discourse,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54(3): 325-342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valero-Silva, Nestor. (1996). “A Foucauldian Reflection on Critical Systems Thinking.” In Robert L. Flood and Norma R. Romm, eds., Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice (New York: Plenum Press), 63-79.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • White, Leroy and Ann Taket. (1994). “The Death of the Expert,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45(7): 733-748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Leroy and Ann Taket. (1996). “The End of Theory?” Omega, International Journal of Management Science, 24(1): 47-56.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Grassick SSG Pty Ltd, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Donald HECTOR

  2. College of Arts and Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Carleton CHRISTENSEN

  3. University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Jim PETRIE

Authors
  1. Donald HECTOR
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carleton CHRISTENSEN
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jim PETRIE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald HECTOR .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Philosophy, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China

    Carl Mitcham

  2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Bocong LI

  3. Engineering & Computer Science, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA

    Byron Newberry

  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute for the History of Natural Sciences, Beijing, China

    Baichun ZHANG

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

HECTOR, D., CHRISTENSEN, C., PETRIE, J. (2018). Toward a Practical Philosophy of Engineering: Dealing with Complex Problems from the Sustainability Discourse. In: Mitcham, C., LI, B., Newberry, B., ZHANG, B. (eds) Philosophy of Engineering, East and West. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 330. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62450-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation