PhilSci Archive

Is Engineering Philosophically Weak? A Linguistic and Institutional Analysis

Goldberg, David E. (2009) Is Engineering Philosophically Weak? A Linguistic and Institutional Analysis. [Preprint]

[img]
Preview
PDF
deg-philosophical-weakness-spt2009.pdf

Download (49kB)

Abstract

This paper follows a paper by Mitcham and considers whether engineering is among a group of occupations he calls philosophically weak, in the sense that engineering does not aspire to good-in-themselves ideals as do medicine and law. The paper agrees that engineering is philosophically weak, but in the different sense that engineering is not as reflective upon its nature and place in the world as some other professions. The paper recovers Mitcham's distinction by consider the institutional complexity of a given occupation, suggesting that engineering's practice in the context of complex institutional arrangements precludes the relative ethical simplicity of such occupations as medicine and law.


Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |

Item Type: Preprint
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
Goldberg, David E.
Keywords: philosophically weak, ethically simple, ideals, institutionally complex, profession, occupation
Subjects: General Issues > Ethical Issues
Depositing User: David E. Goldberg
Date Deposited: 24 Mar 2009
Last Modified: 07 Oct 2010 15:17
Item ID: 4532
URI: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/4532

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item