Figueiredo (2008) Epistemology Engineering

8/7/2019 Figueiredo (2008) Epistemology Engineering

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/figueiredo-2008-epistemology-engineering 1/40

Toward

anEpistemology of

Engineering

NOVEMBER 10-12, 2008

WORKSHOP ON PHILOSOPHY & ENGINEERINGROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, LONDON!



What’s Engineering Knowledge?

How different is it from traditional

Scientific Knowledge?

How can we obtain reliable

Engineering Knowledge?

How can we assess the value of

Engineering Knowledge?





PHILOSOPHY OF

KNOWLEDGE

!"#$%"&'$()*+,("

ENGINEERING

!"-*.$,(*+,("

TOWARD AN EPISTEMOLOGY

OF ENGINEERING

!"#$!%&'(&)(*+(%!$,"-(&(.%""

EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN



Toward

anEpistemology of

Engineering

NOVEMBER 10-12, 2008




1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!2. THE FOUR QUESTIONS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE !

3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN!4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!

5. RIGOUR, CREATIVITY & CHANCE IN ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE!6. CONCLUSIONS!








1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!

•! Engineering as Basic Science

•! Engineering as Social & Business Activity•! Engineering as Design

•! Engineering as Doing

[Figueiredo (2002)] "



SOCIAL SCIENCES

& BUSINESS

BASIC!SCIENCES

DESIGN

PRACTICAL

REALIZATION

/0120//3"45"

567248"9":;520/55"

/<=/3>"

/0120//3"45"

572/0?5>"

/0120//3"45"

@/5210/3""9"

20>/134>63"

/0120//3"45"

@6/3"





1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!ENGINEERING AS BASIC SCIENCE

Engineering as the application of the Basic Sciences.

Practice founded on the values of rigour and logics, devoted

to the acquisition of knowledge by analysis and experimentation.

The discovery of new knowledge and of first principles

is the activity leading to higher intellectual recognition.

Research is the preferred “modus operandi”.

The Engineering Sciences (Thermodynamics, Fluid Dynamics,

Theory of Categories, …) as key representatives of this perspective.

Engineers as thinkers



1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL AND BUSINESS ACTIVITY

Engineers as social and business experts

Engineering as an integrating part of socio-economic reality.

The creation of social and economic value and the belief in the

satisfaction of end users emerge as central values

Engineers not just as technologists, but also as social experts,

in their ability to recognise the eminently social and economic

nature of the world they act upon and the

social complexity of the teams they belong to.



1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!ENGINEERING AS DESIGN

Engineers as designers and integrators

Systems thinking instead of analytical thinking.

Practice founded on holistic, contextual, and integrated

representations of the world, rather than on partial visions.

Respect for the principles of compromise, alternative,

economic and social relevance, material feasibility.

Decision often based on incomplete knowledge, intuition,

and personal and collective experience, resortingfrequently to non-scientific modes of thinking.



1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!ENGINEERING AS PRACTICAL REALIZATION

Engineers as doers (or makers)

Engineering as the art of getting things done.

Founded on the ability to change the world, overcomingall sorts of barriers with flexibility and perseverance.

The art of the “homo faber”, in its purest expression, the ability

to tuck up one’s sleeves and get down to the nitty-gritty.

The completed job, that stands before the

world, leads to higher recognition



SOCIAL SCIENCES

& BUSINESS

BASIC SCIENCES

DESIGN

PRACTICAL

REALIZATION

•!">A/63B"•!"C6@/8"

•!"C/>A6@"

•!"=;:8274?60"•!"760D/3/07/"

•!"=36@;7>"•!"5/3E27/"

•!"C45>/3=2/7/"


•!"=36F/7>"•!"5B5>/C"

•!"20>/134?60"

•!"0/16?4?60"•!">/4C"

•!"E48;/"•!"7;5>6C/3"•!"C43G/>"

SOME KEY WORDS



SOCIAL SCIENCES

& BUSINESS

BASIC SCIENCES

DESIGN

PRACTICAL

REALIZATION





SOCIAL SCIENCES

& BUSINESS

BASIC SCIENCES

DESIGN

PRACTICAL

REALIZATION





1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING! AGGREGATION OF THE FOUR DIMENSIONS

AS AN EXERCISE IN TRANSDICIPLINARITY

Engineering as the mutual interpenetration of the epistemologies

of the four dimensions in the context of disturbances that

shake up the corresponding systems of knowledge production.

Transdisciplinarity as the continuous linking and re-linking,

in specific clusterings and configurations, of knowledge

that is brought together on a temporary basis in specific

contexts of application, which makes it strongly oriented to,

and driven by, problem-solving [Gibbons et al., 1994]..



SOCIAL SCIENCES

& BUSINESS

BASIC SCIENCES

DESIGN

PRACTICAL

REALIZATION


POSITIVIST

PERSPECTIVE

CONSTRUCTIVIST &

INTERPRETIVISTPERSPECTIVE

CONSTRUCTIVIST &

INTERPRETIVISTPERSPECTIVE

Schön, Mintzberg, Ciborra,

(Crafting & Bricolage)

[Schön (1983), Mintzberg (1987), Ciborra (1998)] "








2. THE FOUR QUESTIONS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWELDGE!Ontological question

What reality can we known?

Epistemological question

What is knowledge? What knowledge can we get?

Axiological question

What is the value of the knowledge we build?

Methodological question

How can we build that knowledge?

[Guba & Lincoln (1994), Lincoln & Guba (2000)] "








3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !

Modern Movement of Designpositivist scientization of design

(1920s)

Designerly Ways of Knowing backlash against scientization

(1970s)

Reverse Influence designerly visions for science

(late 1900s, 2000s)

EVOLUTION OF THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN

[Cross (2001); Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "



3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !SOME DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS

•! Orientation toward the solution, rather than

the problem

•! Permanent generation of intermediary tasks

and redefinition of requirements andconstraints

•! Tolerance of error and chance

PROBLEM FORMULATION

•! Good acceptance of ill-defined problems

•! Preference to gradually formulate problems

as they are solved

•! Reluctance to formulate problems rigorously

until they are solved

•! Attraction for exploratory changes of goals

and constraints

[Cross (2007)] "



3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !SOME DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN

FOCUS ON THE SOLUTION

•! Conjectural approach to the problems as a function

of potential solutions.

•! Simultaneous tackling of problem and

solution

•! Generative, rather than deductive reasoning

EXPLORATORY PROGRESS

•! The sketch as a metaphor to exploratory

progression•! Importance of ambiguity, reinterpretation and

analogy

•! Dialectical progression

•! Dialogue between seeing that and

seeing as

[Cross (2007)] "



3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !PROGRESS IN THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CAMP

•! Design as Functional Analysis

•! Design as Problem Solving

•! Design as Problem Setting

•! Design as Emergent Evolutionary Learning

[Gasson (2004)] "




DESIGN AS FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS

•! Requirements fully available a the outset

•! Designer just needs to analyse the problem and

deductively proceed to the solution

•! Inspired by the positivist perspective of

traditional basic sciences

DESIGN AS PROBLEM-SOLVING

•! Specially for complex, organizational,

problems•! Simplifies problems until a rational solution is

possible (“bounded rationality”)

•! Epistemologically close to some popular

visions of the social sciences

[Gasson (2004)] "




DESIGN AS PROBLEM SETTING

•! Discovery and negotiation of unstated goals,

implications, and criteria before a problem canbe formulated and, subsequently, solved

•! This vision of design takes a

phenomenological approach that expresses aconstructivist epistemology

DESIGN AS EMERGENT LEARNING

•! Convergence of problem and solution

•! Emergent process of learning while planning

short-term partial goals, as the process

progresses

•! Design, emerging in circular references, linking

problem formulation and problem solution,

emphasizes a constructivist vision

[Gasson (2004)] "








4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!

Ontological question

What reality can engineering know?

Epistemological questionWhat is engineering knowledge?

Axiological questionWhat is the value of engineering knowledge?

Methodological question

How can engineering knowledge be built?

THE FOUR QUESTIONS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF ENGINEERING



4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!ONTOLOGICAL QUESTION

What reality can engineering know?

realist principle phenomenological principle

Engineers construct their knowledge along this whole continuum"

As scientists and doers, they value the realist principle, but, as designers

and social experts they are able to reconcile it with the phenomenological principle

We can know the reality that is externalto us, independent from us, and driven

by immutable laws

We know the world by interacting with it in

an emergent process that changes

knowledge as we keep interacting

scientists, doers! designers, social experts!

[Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "



4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!EPISTEMOLOGICAL QUESTION

What is engineering knowledge?

deterministic principle teleological principle


As scientists and doers, they value the deterministic principle, but, as

designers they are able to reconcile it with the teleological principle

Knowledge is what we learn byexploring the causes of the problems

we face

Knowledge is what gets us to an

intended result

scientists, doers! designers!




1. principle of analytical modeling 1. principle of complexity

2. principle of sufficient reason 2. principle of intelligent action

Human reason can react to the dissonances to which it is

confronted by producing “intelligent actions” adapted to

reduce these dissonances

4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!METHODOLOGICAL QUESTION

How can engineering knowledge be built?

We build knowledge by seeing the world as complex and

embodying stability and change, chaos and order, with

the parts interacting in the emergent and largely

unpredictable construction of reality

There is no effect without a cause and nochange without a reason for change

To explain reality we must divide each difficulty

into as many parts as possible and necessary

to resolve it better

scientists, doers! designers, social experts!

Engineers construct their knowledge

along this whole continuum"[Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "



principle of intrinsic rigour principle of extrinsic relevance

scientists! designers, doers!

4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!AXIOLOGICAL QUESTION

What is the value of engineering knowledge?

The value of knowledge is determined by

its practical resultsThe value of knowledge is determined by its

demonstrated truth, expressed in generalised

principles

Engineers construct their knowledge along this whole continuum"The issues relating to the esthetical dimension have been left out, to simplify"




1. principle of value exclusion 1. principle of value inclusion

2. principle of extrinsic ethics 2. principle of intrinsic ethics

scientists! some designers, some social scientists!

ethical behavior is constructed by each

professional in the search for the collectivegood

4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!AXIOLOGICAL QUESTION

What is the value of engineering knowledge?

values have an essential role to play in

the emergent process of knowledge

construction

ethical behavior is formally policed by

external mechanisms

values have no role

to play in knowledge

construction










5. RIGOUR, CREATIVITY & CHANCE IN ENGINEERING!How can Engineering knowledge preserve rigour in the caseswhere it originates from mere gut feelings, takes advantage of

chance information, and seizes upon creative leaps that goagainst traditional scientific rigour?

By systematically following Popper’s concept of critical discussion [Popper, 1994].

It resorts to the rigorous application of critical discussion to

legitimize the emergent steps of its progress and to recover rigour

from the exposures to chance and the abductive leaps and bonds of Engineering [Figueiredo & Cunha, 2007].








6. CONCLUSIONS!

The Epistemology of Engineering results

from the mutual interpenetration of the

epistemologies of the constituent

dimensions of Engineering.

and it keeps changing with the changing

contributions of these changing components:

science, social and business activities,design, and practical realization.



REFERENCES!Ciborra, C. U. (1998). Crisis and foundations: an inquiry into the nature and limits of models and methods in the information systems

discipline. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 7(1), 5-16.

Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues. 17(3). MassachusettsInstitute of Technology.

Cross, N. (2007). Designerly Ways of Knowing , Birkauser, Basel. Figueiredo, A. D. (2002). Accreditation and Quality Assessment in a Changing Profession. Proc. International Conference on

Engineering Education 2007 , ICEE 2002, Manchester. Figueiredo, A. D., and Cunha, P. R. (2006). Action research and design in information systems: two faces of a single coin. In Kock,

N. (ed.) Information Systems Action Research: An Applied View of Emerging Concepts and Methods. Springer. Gasson, S. (2004) Organizational ‘problem-solving’ and theories of social cognition (working paper).

http://www.cis.drexel.edu/faculty/gasson/Research/Problem-Solving.html. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The

Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage Publications. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In K. D. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds.). Handbook

of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.Lincoln, (eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Mintzberg, H. (1987). Crafting strategy. Harvard Business Review . 66-75. Popper, K. (1994). Models, instruments and truth: the status of the rationality principle in the social sciences. In The Myth of the

Framework: In Defense of Science and Rationality . London: Routledge, 154-184. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences. 4, 155-69. Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.



Towardan

Epistemology ofEngineeringNOVEMBER 10-12, 2008


THE END

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	antonio-dias-figueiredo
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Figueiredo (2008) Epistemology Engineering

Documents