Date post: | 02-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | antonio-dias-de-figueiredo |
View: | 5,900 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Toward
an
Epistemology of
Engineering
NOVEMBER 10-12, 2008
WORKSHOP ON PHILOSOPHY & ENGINEERING ROYAL 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?
EPISTEMOLOGY
OF ENGINEERING
Answers:
PHILOSOPHY OF
KNOWLEDGE
!"#$%"&'$()*+,("
ENGINEERING
!"-*.$,(*+,("
TOWARD AN EPISTEMOLOGY
OF ENGINEERING
!"#$!%&'(&)(*+(%!$,"-(&(.%""
EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN
Toward
an
Epistemology of
Engineering
NOVEMBER 10-12, 2008
WORKSHOP ON PHILOSOPHY & ENGINEERING ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, LONDON!
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!
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!
[Figueiredo (2002)] "
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, resorting
frequently 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, overcoming
all 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/"
1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!
•!"=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
1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!
[Figueiredo (2002)] "
SOCIAL SCIENCES
& BUSINESS
BASIC SCIENCES
DESIGN PRACTICAL
REALIZATION
1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!
[Figueiredo (2002)] "
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
1. THE FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ENGINEERING!
POSITIVIST
PERSPECTIVE
CONSTRUCTIVIST &
INTERPRETIVIST PERSPECTIVE
CONSTRUCTIVIST & INTERPRETIVIST
PERSPECTIVE
Schön, Mintzberg, Ciborra,
(Crafting & Bricolage)
[Schön (1983), Mintzberg (1987), Ciborra (1998)] "
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!
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)] "
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!
3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !
Modern Movement of Design positivist 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 and
constraints
•! 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)] "
3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !
PROGRESS IN THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CAMP
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)] "
3. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DESIGN !
PROGRESS IN THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CAMP
DESIGN AS PROBLEM SETTING
•! Discovery and negotiation of unstated goals,
implications, and criteria before a problem can
be formulated and, subsequently, solved
•! This vision of design takes a
phenomenological approach that expresses a
constructivist 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)] "
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!
4. THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF ENGINEERING!
Ontological question
What reality can engineering know?
Epistemological question
What is engineering knowledge?
Axiological question
What 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 external
to 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
Engineers construct their knowledge along this whole continuum"
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 by
exploring the causes of the problems
we face
Knowledge is what gets us to an
intended result
scientists, doers! designers!
[Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "
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 no
change 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 results The 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"
[Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "
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 collective
good
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
Engineers construct their knowledge along this whole continuum"
[Figueiredo & Cunha (2006)] "
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!
5. RIGOUR, CREATIVITY & CHANCE IN ENGINEERING!
How can Engineering knowledge preserve rigour in the cases
where it originates from mere gut feelings, takes advantage of
chance information, and seizes upon creative leaps that go against 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].
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!
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). Massachusetts Institute 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.
Toward
an
Epistemology of
Engineering NOVEMBER 10-12, 2008
WORKSHOP ON PHILOSOPHY & ENGINEERING ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, LONDON!
THE END