Clark, List: Not at all, and I agree with you about the distinction between pre-modern trades and modern engineering. I think that the fairly ubiquitous use of *mathematical *models (i.e., diagrams) to *analyze *artifacts in advance of actually making or building them is what mainly distinguishes the latter.
Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:50 PM, CLARK GOBLE <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 8:23 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Your points are well-taken. As I observed at the end of the article, > modern engineering reasoning relies largely on the relatively stable habits > of matter, whereas ethical deliberation involves the much more malleable > habits of mind that manifest in human behavior. We can model the former > quite successfully with mathematics, but the latter are typically amenable > only to less reliably predictive approaches, such as narrative. > > > Oh fully agree and I hope you didn’t take me as dismissive. I rather liked > it. I just think that pre-modern vs. modern where science and engineering > become intertwined is very different even though both depend upon > stabilities in matter. >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
