The Devil is in the Details: Why Engineering is an Inexact Science

One of the main reasons cited for the choice of an engineering career is the desire to employ an exact science.Most students of engineering distinguish themselves from the practitioners of "soft" sciences, such as psychology, marketing, sociology or philosophy.After all, the so-called soft sciences have no findings which are certain, but rather competing sets of assertions that arise from one or another set of values.This paper argues that engineering in general is not entitled to the degree of certainty typically associated with it.This point is illustrated by analyzing eight topical areas of engineering design, showing the limits of certainty in each case.Further, a case is made that the recognition of this inherent uncertainty should be acknowledged and taught in engineering ethics classes.In the first instance, understanding the limits of knowledge in engineering is a useful antidote to a riskier approach which might tend to ignore unknowns.Secondly, it would seem that an objective assessment of what an engineer is entitled to claim to be certain, and what is regarded as uncertain should precede any attempt to evaluate the ethical implications of the technology under consideration.I.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2-1153-51701
Primary Topic
Cognitive Science and Education Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Devil is in the Details: Why Engineering is an Inexact Science

Day W. Radebaugh
Cognitive Science and Education Research
article

The Devil is in the Details: Why Engineering is an Inexact Science

Day W. Radebaugh
article en

Abstract

One of the main reasons cited for the choice of an engineering career is the desire to employ an exact science.Most students of engineering distinguish themselves from the practitioners of "soft" sciences, such as psychology, marketing, sociology or philosophy.After all, the so-called soft sciences have no findings which are certain, but rather competing sets of assertions that arise from one or another set of values.This paper argues that engineering in general is not entitled to the degree of certainty typically associated with it.This point is illustrated by analyzing eight topical areas of engineering design, showing the limits of certainty in each case.Further, a case is made that the recognition of this inherent uncertainty should be acknowledged and taught in engineering ethics classes.In the first instance, understanding the limits of knowledge in engineering is a useful antidote to a riskier approach which might tend to ignore unknowns.Secondly, it would seem that an objective assessment of what an engineer is entitled to claim to be certain, and what is regarded as uncertain should precede any attempt to evaluate the ethical implications of the technology under consideration.I.

Wichita State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Cognitive Science and Education Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Devil is in the Details: Why Engineering is an Inexact Science — Day W. Radebaugh · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS