Is engineering philosophically weak? A linguistic an institutional analysis

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.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-03-25

Downloads
23 (#641,102)

6 months
1 (#1,444,594)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Changing the Paradigm for Engineering Ethics.Jon Alan Schmidt - 2014 - Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (4):985-1010.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references