Down the zigzag path to progress

I think there is an important lesson in the reading from Seely. The way engineering education developed, after the 50's, toward ever hypothetical mathematics that had less bearing on physical realities represents a departure from common conceptions of science and engineering developmental pathways. The Enlightenment, which is large part is the birthplace of modern science, carried many themes such as progress, the power of reason, and evolution of society. During this time societies began to shift from feudal and agrarian modes of operation toward industrial modes (in the west anyways), and writers at that time and following periods emphasized the power of reason to understand and shape increasingly complex societies. Progress and sometimes evolution of society were consistent themes in addition to reason in the Enlightenment; although the Enlightenment contains a very broad array of thinkers who sometimes hold contradictory beliefs. Science is commonly seen as an empirical mode of inquiry and discovery that builds upon itself and progresses over time toward better understanding. Not surprisingly, modern science, which developed during the Enlightenment, contains many of the same themes as the Enlightenment. From this vantage point, progress is often seen as inevitable; as we discover more we understand our world and the human condition better, and can use that knowledge to shape our ways of living.

Some thinkers, including Michel Foucault, through his work have questioned how inevitable or natural progress is, both in society and in science itself. By analyzing changes in discourse and practices over time, Foucault reveals ways in which what seems to be progressive, reasoned growth or development is sometimes not as well reasoned as we thought. Ultimately, although this is not something Foucault discusses directly, its a warning that progress is not always inevitable, even with fields like science.

Bringing this back to Seely, the divergence in engineering toward more esoteric math seems to represent a departure from a progressive development of science, in this case dealing with engineering applications of science. This is particularly important for engineering education students-to-be-researchers, and should remind us to be wary and skeptical about the way a field develops. Although science and engineering certainly grow, their growth and progression is not inevitable. Sometimes these fields take bizarre twists, and as students-to-be-researchers, we cannot be complacent and assume that things will develop properly without redirect. Of course, some level of peculiar development is probably inevitable, but as members of an emergent field who deal directly with how engineering is taught, I think we should also be the vanguard who tries to steer engineering toward the preferable--but not inevitable--path of progress.

--Corey