Rethinking Technology and Engineering: Dialogues Across Disciplines and Geographies 3031252322, 9783031252327

Table of contents :
Rethinking Technology and Engineering
Dialogues Across Disciplines and Geographies
Copyright
Contents
Contributors
Biographies
Chapter 1: Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies
1.1 Footnotes to Plato
1.2 Reaching Out and Looking Ahead: Shaping Up the Engineer-Philosopher
1.3 About This Volume
1.3.1 Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values
1.3.2 Reflections on Artifacts
1.3.3 Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics
1.3.4 Engineering Education
1.4 As a Conclusion
References
Part I: Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values
Chapter 2: Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Whose Ethics? Whose Values?
2.3 Emergent Crises
2.4 Disrupting the Silent Status Quo: Attending to Engineering Ethics Pedagogy
2.5 Changing the Engineering Ethics Landscape: Putting Principles into Practice
References
Chapter 3: What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto for Socially Situated Professional Ethics
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Engineering Challenges in the Global South
3.3 Engineering and Society in Latin America: Economic and Political Aspects
3.4 A Human, Social, Ethical and Epistemological Analysis of Engineering
3.5 From Ethics to Epistemology
3.6 Engineering Education
3.7 From the Social to the Human: The Need for a New Civilization Equation
3.8 Conclusion
References
Chapter 4: Freedom and Standards in Engineering
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The Engineering Context
4.3 Freedom, Responsibility, and Risk
4.4 Standards in Engineering
4.5 The Current Situation
4.6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 5: Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Object References in Engineering Design
5.3 Design Margins in Object References
5.4 Object References as Parsimonious Descriptions of Engineering Designs
5.5 Object References and Engineering Knowledge
5.6 Practical Challenges of Handling Object References
5.7 Conclusions
References
Chapter 6: A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design
6.1 Introduction
6.2 General Context
6.3 Individuation as an Alternative Ontological Model
6.4 The Problematic Field in Simondon and Deleuze
6.5 Problematic Field and Ontology of Engineering
6.6 To Engineer
6.7 Conclusions
References
Chapter 7: How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How Philosophy Can Help
7.1 Background to and Aims of the Chapter
7.2 What Is Coaching?
7.2.1 Coaching Defined
7.2.2 A Young and Dynamic Practice
7.2.3 Managing Coaching’s Embarrassment of Riches
7.2.4 Earliest Efforts to Carry Coaching to Engineering Education
7.3 Two Views of Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering
7.3.1 Dave’s Perspective
7.3.1.1 Early Efforts Integrating Philosophy and Coaching for Engineering Practice
7.3.1.2 The 5 Shifts Framework
7.3.1.3 Learning from a Decade of Practice
7.3.2 Nina’s Perspective
7.3.2.1 The Why
7.3.2.2 The How
7.3.2.3 The Imperial College Coaching Programme: A Precursor in the UK
7.4 Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering: Wrap Up & An Invitation
7.4.1 Initial Takeaways
7.4.1.1 Coaching and Engineering
7.4.1.2 Coaching and Philosophy
7.4.2 Coaching: An Invitation to a Humble Humanistic Bridge
References
Part II: Reflections on Artifacts
Chapter 8: What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?
8.1 Introduction
8.2 To See or Not to See, That Is the Question
8.2.1 What Is Understood by “Nature” and “Technology”
8.2.2 “Real” Nature? Or Human-Tailored Nature?
8.2.3 Transformation Belongs to the Landscape
8.2.4 Façades of Sustainability
8.2.5 Perceiving with All Senses
8.3 The Ugliness and Beauty of Landscape and Overhead Lines
8.4 The Energy Transition and the Visibility of the Power Grid
8.4.1 Energy Transition Through Changes in Consumer Behaviour
8.4.2 Energy Transition Through Technological Means
8.5 Conclusion
References
Chapter 9: AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values
9.1 Introduction
9.2 What Is AI and What (If Anything) Is Special About It?
9.3 Unintended Consequences
9.4 Designing AI Systems for Human Values
9.5 Machine Ethics
9.6 Meaningful Human Control: The Need for Meta-Values
9.7 An Experimental Perspective
9.8 Human Indeterminacy
9.9 Conclusions
References
Chapter 10: Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World
10.1 The Moral Machine Experiment
10.2 An Argument for Moral Pluralism
10.3 Apparent Moral Pluralism in the Moral Machine Experiment
10.4 Relevance of Moral Machine Experiment Data
10.5 Potential Methods for Incorporating Moral Pluralism
References
Chapter 11: The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical Reflection and Alternative Imaginaries
11.1 Introduction
11.2 The Contested Smart City
11.3 Understanding Socio-Technical Controversies
11.4 The Threefold Potential
11.4.1 Civic Engagement
11.4.2 Ethical Reflection
11.4.3 Alternative Imaginaries
11.5 Design Approaches to Realize the Potential of Controversies
11.6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 12: The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations
12.1 Introduction
12.2 The Importance of E-Democracy and the Problem of DDD
12.3 The Philosophical Foundations of DDD
12.3.1 Athens and Direct Democracy in the Ekklesia
12.3.2 Rousseau and the General Will
12.4 Conclusion
References
Chapter 13: Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit
13.1 Introduction
13.2 Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering
13.3 Value Sensitive Design (VSD)
13.4 VSD to Design for Equifinality Via Agile
13.5 Implementing VSD in Engineering Teams: An Agile Approach
13.6 Conclusions
References
Chapter 14: Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste
14.1 Introduction
14.2 Influencers: A Contemporary Cultural and Social Phenomenon
14.2.1 The Authenticity Process
14.2.2 Traditional Marketing Practices Versus Influencer Marketing
14.2.3 Legal Issues
14.2.4 How Does Society Value Advertising? Legal Treatment of “Commercial Speech”
14.3 ‘Likes for Likes’: A Philosophical Inquiry
14.3.1 Culture, Class, and Preference
14.3.2 The Economy of Desire
14.3.3 Influencers and the Volatility of Habitus
14.3.4 Selling Relationships
14.4 To Influence and Be Influenced
14.4.1 Influencer Identity
14.4.2 Ethical Considerations for Influencers – Considering the Commodity
14.4.3 Future Implications
References
Part III: Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics
Chapter 15: Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing the Future
15.1 Introduction
15.2 Railways Are Not Bad, nor Good, nor Neutral
15.3 Railways Induce and Require Innovations
15.4 Opening the Black Box
15.5 Learning from History
15.6 Conclusion: The Human Agency in Portuguese Railways
References
Chapter 16: Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile
16.1 Introduction
16.2 Time, Temporality and Solar Engineering
16.3 The Historical Path of Solar Energy in Chile
16.4 Networks of Solar Development in Chile
16.5 The Process of Reconstructing Solar Energy’s History
16.6 Final Remarks. Time and Interdiscipline in Solar Energy
References
Chapter 17: Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias
17.1 Introduction
17.2 Engineering Education Through Sci Fi Lens
17.3 Solarpunk: From Everyday Dystopia to Co-created (e)Utopias
17.4 A Dialogue Between Solarpunk and Afrofuturism as the Decolonization of the Production of Future
17.5 Discussion and Future Agendas
References
Chapter 18: “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World
18.1 Introduction: Selling the Future
18.2 Mr. Carrin’s Predicament
18.3 Averageness
18.4 Consumer Psychology
18.5 Societal Implications
18.6 Who Decides for Us?
18.7 The Imagination of Progress
18.8 Echoes from Popular Culture
18.9 Conclusions
References
Chapter 19: Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality
19.1 Introduction
19.2 Enhancing the Human Being: Old Wine in New Wineskins?
19.3 Unconcealing Contemporary Technology and Practices of Human Enhancement
19.4 Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality
19.5 Conclusion
References
Part IV: Engineering Education
Chapter 20: What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is Defined by Engineering Instructors
20.1 Introduction
20.2 Background
20.2.1 Definitions of Engineering Ethics
20.2.2 Conceptual Models of Engineering Ethics Education
20.3 Methods
20.4 Defining Engineering Ethics
20.4.1 Decision-Making in Complex Situations
20.4.2 Connection to Practice
20.4.3 Social Embeddedness
20.4.4 Character Shaping and Moral Development
20.4.5 Common Sense
20.5 The Scope of Engineering Ethics Education
20.5.1 Macroethical Scope
20.5.1.1 Sustainability
20.5.1.2 Societal Dimension of Engineering
20.5.1.3 Regulation and Legislation
20.5.2 Microethical Scope
20.5.2.1 Professional Codes
20.5.2.2 Health and Safety
20.5.2.3 Ethical Theories
20.5.3 Value Sensitive Design
20.6 Discussion
20.7 Conclusion
References
Chapter 21: ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities
21.1 Introduction
21.2 Formalizing Our Proposal
21.3 Putting Our Proposal into Practice
21.3.1 Students’ Academic Projects
21.4 Conclusions
References
Chapter 22: The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners
22.1 Introduction
22.2 Role Identity and Context Embeddedness Through Existential Philosophy
22.3 Complexity and Interpretation Through History of Technology
22.4 Alternative Viewpoints and Critical Thinking through Technology Ethics
22.5 Discussion
22.6 Conclusions
References
Chapter 23: The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible Engineering Practice and Education
23.1 Introduction
23.2 Engineering and Coloniality
23.3 Buen Vivir
23.4 Engineering and Buen Vivir: Case Studies
23.4.1 The Ingenuity, Science, Technology, and Society Discipline
23.4.2 Community Radio Station
23.5 Decolonial Engineering: Practice and Education
23.6 Closing Remarks
References
Chapter 24: Engineers Should Be Activists
24.1 Introduction
24.2 Philosophy of Activism
24.3 Educational Philosophy
24.4 Engineering Philosophy
24.5 Engineering Activism
24.5.1 History
24.5.2 Student Activism
24.5.3 Engineering Curriculum
24.5.4 Public Versus Private Good
24.6 Discussion and Conclusions
24.7 Summary
References

Citation preview

Philosophy of Engineering and Technology

Albrecht Fritzsche Andrés Santa-María   Editors

Rethinking Technology and Engineering Dialogues Across Disciplines and Geographies

Philosophy of Engineering and Technology Volume 45

Editor-in-Chief Pieter E. Vermaas, Dept of Philosophy, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands Series Editors Darryl Cressman, Dept of Philosophy, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands Neelke Doorn, Dept of Philosophy, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands Edison Renato Silva, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Editorial Board Philip Brey, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands Louis Bucciarelli, School of Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Belmont, MA, USA Michael Davis, Humanities Dept, Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL, USA Andrew Feenberg, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada Luciano Floridi, Dept of Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire Hertfordshire, UK Jun Fudano, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Nonoichi, Japan Sven Ove Hansson, Division of Philosophy, Royal Institute of Technology KTH Stockholm, Stockholms Län, Sweden Craig Hanks, Philosophy Dept, Texas State University, San Marcos, USA Vincent F. Hendricks, Center for Information & Bubble Studies, University of Copenhagen, København, Denmark Don Ihde, Dept of Philosopy, SUNY at Stony brook, Stony Brook, NY, USA Billy Vaughn Koen, Dept of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas Austin, TX, USA Peter Kroes, Dept of Philosophy, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands Sylvain Lavelle, Ctr for Ethics, Tech & Society, ICAM Paris-Senart Engineering School, Lieusaint-Senart, France

Michael Lynch, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA Anthonie W. M. Meijers, Dept of Philosophy and Ethics, Eindhoven Univ of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Duncan Michael, Ove Arup Foundation, London, UK Carl Mitcham, Liberal Arts & International Studie, Colorado School of Mines Golden, CO, USA Byron Newberry, Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA Helen Nissenbaum, New York University, New York, NY, USA Alfred Nordmann, Institut für Philosophie, Technische Universität Darmstadt Darmstadt, Germany Joseph C Pitt, Dept of Philosophy, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA Daniel Sarewitz, Consortium for Sci Policy & Outcome, Arizona State University Washington DC, USA Jon Alan Schmidt, Aviation & Federal Group, Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO, USA Peter Simons, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Jeroen van den Hoven, Dept of Philosophy, Delft University of Technology Delft, The Netherlands Ibo van der Poel, Dept of Philosophy, Delft University of Technology Delft, The Netherlands John Weckert, Centre for Applied Philosophy & Ethics, Charles Sturt University Canberra, ACT, Australia

The Philosophy of Engineering and Technology book series provides the multifaceted and rapidly growing discipline of the philosophy of technology with a central overarching and integrative platform. It publishes on all topics in the philosophy of technology and is open to all research communities across the world. Specifically, it publishes edited volumes and monographs in: • the phenomenology, anthropology and socio-politics of technology and engineering • the emergent fields of the ontology and epistemology of technology and design • engineering ethics and the ethics of specific technologies ranging from nuclear technologies to artificial intelligence • written from philosophical and practitioners’ perspectives and authored by philosophers and practitioners The series also welcomes proposals that bring these fields together or advance philosophy of engineering and technology in other integrative ways. Proposals should include: • • • •

A short synopsis of the work or the introduction chapter The proposed Table of Contents The CV of the lead author(s) or editor(s) If available: one sample chapter

We aim to make a first decision within 1 month of submission. In case of a positive first decision the work will be provisionally contracted; the final decision about publication will depend upon the result of anonymous peer review of the complete manuscript. We aim to have the complete work peer-reviewed within 3 months of submission. The series discourages the submission of manuscripts that contain reprints of previous published material and/or manuscripts that are below 150 pages/75,000 words. For inquiries and submission of proposals authors can contact the editor-in-chief Pieter Vermaas via: [email protected], or contact one of the associate editors.

Albrecht Fritzsche  •  Andrés Santa-María Editors

Rethinking Technology and Engineering Dialogues Across Disciplines and Geographies

Editors Albrecht Fritzsche Rabat Business School Université Internationale de Rabat Rabat, Morocco

Andrés Santa-María Department of Humanistic Studies Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María San Joaquín, Santiago, Chile

ISSN 1879-7202     ISSN 1879-7210 (electronic) Philosophy of Engineering and Technology ISBN 978-3-031-25232-7    ISBN 978-3-031-25233-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Contents

1

Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Andrés Santa-María and Albrecht Fritzsche 1.1 Footnotes to Plato ����������������������������������������������������������������������������    2 1.2 Reaching Out and Looking Ahead: Shaping Up the Engineer-Philosopher������������������������������������������������������������������    3 1.3 About This Volume ��������������������������������������������������������������������������    5 1.3.1 Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values����������������������    6 1.3.2 Reflections on Artifacts��������������������������������������������������������    6 1.3.3 Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics ��������������������������������������������������������    7 1.3.4 Engineering Education����������������������������������������������������������    8 1.4 As a Conclusion��������������������������������������������������������������������������������    9 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    9

Part I Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values 2

Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life����������������������������������������������������������������������������������   13 Donna Riley 2.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   13 2.2 Whose Ethics? Whose Values? ��������������������������������������������������������   14 2.3 Emergent Crises��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   16 2.4 Disrupting the Silent Status Quo: Attending to Engineering Ethics Pedagogy ������������������������������������������������������   17 2.5 Changing the Engineering Ethics Landscape: Putting Principles into Practice��������������������������������������������������������   20 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   21

vii

viii

Contents

3

What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto for Socially Situated Professional Ethics ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������   25 Mauricio Leonardo Aguilar-Molina, Walter Antônio Bazzo, Luciano Andreatta Carvalho da Costa, Humberto Henriques de Arruda, Édison Renato Pereira da Silva, and Andrés Santa-María 3.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   26 3.2 Engineering Challenges in the Global South������������������������������������   28 3.3 Engineering and Society in Latin America: Economic and Political Aspects ������������������������������������������������������������������������   30 3.4 A Human, Social, Ethical and Epistemological Analysis of Engineering����������������������������������������������������������������������������������   33 3.5 From Ethics to Epistemology�����������������������������������������������������������   34 3.6 Engineering Education����������������������������������������������������������������������   35 3.7 From the Social to the Human: The Need for a New Civilization Equation ������������������������������������������������������   37 3.8 Conclusion����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   38 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   40

4

 reedom and Standards in Engineering������������������������������������������������   43 F Erik W. Aslaksen 4.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   43 4.2 The Engineering Context������������������������������������������������������������������   44 4.3 Freedom, Responsibility, and Risk ��������������������������������������������������   47 4.4 Standards in Engineering������������������������������������������������������������������   48 4.5 The Current Situation������������������������������������������������������������������������   50 4.6 Conclusion����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   52 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   52

5

 ast Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge����������������   55 P Mark Addis, Claudia Eckert, and Martin Stacey 5.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   55 5.2 Object References in Engineering Design����������������������������������������   57 5.3 Design Margins in Object References����������������������������������������������   58 5.4 Object References as Parsimonious Descriptions of Engineering Designs��������������������������������������������������������������������   59 5.5 Object References and Engineering Knowledge������������������������������   60 5.6 Practical Challenges of Handling Object References ����������������������   63 5.7 Conclusions��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   64 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   65

6

A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design������������������������������������������������������������������������������   67 José Aravena-Reyes 6.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   68 6.2 General Context��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   69

Contents

ix

6.3 Individuation as an Alternative Ontological Model��������������������������   71 6.4 The Problematic Field in Simondon and Deleuze����������������������������   73 6.5 Problematic Field and Ontology of Engineering������������������������������   75 6.6 To Engineer ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   77 6.7 Conclusions��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   78 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   78 7

How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How Philosophy Can Help����������������������������   81 Nina Jirouskova and David E. Goldberg 7.1 Background to and Aims of the Chapter������������������������������������������   82 7.2 What Is Coaching?����������������������������������������������������������������������������   82 7.2.1 Coaching Defined�����������������������������������������������������������������   83 7.2.2 A Young and Dynamic Practice��������������������������������������������   83 7.2.3 Managing Coaching’s Embarrassment of Riches ����������������   84 7.2.4 Earliest Efforts to Carry Coaching to Engineering Education������������������������������������������������������������������������������   85 7.3 Two Views of Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering������������������������   86 7.3.1 Dave’s Perspective����������������������������������������������������������������   86 7.3.2 Nina’s Perspective����������������������������������������������������������������   90 7.4 Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering: Wrap Up & An Invitation ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   93 7.4.1 Initial Takeaways������������������������������������������������������������������   94 7.4.2 Coaching: An Invitation to a Humble Humanistic Bridge����������������������������������������������������������������   96 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   96

Part II Reflections on Artifacts 8

 hat Do Overhead Lines Reveal? ��������������������������������������������������������  103 W Daiana Martinez Monteleone 8.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  104 8.2 To See or Not to See, That Is the Question ��������������������������������������  105 8.2.1 What Is Understood by “Nature” and “Technology”������������  107 8.2.2 “Real” Nature? Or Human-Tailored Nature?������������������������  108 8.2.3 Transformation Belongs to the Landscape����������������������������  108 8.2.4 Façades of Sustainability������������������������������������������������������  109 8.2.5 Perceiving with All Senses����������������������������������������������������  109 8.3 The Ugliness and Beauty of Landscape and Overhead Lines����������  110 8.4 The Energy Transition and the Visibility of the Power Grid������������  112 8.4.1 Energy Transition Through Changes in Consumer Behaviour������������������������������������������������������������������������������  113 8.4.2 Energy Transition Through Technological Means����������������  113 8.5 Conclusion����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  114 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  115

x

9

Contents

AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values����������������������������������������������������������������������  117 Ibo van de Poel 9.1 Introduction��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  117 9.2 What Is AI and What (If Anything) Is Special About It?������������������  118 9.3 Unintended Consequences����������������������������������������������������������������  120 9.4 Designing AI Systems for Human Values����������������������������������������  121 9.5 Machine Ethics����������������������������������������������������������������������������������  122 9.6 Meaningful Human Control: The Need for Meta-Values ����������������  123 9.7 An Experimental Perspective������������������������������������������������������������  125 9.8 Human Indeterminacy����������������������������������������������������������������������  125 9.9 Conclusions��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  127 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  128

10 C  rowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World ��������������������  131 Paul Firenze 10.1 The Moral Machine Experiment����������������������������������������������������  132 10.2 An Argument for Moral Pluralism��������������������������������������������������  133 10.3 Apparent Moral Pluralism in the Moral Machine Experiment ������  135 10.4 Relevance of Moral Machine Experiment Data������������������������������  136 10.5 Potential Methods for Incorporating Moral Pluralism��������������������  138 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  141 11 T  he Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical Reflection and Alternative Imaginaries��������������������������������������������������������������������  143 Anouk Geenen, Julieta Matos Castaño, and Mascha van der Voort 11.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  143 11.2 The Contested Smart City��������������������������������������������������������������  145 11.3 Understanding Socio-Technical Controversies ������������������������������  146 11.4 The Threefold Potential������������������������������������������������������������������  148 11.4.1 Civic Engagement ��������������������������������������������������������������  148 11.4.2 Ethical Reflection����������������������������������������������������������������  149 11.4.3 Alternative Imaginaries������������������������������������������������������  151 11.5 Design Approaches to Realize the Potential of Controversies��������  152 11.6 Conclusion��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  153 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  154 12 T  he Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations����������������������������������������������������������  157 Matías Quer 12.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  158 12.2 The Importance of E-Democracy and the Problem of DDD����������  158 12.3 The Philosophical Foundations of DDD����������������������������������������  160 12.3.1 Athens and Direct Democracy in the Ekklesia ������������������  160 12.3.2 Rousseau and the General Will ������������������������������������������  162 12.4 Conclusion��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  164 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  166

Contents

xi

13 A  gile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit ����������  169 Steven Umbrello and Olivia Gambelin 13.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  169 13.2 Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering����������������������������������  171 13.3 Value Sensitive Design (VSD)��������������������������������������������������������  172 13.4 VSD to Design for Equifinality Via Agile��������������������������������������  174 13.5 Implementing VSD in Engineering Teams: An Agile Approach ������������������������������������������������������������������������  176 13.6 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  179 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  180 14 W  ho’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste��������������������������  183 Kristen Psaty Watts and Robert Mast 14.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  184 14.2 Influencers: A Contemporary Cultural and Social Phenomenon������������������������������������������������������������������  184 14.2.1 The Authenticity Process����������������������������������������������������  185 14.2.2 Traditional Marketing Practices Versus Influencer Marketing����������������������������������������������������������������������������  186 14.2.3 Legal Issues������������������������������������������������������������������������  187 14.2.4 How Does Society Value Advertising? Legal Treatment of “Commercial Speech” ������������������������  188 14.3 ‘Likes for Likes’: A Philosophical Inquiry ������������������������������������  188 14.3.1 Culture, Class, and Preference��������������������������������������������  189 14.3.2 The Economy of Desire������������������������������������������������������  190 14.3.3 Influencers and the Volatility of Habitus����������������������������  191 14.3.4 Selling Relationships����������������������������������������������������������  192 14.4 To Influence and Be Influenced������������������������������������������������������  194 14.4.1 Influencer Identity��������������������������������������������������������������  194 14.4.2 Ethical Considerations for Influencers – Considering the Commodity ������������������������������������������������������������������  195 14.4.3 Future Implications ������������������������������������������������������������  195 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  196 Part III Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics 15 P  ortuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing the Future��������������������������������������������  201 Hugo Silveira Pereira 15.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  201 15.2 Railways Are Not Bad, nor Good, nor Neutral ������������������������������  203 15.3 Railways Induce and Require Innovations��������������������������������������  204 15.4 Opening the Black Box������������������������������������������������������������������  206 15.5 Learning from History��������������������������������������������������������������������  208 15.6 Conclusion: The Human Agency in Portuguese Railways ������������  210 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  211

xii

Contents

16 I nterdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile��������������������������������������������������������������������������������  213 Barbara Kirsi Silva, Cecilia Ibarra, and Mauricio Osses 16.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  213 16.2 Time, Temporality and Solar Engineering��������������������������������������  214 16.3 The Historical Path of Solar Energy in Chile ��������������������������������  216 16.4 Networks of Solar Development in Chile ��������������������������������������  218 16.5 The Process of Reconstructing Solar Energy’s History������������������  219 16.6 Final Remarks. Time and Interdiscipline in Solar Energy��������������  221 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  222 17 S  cience Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias����������������������������������������������������������������������  225 Juan David Reina-Rozo 17.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  226 17.2 Engineering Education Through Sci Fi Lens����������������������������������  228 17.3 Solarpunk: From Everyday Dystopia to Co-created (e)Utopias ����  229 17.4 A Dialogue Between Solarpunk and Afrofuturism as the Decolonization of the Production of Future������������������������������������  232 17.5 Discussion and Future Agendas������������������������������������������������������  234 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  235 18 “ The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World ����������������������������������  239 Stanley C. Kranc 18.1 Introduction: Selling the Future������������������������������������������������������  239 18.2 Mr. Carrin’s Predicament����������������������������������������������������������������  241 18.3 Averageness������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  243 18.4 Consumer Psychology��������������������������������������������������������������������  244 18.5 Societal Implications����������������������������������������������������������������������  244 18.6 Who Decides for Us?����������������������������������������������������������������������  246 18.7 The Imagination of Progress����������������������������������������������������������  247 18.8 Echoes from Popular Culture����������������������������������������������������������  248 18.9 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  248 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  249 19 U  nconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality��������������������������������������������������  251 Daniel Gihovani Toscano López 19.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  252 19.2 Enhancing the Human Being: Old Wine in New Wineskins?��������  252 19.3 Unconcealing Contemporary Technology and Practices of Human Enhancement������������������������������������������������������������������  255 19.4 Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality������������������������������  257 19.5 Conclusion��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  259 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  259

Contents

xiii

Part IV Engineering Education 20 W  hat Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is Defined by Engineering Instructors����������  263 Diana Adela Martin and Eddie Conlon 20.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  264 20.2 Background ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  264 20.2.1 Definitions of Engineering Ethics��������������������������������������  264 20.2.2 Conceptual Models of Engineering Ethics Education��������  265 20.3 Methods������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  266 20.4 Defining Engineering Ethics ����������������������������������������������������������  267 20.4.1 Decision-Making in Complex Situations����������������������������  268 20.4.2 Connection to Practice��������������������������������������������������������  269 20.4.3 Social Embeddedness���������������������������������������������������������  270 20.4.4 Character Shaping and Moral Development����������������������  270 20.4.5 Common Sense ������������������������������������������������������������������  271 20.5 The Scope of Engineering Ethics Education����������������������������������  271 20.5.1 Macroethical Scope������������������������������������������������������������  272 20.5.2 Microethical Scope ������������������������������������������������������������  275 20.5.3 Value Sensitive Design��������������������������������������������������������  277 20.6 Discussion ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  277 20.7 Conclusion��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  279 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  280 21 ‘ Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities��������������������������������������������������������������  283 Héctor Gustavo Giuliano, Leandro Ariel Giri, Fernando Gabriel Nicchi, Walter Mario Weyerstall, Lydia Fabiana Ferreira Aicardi, Martín Parselis, and Sergio Mersé 21.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  284 21.2 Formalizing Our Proposal��������������������������������������������������������������  285 21.3 Putting Our Proposal into Practice��������������������������������������������������  288 21.3.1 Students’ Academic Projects����������������������������������������������  292 21.4 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  293 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  294 22 T  he Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners������������������������������������������������������  297 Priyan Dias 22.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  297 22.2 Role Identity and Context Embeddedness Through Existential Philosophy������������������������������������������������������  299 22.3 Complexity and Interpretation Through History of Technology ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������  301 22.4 Alternative Viewpoints and Critical Thinking through Technology Ethics��������������������������������������������������������������������������  303 22.5 Discussion ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  304 22.6 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  306 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  306

xiv

Contents

23 T  he Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible Engineering Practice and Education ��������������������������������������  309 Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz, Alexei Ochoa-Duarte, and Andrés Leonardo León 23.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  309 23.2 Engineering and Coloniality ����������������������������������������������������������  311 23.3 Buen Vivir����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  313 23.4 Engineering and Buen Vivir: Case Studies��������������������������������������  315 23.4.1 The Ingenuity, Science, Technology, and Society Discipline��������������������������������������������������������  315 23.4.2 Community Radio Station��������������������������������������������������  316 23.5 Decolonial Engineering: Practice and Education ��������������������������  317 23.6 Closing Remarks����������������������������������������������������������������������������  319 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  321 24 E  ngineers Should Be Activists����������������������������������������������������������������  325 Thomas Siller and Gearold Johnson 24.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  326 24.2 Philosophy of Activism������������������������������������������������������������������  326 24.3 Educational Philosophy������������������������������������������������������������������  328 24.4 Engineering Philosophy������������������������������������������������������������������  329 24.5 Engineering Activism����������������������������������������������������������������������  330 24.5.1 History��������������������������������������������������������������������������������  330 24.5.2 Student Activism����������������������������������������������������������������  331 24.5.3 Engineering Curriculum�����������������������������������������������������  332 24.5.4 Public Versus Private Good������������������������������������������������  335 24.6 Discussion and Conclusions ����������������������������������������������������������  336 24.7 Summary ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  336 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  337

Contributors

Mark  Addis  Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK Lydia Fabiana Ferreira Aicardi  Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina José Aravena-Reyes,  Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil Erik W. Aslaksen,  Allambie Heights, NSW, Australia Walter  Antônio  Bazzo  Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, SC, Brazil Julieta Matos Castaño  University of Twente, Department of Design, Production and Management, Enschede, The Netherlands Eddie  Conlon  School Dublin, Ireland

of

Multidisciplinary

Technologies,

TU

Dublin,

Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz  Aeronautics Technological Institute (ITA – Brazil), São José dos Campos, Brazil Luciano Andreatta Carvalho da Costa  Universidade Estadual do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Édison Renato Pereira da Silva  Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Humberto Henriques de Arruda  Instituto Militar de Engenharia, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Priyan Dias  Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka Claudia Eckert  Department of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK xv

xvi

Contributors

Paul  Firenze,  School of Sciences and Humanities, Wentworth Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, USA Albrecht  Fritzsche  Rabat Business School, Université Internationale de Rabat, Rabat, Morocco Olivia Gambelin  Ethical Intelligence Associates, Limited, Brussels, Belgium Anouk  Geenen  University of Twente, Department of Design, Production and Management, Enschede, The Netherlands Leandro Ariel Giri  Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas, Buenos Aires, Argentina Héctor Gustavo Giuliano  Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Agrarias, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina David E. Goldberg  ThreeJoy Associates, Inc., London, UK Cecilia  Ibarra  Faculty of Government / Center for Climate and Resilience Research, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile Nina Jirouskova  Resallience, Paris, France Gearold Johnson  Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA Stanley C. Kranc  University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA Andrés Leonardo León  Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia Daniel Toscano López  Faculty of Medicine, Center for Bioethics/Observatory of Bioethics and Law, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Diana  Adela  Martin  Philosophy & Ethics, TU Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands School of Multidisciplinary Technologies, TU Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Robert Mast,  Brookline, MA, USA Sergio Mersé  Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Agrarias, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina Mauricio Leonardo Aguilar -Molina  Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil Daiana  Martinez  Monteleone  Stiftung Universität Hildesheim, Hildesheim, Germany Fernando Gabriel Nicchi  Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina Alexei Ochoa-Duarte  Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia

Contributors

xvii

Mauricio  Osses  Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa Maria (USM), Valparaíso, Chile Martín  Parselis  Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina Hugo Silveira Pereira  CIUHCT – Interuniversity Centre for the History of Science and Technology (NOVA School of Science and Technology), Caparica, Portugal Department of History of the University of York, York, UK Matías Quer  Signos Center, Universidad de los Andes, Santiago, Chile Juan David Reina-Rozo  Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany Donna  Riley  School of Albuquerque, NM, USA

Engineering,

University

of

New

Mexico,

Andrés  Santa-María  Department of Humanistic Studies, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, San Joaquín, Santiago, Chile Thomas Siller  Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA Barbara  Kirsi  Silva  College UC / Faculty of History, Geography, and Political Science, Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile Martin  Stacey  School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK Steven Umbrello  Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), Wellington, CT, USA Ibo  van  de  Poel,  Department of Values Technology and Innovation, School of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands Mascha van der Voort  University of Twente, Department of Design, Production and Management, Enschede, The Netherlands Kristen Psaty Watts,  Santa Barbara, CA, USA Walter Mario Weyerstall  Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Tecnología, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Tucumán, Argentina

Biographies

Mark Addis  is Associate Dean Knowledge Exchange at the Open University and a Research Associate at the Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science at the London School of Economics. He was a Visiting Professor in the Department of Culture and Society at Aarhus University. He has published in the areas of Wittgenstein, epistemology, and the philosophies of mind and science. Lydia  Fabiana  Ferreira  Aicardi  is an electrical engineer and specialist in distance learning. She is Professor and Researcher on electrotechnics, industrial automation, and introduction to engineering at Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina and Universidad de Buenos Aires. She also manages engineering research projects. José Aravena-Reyes  is a full professor of Engineering at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora (Brazil). He has studied engineering at the Austral University of Chile, received his doctoral degree in Engineering from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, and was in a postdoctoral stage on Philosophy of Technology at Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná (Brazil). His research and teaching activities are focused on the philosophy of engineering and engineering design, engineering education, CAD, project management, and engineering and society. Erik W. Aslaksen  is an engineer and physicist whose 50-year career in industry ranged from basic research to corporate management. Now retired, he dedicates his time to research on the evolution of society. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of NSW, a Charter Member of Omega Alpha, and is the author of nine books (one with W.R. Belcher), six book chapters, and more than 80 papers. Walter  Antônio  Bazzo  is Full Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and the Graduate Program in Scientific and Technological Education (PPGECT) at Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil). He holds a degree in Mechanical Engineering and a doctorate in Education Sciences and is currently researching in science, technology, and society. The Civilizing Equation is, today, a major theme of his investigations. He also coordinates the Center for Studies and

xix

xx

Contents

Research in Technological Education (NEPET—www.nepet.ufsc.br) and is the author of 10 books in these areas. Julieta  Matos  Castaño  is a researcher and project lead at DesignLab of the University of Twente, working on developing and applying responsible futuring to address societal challenges. Her research interests lie exploring the potential of controversies to develop alternative imaginaries in the context of smart city futures and urban transformation. Eddie Conlon  is a sociologist and works at the Technological University of Dublin. He has been working with engineering students for almost 20 years to help them explore the relationship between technology, engineering, and society. His interests are in the sociology of work, and recently he has published and supervised graduate students in areas such as engineering ethics, the social position of engineers, and the integration of sustainability into engineering education. Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz  is a member of the Citizenship and Social Technologies Lab (www.labcts.org). He has a philosophy and electrical engineering background and received his doctorate in philosophy from the University of São Paulo (Brazil). His research area encompasses philosophy of engineering/technology, decolonial theory, engineering education, and engaged/grassroots technical interventions. He is interested in the emancipatory or decolonial characteristics and impacts of such interventions on engineering practice and training and on the mainstream philosophy of engineering/technology. Luciano Andreatta Carvalho da Costa  is Adjunct Professor in the Department of Engineering and the Graduate Program in Teaching for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (PPGSTEM) at the State University of Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil). He holds a degree in Civil Engineering and Mathematics and doctorate and master’s in Engineering from UFRGS. He works in the field of STEM Education and ICT for Education. He is the author of several papers and books in these areas, and he coordinates the PPGSTEM graduate program. Édison  Renato  Pereira  da  Silva  is Adjunct Professor in the Department of Industrial Engineering at Escola Politécnica and at the Management & Innovation area of the Production Engineering Program at Coppe/UFRJ. He is co-founder of Garagem GetUp/UFRJ.  He has doctoral degree and a master’s in Production Engineering from COPPE/UFRJ. He works in the field of Evidence-Based Startup Entrepreneurship, more specifically: (1) Startup Entrepreneurship Process; (2) Corporate-Startup Engagement; (3) Teaching Entrepreneurship and Engineering. Humberto Henriques de Arruda  is a PhD student at Management and Innovation area of the Production Engineering Program at Coppe/UFRJ.  His research and teaching activities are focused on the engineering education, active learning, and entrepreneurship.

Biographies

xxi

Priyan  Dias  is Emeritus Professor in Civil Engineering at the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. His research encompasses concrete technology, structural engineering, systems techniques, and philosophy of engineering. He is the author of Philosophy for Engineering: Practice, Context, Ethics, Models, Failure, published by Springer Nature (2019). He serves as the Sri Lanka Representative for the Institution of Structural Engineers (UK) and is currently (2020–2022) the President of the National Academy of Sciences of Sri Lanka. Claudia  Eckert  is Professor of Design at the Open University. Her research focuses on empirical studies of development processes of complex products and the development of tools, methods, and concept to support them. Paul  Firenze  is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, where he teaches courses in the ethics of information technologies, bioethics, and science, technology, and society. His current research project focuses on the role of information technologies in the production and distribution of capital. Albrecht Fritzsche  is Full Professor of Innovation and Technology Studies at the International University of Rabat, where he coordinates the multidisciplinary project team on innovation and complexity management at Rabat Business School. He holds doctoral degrees in Philosophy and Industrial Management. His publications cover a wide range of different questions related to innovation and technical change in the digital age. Olivia Gambelin  is an AI ethicist who seeks to understand the importance of ethics in AI development and usage through her works with tech entrepreneurs. She is the founder and CEO of Ethical Intelligence Associates Ltd. Anouk Geenen  is a PhD candidate within the Human Centred Design group at the University of Twente. She uses design research to explore the potential of socio-­ technical controversies to stimulate societal deliberation and critical yet constructive reflection on smart urban technology. Leandro  Ariel  Giri  is Professor of Philosophy of Science at the Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero, Argentina, and member of the Group of Philosophy of Science and Complex Systems. He has a doctoral degree in Epistemology and History of Science from the Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero, and he is a chemical engineer from the Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. He is a researcher at CONICET, Argentina, focused on philosophy of science and technology. Héctor  Gustavo  Giuliano  is a researcher and professor of engineering at the Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. He has studied Electronic Engineering at the Universidad Nacional de La Plata and received his doctoral degree in Epistemology and History of Science from Universidad Nacional de Tres de

xxii

Biographies

Febrero, Argentina. His research and teaching activities are focused on philosophy and history of engineering. He is the editor of the academic journal Technology and Society. David E. Goldberg  (Dave) is an artificial intelligence pioneer, engineer, entrepreneur, educator, and leadership coach (Georgetown). Author of the widely cited Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning (Addison-­ Wesley, 1989) and co-founder of ShareThis.com, in 2007, he started the Illinois Foundry for Innovation in Engineering Education (iFoundry). In 2010, he resigned his tenure and professorship at the University of Illinois to start ThreeJoy Associates, Inc. and work full time for the improvement of higher education. Dave now gives workshops and talks, consults with educational institutions, and coaches individual educators and academic leaders to bring about timely, effective, and wholehearted academic change. Cecilia Ibarra  is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Government, and Associate Researcher at CR2, Center for Climate and Resilience Research, both at Universidad de Chile. She holds a doctoral degree in Science and Technology Policy from the University of Sussex, and her research focuses on climate governance, technological change, and history of science and technology in Chile. Nina Jirouskova  is a Resilience Enabler, bringing her competencies in civil engineering, natural disasters risk management, coaching and her keen interest in philosophy together to enable and foster resilience of people, projects, companies, and society as a whole in the face of foreseeable or unexpected shocks, stresses & difficulties. Supporting PhD students of Imperial College, London, as part of the coaching team of the Graduate School, she also coaches a variety of individuals and organisations in her own practice and continues, complimentarily, to contribute to the resilience of society within her role at Resallience, a consultancy company focused on climate change adaptation & resilience, as Head of Strategic Partnerships and co-lead of its resilience management taskforce. Gearold  Johnson  is currently Senior Research Scholar, the Emeritus George T Abell Endowed Chair, and Emeritus Professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Colorado State University. He received his BSc, MSc, and PhD degrees from Purdue University. Stanley C. Kranc  is Professor Emeritus of Engineering at the University of South Florida. He studied engineering and science at Northwestern University (USA), where he received his doctoral degree. His technical research activities have been concerned with experimental fluid mechanics, heat transfer, and mathematical modeling of physical systems. His current interests are centered on the philosophy of technology and engineering.

Biographies

xxiii

Andrés Leonardo León  is Professor of Engineering at the National University of Colombia. He is an electronic engineer with a master’s in Industrial Engineering, and he received his doctoral degree in Social and Human Sciences at the National University of Colombia. His teaching activities are with Problem-Based Learning methodology, and his research activities are around humanitarian engineering. He is a member of the Research Group on Technology and Innovation for Community Development. Daniel Toscano López  is Professor of Philosophy in several master’s programs at the University of Desarrollo and the University of Valparaíso (Chile). He has studied Philosophy at the University of Javeriana (Colombia) and received his doctoral degree in Philosophy from the Pontifical Catholic University of Santiago. His research and teaching activity focuses on political philosophy, ethics, bioethics, and human enhancement technologies. Diana  Adela  Martin  is a postdoctoral researcher at TU Eindhoven (The Netherlands), focusing on ethics, sustainability, and multi-stakeholder collaborations in engineering education. Diana is co-founder of the educational NGO Link Education and Practice (2008–2015), whose projects aimed to improve the employability prospects of youth from underprivileged backgrounds. In 2015 Diana was named by the European Forum Alpbach as one of Europe’s innovators in tackling inequality in higher education. Robert Mast  is a writer and independent scholar based in New York and Boston. He received his undergraduate degree from New York University in Philosophy and Economics. His research focuses on contemporary economic philosophy, in particular, navigating ethics and identity under late-stage capitalism. Sergio Mersé  is an electrical engineer from the Universidad Nacional de La Plata and holds a master’s in Social Studies of Science from the Universidad Nacional de Quilmes. Actually, he is Professor of introduction to engineering at Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. Professionally, he is Technical Director in Melectric S.A., a company oriented to the electrical and automation market. Mauricio Leonardo Aguilar Molina  is Full Professor at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora (Brazil). He holds a degree in Naval Engineering from the Austral University of Chile and a doctorate in Engineering Sciences from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil). His teaching and research interests focus on engineering design, project management, and the innovative role of new technologies and its implications in civil engineering education. Daiana  Martinez  Monteleone  is an Argentinian civil engineer (UTN-FRBA), who works in Germany in the energy sector and studies Philosophy, Arts and Media at the University of Hildesheim. Since 2018 she has participated in the planning of the SuedOstLink project, which will transport electricity from the North to the

xxiv

Biographies

South of Germany by means of underground cables. That inspired her reflection on the conceptions of beauty and nature, which gave rise to her first publication. Fernando  Gabriel  Nicchi  is an electrical engineer from the Universidad de Buenos Aires, with a master’s in Administration and Public Policy from the Universidad de San Andrés and a doctoral degree in Economics from Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. He has worked in economic consulting, participating in numerous projects, local and international, both for private companies and for governments, all related to economy and energy. He is also Professor at the Universidad de Buenos Aires and Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. Alexei Ochoa-Duarte  is a mechatronic engineer with a master’s in Systems and Computer Engineering, a PhD student in Engineering—Industry and Organizations at Universidad Nacional de Colombia, a teaching assistant fellow in object-oriented programming, and a tutor of the elective subject Cátedra Ingenio, Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad. He is a member of the Research Group on Technologies and Innovation for Community Development (GITIDC). He researches about engaged engineering, Buen Vivir, and engineering education. Mauricio Osses  works in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University Federico Santa María (Chile). He holds a degree in Mechanical Engineering, University of Chile, and a PhD degree at the Department of Fuel and Energy, University of Leeds, UK. His current research and professional activities are focused on emission inventories from mobile sources, renewable energies, storage technologies, and decarbonization of transportation toward sustainable mobility. Martín Parselis  is an author, researcher, and professor on technology and society field at the Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. He is an electronic engineer from the Instituto Tecnológico de Buenos Aires and holds doctoral degree on Social Studies on Technology from the Universidad de Salamanca. Hugo Silveira Pereira, PhD  in History (University of Porto, Portugal), is Assistant Researcher at the Interuniversity Centre for the History of Science and Technology (NOVA School of Science and Technology, Portugal) and Honorary Visiting Fellow at the Department of History (University of York, United Kingdom). He published several works about Portugal’s mainland and colonial railways. His current academic interests include the use of photography to record activities of science, technology, engineering, and medicine and create landscapes of progress. Matías Quer  is a researcher of Political Philosophy and Political Science at Signos Center, and a professor of Moral Philosophy at Universidad de los Andes (Chile). He has a BSc in Medicine from the Universidad del Desarrollo (Chile) and an MA in Philosophy and an MA in Political Studies, both from the Universidad de los Andes. He is currently a PhD student at the Universidad de los Andes, and his

Biographies

xxv

research is focused on transhumanism, liberal eugenics, and the challenges that new technologies present to democracy and politics. Juan  David  Reina-Rozo  is an industrial engineer with postgraduate studies in Environmental and Development Studies and holds PhD in Engineering. He has dedicated his professional life to reflecting and acting around the technology-­society relationship. He has collaborated with indigenous communities of the Colombian Caribbean coast in processes related to the social appropriation of solar energy. He has worked as a teacher, consultant, researcher, and member of the Research Group on Technologies and Innovation for Community Development at the National University of Colombia. He is participant of the collective Enraizando since 2018 and a visiting researcher at the Technical University of Berlin (Germany). Donna  Riley  is Jim and Ellen King Dean of the School of Engineering and Professor of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering at the University of New Mexico. Her research focuses on integrating critical liberal education capacities in the formation of engineering professionals. She is the author of Engineering and Social Justice (Morgan & Claypool, 2008). Riley earned a B.S.E. in Chemical Engineering from Princeton and a PhD from Carnegie Mellon in Engineering and Public Policy. She is a fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education. Andrés  Santa-María  is Professor of Philosophy at the Technical University Federico Santa María (Chile). He received his doctoral degree in Philosophy from the Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaíso. His research and teaching activities are focused on the history of ancient philosophy, philosophy of education, and, more recently,  ethics and philosophy of technology and its impact in engineering education. Thomas Siller  is Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Colorado State University. He received his PhD in Civil Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University, and his teaching and research interests are focused on engineering education and sustainability. Barbara Kirsi Silva  is Professor of History of Science in a double appointment at College UC and the Faculty of History, Geography, and Political Science, at Universidad Católica de Chile. She works on the history of science and technology in Latin America and on science diplomacy, from a global perspective. She has specialized in the contemporary history of astronomy, along with other projects covering the history of solar engineering, environmental history, and, more recently, energy and water management. Martin Stacey  teaches Computer Science at De Montfort University, focusing on systems analysis and design and human computer interaction. He is a cognitive scientist by training with degrees in Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. His

xxvi

Biographies

research focuses on developing a cross-disciplinary understanding of design and development processes. Steven Umbrello  is a research fellow at the Delft University of Technology and the Managing Director at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET). He is also a researcher at the University of Turin in collaboration with the Collège des Bernardins, where he works on digital humanism. His work focuses on the ethics and design of emerging and transformative technologies, in particular, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, and Industry 4.0 technologies. He is the editor of several international academic journals, such as the International Journal of Technoethics, the Journal of Responsible Technology, and the Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies. He was formerly a Stiftung Südtiroler Sparkasse Global Fellow at Eurac Research, where he worked on the philosophy, religion, and society program. He is the author of several books, including Designed for Death: Controlling Killer Robots (2022) and dozens of academic articles across a broad range of techno-ethical domains. Ibo van de Poel  is Anthoni van Leeuwenhoek Professor in Ethics and Technology at the Technical University Delft, The Netherlands. He has written about value change, ethics of disruptive technologies, ethics of technological risks, design for values, responsible innovation, and moral responsibility. He currently has an ERC Advanced grant on Design for changing values: a theory of value change in sociotechnical systems. Mascha van der Voort  is Full Professor at the Human Centred Design group at the University of Twente. Her research focuses on design approaches and tools that enable all types of stakeholders to actively engage and participate in collaboratively exploring and defining potential futures. Kristen Psaty Watts  is an independent scholar and technology attorney based in California. She practices in the areas of privacy, intellectual property, internet, and video game law. Watts received her undergraduate degrees in History and Philosophy with Honors from Colby College, and her Juris Doctorate from Santa Clara University located in Silicon Valley, where she was able to integrate Jurisprudence into her legal concentration in High Technology Law. Walter Mario Weyerstall  is Full Professor in the Faculty of Exact Sciences and Technology at the Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, where he obtained his Engineering degree. He also obtained a master’s degree in Business Administration from the Fundación del Tucumán in cooperation with the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso. He has worked in the electronics industry, in the management of service companies, and in consulting. Currently, his central interest is to integrate social and humanistic training in both undergraduate and graduate engineering programs.

Chapter 1

Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies Andrés Santa-María and Albrecht Fritzsche

Abstract  Since ancient Greece, the importance of dialogue is well established in philosophy. Plato’s works show dialogue as a means to engage across disciplinary boundaries, reflect on experience and gain new insight. In their exchange, the participants learn from one another without necessarily reaching agreements or annihilating differences and conflicts. Since the turn of the century, philosophers of technology have shown an increasing interest in a dialogue with practitioners. During the last decade, the forum for Philosophy, Engineering and Technology (fPET) has provided an important platform for such a dialogue. In 2020, this platform was challenged by the outbreak of the Covid 19 pandemic, which made it impossible to attend conferences in person. With the shift to an online format, fPET2020 was nevertheless able to continue the tradition of previous events. Furthermore, the online format made it possible to include voices in the dialogue that had so far not been heard, resulting in a broader and geographically and culturally richer interaction. This volume assembles selected works presented at fPET2020 or inspired by the networking activities that took place there. Keywords  Plato · Cooperative dialogue · Interdisciplinarity · Philosophy of engineering

A. Santa-María (*) Department of Humanistic Studies, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, San Joaquín, Santiago, Chile e-mail: [email protected] A. Fritzsche Rabat Business School, Université Internationale de Rabat, Rabat, Morocco e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_1

1

2

A. Santa-María and A. Fritzsche

1.1 Footnotes to Plato If we look at the awakening of philosophical thought in ancient Greece and, more specifically, at the time when Socrates and Plato incorporated ethical-­anthropological concerns to the range of topics addressed by previous philosophers, it is not difficult to notice that the search for wisdom to which this activity invites is marked, from its very origin, by interdisciplinary dialogue. Since then, dialectics and interdisciplinarity have become not only two characteristic features of these two thinkers, but also of the philosophical tradition that they were inaugurating. Let us dwell briefly on these two aspects and their most relevant implications. Regarding the eminently dialectical character of philosophy, it is very likely that Plato’s decision (as well as that of his fellow Xenophon) to use dialogue as a literary form does not respond to an interest in simply immortalizing the spoken words of his teacher. Indeed, the evolution experienced by the character Socrates throughout the corpus platonicum makes this hypothesis untenable. What Plato at least seems to be wanting to immortalize by preferring dialogue over treatise in his writings is the necessarily dialectical character of the quest for wisdom. In this sense, the dialogue seems to be a privileged literary style not so much to express a list of philosophical theses, but to provide the pragmatic context in which these theses can make full sense and, above all, to express the essence of the philosophical activity and attitude (Wieland, 1999; Kahn, 1997). In this way, Plato seems to react to the exhortative style to persuade an audience used by the sophists and rhetoricians of his days. He is also not comfortable with the debate understood as a zero-sum game in which one interlocutor wins and the other loses, as can be seen in the exasperation of the rhetoricians Polo and Callicles in the dialogue Gorgias. The alternative to exhortation and debate proposed by the character Socrates in Plato’s writings is cooperative dialogue. In it, the diverse visions of the interlocutors do not constitute a difficulty but an opportunity to advance towards wisdom. When this collaborative spirit is well assimilated by Socrates’ interlocutors, the outcome of the dialogue will always be a win for both, even when the dialogue does not end with a conclusive agreement (Vigo, 2001), something that rarely happens in Plato’s dialogues. And this outcome can be achieved independently from the role that the participants take in the dialogue. Asking questions and answering them, acquiring and sharing knowledge and experience can all lead to new insights for the participants in a dialogue. With regard to the interdisciplinarity of these dialogues, it is no coincidence that, among the interlocutors of the character Socrates, his fellow philosophers constitute a minority compared to the plethora of practitioners who congregated around him, such as poets, politicians, orators, sophists, soldiers, farmers, mathematicians, slaves, etc. on many occasions to apply the Socratic question par excellence (“what is x?”) to their respective occupations. The great ideas developed by Socrates (or by Plato through the character Socrates) emerge on the occasion of such interdisciplinary conversations. And it is no coincidence either that an important part of these characters came from various geographies, such as Sparta, Miletus, Syracuse,

1  Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies

3

Ephesus, Knossos, etc., to the point that an anonymous “Eleatic stranger” displaced Socrates from the leading role in The Sophist, a dialogue that shows one of the most elaborated versions of the platonic ontology. As most readers will know, the renowned British philosopher A.N. Whitehead (1978, p. 39) once commented on Plato’s thought and its impacts on the posterior philosophical tradition that “The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato”. As he explains below, he is not alluding to a systematic scheme of thought, but to “the wealth of general ideas scattered through them (sc. his writings)”. Indeed, almost every philosophical problem addressed in the last 2400 years was already referred in a way in a platonic dialogue. The questions on what’s reality, what do we know or how we must live are all deeply addressed throughout his work, giving rise to what later would be well known as ontology, epistemology and ethics and its different subdisciplines. Franssen et al. (2018) even identify philosophy of technology issues in Plato’s use of technological images when he describes the action of the Demiurge in the Timaeus. Due to his historical context, it may be understandable that Plato didn’t move forward onto saying something else about technical knowledge and its products. Nevertheless, beyond those incidental considerations on technology, the wealthier general platonic idea that still lives in the field of philosophy of technology, especially after the empirical turn and the rise of a philosophy of engineering, is that the cooperative dialogue constitutes the better path through which move towards a fruitful set of answer’s essays to the questions that challenges us today. Plato, of course, was also among the first to comment on the role of media as facilitators of exchange, with his critical reflection on the written word in the dialogue with Phaedrus. Contemporary scholars rely on media in a much wider variety of ways, which is all by itself a topic for a philosophy of engineering and technology, but also an important prerequisite to keep track of the various lines of thought that flourish in different parts of the world. Just as Plato kept track of what was going on in the countries known to him, scholarly dialogues today are enriched by interactions across cultures and geographies. Physical distance is only one out of many factors to be considered here as an obstruction to be overcome. What can lately be observed in the philosophy of engineering is also an increasing openness to such diverse fields as history, arts and management research, where a lot of unknown territory still remains to be explored.

1.2 Reaching Out and Looking Ahead: Shaping Up the Engineer-Philosopher The development of the philosophy of technology during the twentieth century was marked by an eminent critical discourse on technical rationality and its consequences by authors belonging almost exclusively to the field of the humanities

4

A. Santa-María and A. Fritzsche

(Mitcham, 1994). The so-called “empirical turn of the philosophy of technology” paves the way for a fruitful dialogue that has made it possible to advance in overcoming technophobic and technophilic discourses for the sake of building a technorealist view capable of bringing together diverse disciplines and geographies around the common purpose of reimagining engineering and the relationship between technology and society (Pirtle et al., 2021a). In general terms, it could be said that the predominant pessimistic discourse in what Mitcham (1994) calls the “humanities philosophy of technology” has highlighted the urgency of seriously addressing the questions related to the effects of engineering work and technological development. But since engineering and philosophy began to concur around the same questions, the discourse has undoubtedly gained in efficiency. Certainly, as it is suggested by van de Poel (2010), Fritzsche and Oks (2018a) and Pirtle et al. (2021a), the young discipline “philosophy of engineering” still has many challenges to face, but on the other hand, it is worth noting that these dialogues around the need to rethink engineering have been bearing some fruits that are inspiring with regards to the future. Since L. Bucciarelli (2003) installed the concept of philosophy of engineering within our community, meetings such as the Workshops on philosophy and engineering in 2007 and 2008, and later the biannual Forums on philosophy, engineering and technology held from 2010 to now have brought together philosophers, engineers and other related professionals from more and more geographies (Jaramillo, 2014; López-Cruz, 2020). An example of this is the 2020 meeting, in which a significant number of Latin American participants attended these meetings for the first time. On the other hand, the consolidation of interdisciplinary teams that carry out various philosophy workshops and open laboratory formats has taken important steps towards positioning the design for values as a trend in the engineering practice. Also the creation of engineering philosophy committees, such as that of the ASCE’s Structural Engineering Institute (Bulleit et al., 2015) and, in the academic field, the enormous number of publications on this subject in the last 10 years are fruits that show that perhaps what Langdon Winner denounced in 1986 is no longer so true, when he said that engineers have shown little interest in filling the void produced by the lack of in-depth research on the philosophy of technology and that those who ask important questions about their technical professions are usually seen by their colleagues as dangerous cranks and radicals. Putting things this way, it seems that the self-knowledge that Mitcham (2014) proposes as the great challenge for engineering in the twenty-first century is a task in which progress is already being made. Indeed, the number of engineers who are thinking deeply and critically about the world we wish to design, build, and inhabit has grown considerably. From different geographies and drawing on various disciplines, the profile of an engineer-philosopher has been built, not as a professional who, in addition to doing engineering, does philosophy, but who does engineering with a philosophical attitude, as described by Dewey (2012, p. 344), as “a disposition to penetrate to deeper levels of meaning – to go below the surface and find out the connections of any event or object, and to keep at it”.

1  Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies

5

1.3 About This Volume This volume continues the discussion on philosophy, engineering and technology in other volumes of the POET series: Philosophy and Engineering: An Emerging Agenda (van de Poel & Goldberg, 2010), Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on Practice, Principles and Process (Michelfelder et  al., 2014), Philosophy and Engineering: Exploring Boundaries, Expanding Connections (Michelfelder et al., 2017), The Future of Engineering: Philosophical Foundations, Ethical Problems and Application Cases (Fritzsche & Oks, 2018b) and Engineering and Philosophy: Reimagining Technology and Social Progress (Pirtle et al., 2021b). Like the previous publications, it builds on contributions to the conference series Forum on philosophy, engineering and technology (fPET). In this case, the papers are taken from fPET2020 which took place online due to the COVID-19 emergency and was hosted by the Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María in Chile. As it was said, the fPET conferences provide a unique opportunity for philosophers and engineers from all over the world to meet and discuss philosophical issues of engineering across disciplinary boundaries. The participants of fPET thus gain the opportunity to reflect the subjects of their research from new perspectives and put it into wider academic and social contexts. The previous volumes published in the series show that fPET has frequently been able to anticipate or even set new trends in philosophical research and increase its grounding in current social, technical and economic developments surrounding engineering. This volume intends to do the same. Turning this pandemic crisis into an opportunity, the online format in which the conference had to be run let the attendees engage and network far beyond our geographical boundaries. Due to this format, it was also possible for scholars from India, Sri Lanka, Australia and Eastern Asia to attend, whose voices are rarely heard at other meetings of the same kind. And because of the geographical location of the host university, the fPET2020 conference has attracted many scholars from South America, whose contributions make up for a large part of this volume. Conference participants were encouraged to use digital media not only to present the usual set of slides, but to step outside their classrooms, lecture halls, studies and libraries and relate more directly to the phenomena they discussed. Furthermore, scholars from different parts of the world were introduced as “fPET-ambassadors” to support networking, encourage collaboration in projects and facilitate international grant proposals. On the contrary of Lewis Mumford’s fears on how the annihilation of distance by technology would only magnify our weaknesses instead of our virtues (Mumford, 1973), this engagement across geographies, cultures and disciplines has inspired a unique dialogue, which is reflected in the chapters of this volume. In addition to papers that were presented during the conference, the editors have encouraged some attendees to submit work that has resulted from the discussions that followed up on the paper presentations, establishing new teams of authors that had so far not collaborated. In sum, the volume is able to expand the dialogue across disciplinary boundaries and establishes connections that have so far been overlooked.

6

A. Santa-María and A. Fritzsche

Trying to reflect on this volume the diversity of contributions and to join together some recurrent themes over them, this book has been divided into four sections that we will briefly introduce here.

1.3.1 Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values The six chapters in this section propose to rethink engineering from different perspectives. The first two revolve around the great ethical challenges of engineering. In “Engineering practice: restoring public values in professional life”, Donna Riley reviews some of the most recent engineering-related scandals to reflect on how various actors in society prioritize, realize, override or discard particular values in the design and deployment of technology purported to benefit people and the planet. In “What sort of engineering do we want? How far are we from it? A manifesto for a socially situated professional ethics”, the authors of four different papers presented in fPET2020 discuss the desired profile of new engineers and how this profile could and should be developed in order to respond to the challenges settled by a world on the brink of collapse mostly due to engineers’ professional practice. In “Freedom and standards in engineering”, Erik Aslaksen invites us to turn our attention to the problem of how certain conflicts among freedom and standardization in the engineering practice may problematize the way in which common good must be pursuit, expanding a line of thought that can be traced through many previous publications in this series. Mark Addis, Claudia Eckert and Martin Stacey build a bridge to engineering design research, a thriving field that has so far received surprisingly little attention in fPET. They highlight the value of tacit knowledge in engineers reasoning about the properties of new designs. José Aravena-Reyes, making use of some concepts developed by Gilbert Simondon and Gilles Deleuze, invites us to think about a new epistemological basis to define and solve problems, more open the contributions of the philosophy of technology and engineering than just based on natural sciences. Finally, Nina Jirouskova and David Goldberg claim that modern coaching applied to engineers in the different stages of their career could be the untapped resource that they may need to meet the challenges and demands of today and tomorrow. They also make some suggestions on how philosophers can help in this task that seem in many ways relatable to the approach that Plato has taken in their dialogue with others.

1.3.2 Reflections on Artifacts In this section, a group of seven papers take a philosophical, ethical and political close up to certain artifacts. Each one constitutes clever examples of the concerns that, for instance, authors such as Winner, Ihde and Verbeek have raised drawing on

1  Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies

7

earlier thoughts by Heidegger, Latour and others about how the influence of artifacts goes far beyond the mere meet of their particular function. In the first place, Daiana Martinez contributes to the debate about the impact of large-scale infrastructure projects, on the example of the electricity highways that must be traced through Germany. In this chapter, overhead lines are defended by the author over the most commonly supported underground cables, based in technical, philosophical and aesthetical arguments that reveals the different views about beauty, nature and technology that each of these positions hide. Then we have a group of chapters that address, as pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, different aspects of the general process of digital transformation. The first piece by Ibo van de Poel warns us from the unintended consequences of the developments of AI if its self-knowledge and evolutionary character is not under meaningful human control by a guaranteed set of meta-values such as monitorability, reversibility, adaptability and accountability. An example of those AI systems is the project of incorporating crowdsourced public input. Paul Firenze addresses the problem of how to deal with the programming of the morally contentious decisions to be made by automated vehicles. As a case, he evaluates the relevance and feasibility of the crowdsourced responses programmed according to the MIT Media Lab’s Moral Machine Experiment. Anouk Geenen and Julieta Matos delve into the debate on the pros and cons of the developments of smart city projects, to claim that the controversies that have raised about these projects are not an obstacle to avoid or smoothen but, on the contrary, they are an important input towards its responsible development that must be embraced and appreciated in its political value. Matías Quer focuses on another aspect of the digital transformation: the technology known as Digital Direct Democracy or E-Democracy. The author makes a critical assessment of the different levels of penetration that this technology may have in the society, according to the different uses that we can make of it. Steven Umbrello and Olivia Gambelin focus on a toolkit for existing workflow management Agile and shows that Value Sensitive Design is an approach that promise a way to the democratic design of technology. Kristen Psaty Watts and Robert Mast examine how social media has given place to a unique moment in global capitalism: the digital celebrities. Based on a legal framework and insights from Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Pierre Bourdieu and Gernot Böhme, they question the metaphysical ramifications of this unprecedent sale of relationships and of a percentage of our digital and even physical identity.

1.3.3 Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics This section dives into the wealth of the dialogue between engineering and humanities, widening it to other disciplines such as history, science fiction genre studies and biopolitics.

8

A. Santa-María and A. Fritzsche

The first two contributions approach to engineering from history. Hugo Pereira analyzes the Portuguese Railway History from the scope of Melvin Kranzberg’ six laws of technology to show that this and any technology are determined by nontechnical factors like financial dependency, political lobbying, personal agendas and even utopian beliefs about its impact in economy and society. Bárbara Silva, Cecilia Ibarra and Mauricio Osses invites to reflect on the philosophical possibilities of interdisciplinary work and on the relationship between narratives of the past and imagination of the future through a revision of the history of solar energy in Chile, showing that it was not only a matter of engineering, but also of social and cultural conditions, as well as individual ambitions and interests. Another two papers approach to engineering through literature and, more specifically, through science fiction. Juan David Reina-Rozo claims that the ethos of engineering needs to be comprehensive and plural to face the future challenges of humans and other living beings. This imply including new sources in engineering education, culture and research such as science fiction. Some emerging aesthetical and philosophical sub-genres, like Solarpunk and Afrofuturism, may help them to create a new world by questioning the current technology creation and use. Stanley Kranc invites us to read and explore the short futuristic story “The cost of living” by Robert Sheckley –written 70 years ago– as an image of many of the concerns manifested by the philosophy of technology in the last decades, especially the fact that technology not only serve us as a mere tool, but when doing so, we get involved in a way of living that was not our choice. In the last chapter of this section, Daniel Toscano López addresses the problem of human enhancement and claims that the technologies created to improve us has become an unprecedent political power over the living, through the atomization, molecularization and fragmentation of living matter.

1.3.4 Engineering Education Five different perspectives join in the last section to rethink different aspects of engineering education, as a privileged moment to promote the changes that engineering practice need to meet today’s challenges. In the first place, Diana Marin and Eddie Conlon shows the result of a qualitative study that highlight the diversity (even conflicts) of goals and topics addressed by different engineering ethics teachers in Ireland, as well as their preponderant visions on the importance of practice over theory. Two essays address the question on the role of philosophy in engineering degree programs. On the one hand, a group of scholars from Argentina focuses on two elements from ABET’s definition of engineering to show how the engineer profile described in such definition needs philosophical formation as a part of his/her training to become real. On the other hand, Priyan Dias proposes a set of philosophical issues to be integrated in teaching that make engineering students more reflective and thus better fitted to their careers, i.e. not as something parallel to their design thinking but rather as way to contribute to it.

1  Philosophy of Engineering as a Dialogue Across Disciplines and Geographies

9

The two final chapters offer different proposals of shifts on how engineering is understood and thus on how it is taught. Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz, Alexei Ochoa-­ Duarte and Andrés León present an alternative to the traditional model of engineering practice and education: the Ameridian “Buen vivir” as a way to understand the development in a counter-hegemonic sense. Finally, Thomas Siller and Gerry Johnson feature the importance of an “activist philosophy” to bring the passion and commitment to change necessary for the development of the future engineers.

1.4 As a Conclusion We would like to thank all authors for their excellent contributions to this book, as well as Pieter Vermaas and the whole team at Springer for their collaboration and patience. Furthermore, we would like to extend our gratitude to everyone who contributed to the success of the fPET 2020 conference: the authors and keynote speakers, the technical and administrative staff supporting us in the background, the Director of the Department of Humanistic Studies of Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Dr. Marianna Oyanedel, the organizers of the previous fPET conference, and our fPET ambassadors José Aravena-Reyes, Erik Aslaksen, Geoff Crocker, Priyan Dias, Florian Maurer, Hidekazu Kanemitsu, Édison Renato Silva, and Zachary Pirtle. After Langdon Winner criticized the engineers of the mid-80s, as was shown above, he said that “If Socrates’ suggestion that the ‘unexamined life is not worth living’ still holds, it is news to most engineers” (Winner, 1986, p. 5). It is followed by a note to explain that he is talking about a general attitude, and that there are exceptions. About 30 years later, Mitcham (2014, p. 19) uses the very Delphic apothegm “know yourself” that Socrates used as a rule of life to encourage engineers and non-engineers towards the true grand challenge of engineering: “cultivating deeper and more critical thinking (…) about the way engineering is reshaping how and why we live”. The way in which Socrates assumed such rule led him to adopt the dialectic attitude which would leave a permanent mark in the different philosophical disciplines and subdisciplines that was going to come after him, until today. Indeed, in this volume engineering and philosophy revive the pristine dialectic and interdisciplinary spirit of those platonic arguments of the old times. Now, let the dialogue start.

References Bucciarelli, L. (2003). Engineering philosophy. DUP Satellite; an imprint of Delft University Press. Bulleit, W., Schmidt, J., Alvi, I., Nelson, E., & Rodriguez-Nikl, T. (2015). Philosophy of engineering: What it is and why it matters. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 141(3), 02514003.

10

A. Santa-María and A. Fritzsche

Dewey, J. (2012). Democracy and education. Simon & Brown. Franssen, M., Lokhorst, G. J., & van de Poel, I. (2018). Philosophy of technology. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2018 ed). https://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/fall2018/entries/technology/ Fritzsche, A., & Oks, S. J. (2018a). Translations of technology and the future of engineering. In The future of engineering (pp. 1–12). Springer. Fritzsche, A., & Oks, S. J. (2018b). The future of engineering. Philosophical Foundations, Ethical Problems and Application Cases. Springer. Jaramillo, P. D. F. (2014). Filosofía de la ingeniería: Una disciplina profesional en construcción. INGE CUC, 10(1), 9–18. Kahn, C. H. (1997). Plato and the Socratic dialogue: The philosophical use of a literary form. Cambridge University Press. López-Cruz, O. (2020). From philosophy of technology to philosophy of engineering. Revista Colombiana de Filosofía de la Ciencia, 20(41), 63–111. Michelfelder, D. P., McCarthy, N., & Goldberg, D. E. (Eds.). (2014). Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process. Springer. Michelfelder, D.  P., Newberry, B., & Zhu, Q. (2017). Philosophy and engineering.  Exploring boundaries, expanding connections. Springer. Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. University of Chicago Press. Mitcham, C. (2014). The true grand challenge for engineering: Self-knowledge. Issues in Science and Technology, 31(1), 19–22. Mumford, L. (1973). Technics and the future. In Interpretations and forecasts, 1922–1972: Studies in literature, history, biography, technics, and contemporary society. Harcourt. Pirtle, Z., Tomblin, D., & Madhavan, G. (2021a). Reimagining conceptions of technological and societal progress. In Engineering and philosophy (pp. 1–21). Springer. Pirtle, Z., Tomblin, D., & Madhavan, G. (2021b). Engineering and philosophy. Reimagining Technology and Social Progress. Springer. van de Poel, I. (2010). Philosophy and engineering: Setting the stage. In Philosophy and engineering (pp. 1–11). Springer. van de Poel, I., & Goldberg, D.  E. (Eds.). (2010). Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda. Springer. Vigo, A.  G. (2001). Platón, en torno a las condiciones y la función del diálogo cooperativo. Tópicos, 9, 5–41. Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality. An essay in cosmology. The Free Press. Wieland, W. (1999). Platon und die Formen des Wissens. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor. University of Chicago Press.

Part I

Engineering Practice, Knowledge and Values

Chapter 2

Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life Donna Riley

Abstract  Public engineering scandals like the VW Diesel Cheat, Theranos’s biotech vaporware, and the Boeing 737-MAX call us to reflect on how engineers, management, and the public prioritize, realize, override, or discard particular values in the design and deployment of technology purported to benefit people and the planet. As we look towards a future marked by increasingly wicked problems and sociotechnical messes, can we shift engineering ethics pedagogies to place greater value on learning and growth? What role can engineers and non-engineers play in creating cultures of accountability and fidelity to core public and professional values? Keywords  Engineering ethics pedagogy · Public accountability

2.1 Introduction Recent ethical lapses in both engineering practice and in democratic governance have called us to revisit the role of public values in professional ethics, with significant implications for how we approach engineering formation. In this chapter I will discuss a few recent engineering scandals that reflect a broader lapse in public values. I consider which values we teach engineers and what counts or doesn’t count as principles of/in engineering. Looking ahead to engineering’s emerging future, I lay out some frameworks for principled learning and some ways to instill ethics and philosophical thinking in engineers.

D. Riley (*) School of Engineering, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_2

13

14

D. Riley

2.2 Whose Ethics? Whose Values? In 2010 I was on the market for a new car and sought to purchase a sustainable vehicle. As a thermodynamics instructor I was very much enamored with the historical example of Rudolf Diesel and the ways in which he sought to intervene in the monopolistic, capital-intensive culture forming around the steam engine (von Baeyer, 1999). He designed his engine to burn lots of different fuel types and scale to any size, which was a radical idea for its time. I was excited about a clean diesel and indeed my car registered up to 58 miles per gallon on the highway. Unfortunately, I was swindled. The car exceeded the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s emissions standards for nitrogen oxides. The Volkswagen engineers had designed a software “cheat” to get around that fact in emissions testing (Gates et al., 2017). When VW was being held to account for this. National Public Radio attended a press conference with Matthais Müller, Computer Engineer and VW CEO. NPR’s reporter in a follow-up to his remarks noted “You said this was a technical problem, but the American people feel… this is an ethical problem,” to which Mueller responded “Frankly spoken it was a technical problem…. We had some targets for our technical engineers, and they solved the problem and reached targets with some software solutions which haven’t been compatible to the American law. That is the thing. And the other question you mentioned – it was an ethical problem? I cannot understand why you say that.” (Glinton, 2016) This confusion and utter bewilderment regarding how a technical issue might simultaneously be an ethical issue  – and both very much engineering issues  – reveals the need for a different kind of ethics education for engineers. It takes a holistic perspective to know that engineering entails legal, political, social, cultural, global, communication, lifelong learning, and sustainability considerations. These are all equally engineering considerations, and they cannot be reduced or relegated through a number of false binaries to something like “context” or “impact” or “breadth” or “policy” or “professional skills.” We see a similar pattern with the example of the 737 MAX 8. There is a consensus principle in safety engineering: first, seek to eliminate the hazard (Barnett & Brickman, 1986). If you can design as system so as not to pose a risk in the first place, that is the best option. But the prevailing principle in this case appears to have instead been global competition, according to reporting in the New York Times. (Gelles, 2020; Gelles et al., 2019). As reported there, Boeing had fallen behind Airbus in the marketplace. Airbus had come out with a more fuel-efficient plane, the A320neo, and Boeing was under time pressure to offer a competing model. They decided to put their larger and more fuel-efficient engines on the existing plane structure. They would be higher and further forward on the Max raising the potential for aerodynamic instability and the need for software controls. But in deploying software and sensors, the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) was not held to the same redundancy standard as was the norm for Boeing engineering, effectively choosing to rely on the crew as the fail-safe (Baker & Gates, 2019). This reliance on

2  Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life

15

“airmanship” when technology fails was ill-conceived for a global airline industry employing crews with widely varying training and experience (Langewiesche, 2019). In the end there were two crashes 5 months apart, killing 346, and affecting the global community. Max was put on hold until Boeing could correct this mistake. A third case is that of biotech startup Theranos, as described by Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou (2018), and by ABC News in its podcast and 20/20 episode, The Dropout (Dunn et  al., 2019; Sloan, 2019). A Stanford engineering undergraduate student dropped out of college to start a Silicon Valley company. However, instead of the usual software startup this was a biotechnology idea. The first principle of engineering ethics, to hold paramount the health, safety, and welfare of the public (NSPE, 2019), came up against prevailing Silicon Valley values of “fail fast,” “fake it till you make it” and the lionization of dropout genius billionaires like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Holmes was all the more an industry darling because of her breaking the glass ceiling in running tech startups. As described in The Dropout episodes and podcast, Holmes raised nearly a billion dollars in venture capital with prominent investors. On the principle of “fake it till you make it,” her idea to take a finger-prick blood sample and run 200+ diagnostics on a single device and a single droplet of blood, ended up being deployed at a number of pharmacies across the United States through a deal with the Walgreens chain. The problem was the technology never worked; it was vaporware with direct consequences for consumers’ health. Ken Alltucker (2018) describes the impact of the Theranos-Walgreens rollout at 40 pharmacies in Phoenix, Arizona, where they conducted over 1.5 million blood tests delivering 7.8 million test results for over 175,000 people. Over 10% of the results were voided or corrected. People were misdiagnosed with serious conditions such as thyroid conditions or autoimmune disease. It is difficult to know how treatment decisions based on erroneous results changed the course of patient health for other serious conditions such as heart disease. In Theranos’s heyday, Holmes stated, “I was at a point where another few classes in chemical engineering was not necessary for what I wanted to do” (Sloan, 2019: 8:44). One can’t help but wonder if she had stayed, would she have encountered engineering ethics in such a way as to change her course? Do we teach the kind of intellectual humility required to avert such a disaster? What would engineering ethics (or more broadly, engineering education) need to look like to accomplish this end, especially in the face of Silicon Valley cultural influences? All three of these cases discussed above involve innovations that claim to benefit people or the planet. And in all cases values of the market overrode what we might think of as values of the engineering profession and/or public values. Software and data analytic systems in all cases provided a kind of cover for ethical lapses. We need renewed attention to how we prioritize values in real time. How do we realize, prioritize, override, or discard certain values when we design and deploy technology? And who decides?

16

D. Riley

2.3 Emergent Crises Emerging problems, as Stephanie Adams has noted (2018), are going beyond the complex or “wicked” problems that were popularly discussed in engineering education 20 years ago, and are now better characterized as “social mess” problems (Horn & Weber, 2007). Social messes are characterized by unclear problem definitions and boundaries, uncertainty and consequences are themselves unclear, and values are in conflict, to the point that individuals and groups cannot even agree what the facts are. Riley et al. (2021) note that “social mess” is not necessarily a helpful term in engineering settings, as it renders invisible the role of technology in co-constructing such messes; they offer instead “sociotechnical mess” to better describe the phenomena. What then should engineering educators do to prepare engineers to sustain core public and professional values (not the same, sometimes convergent, sometimes divergent), including but not limited to health, safety, well-being, trust, quality, and integrity? Engineers must deal with both public and professional values. How do engineers work with publics to create cultures of accountability and fidelity to shared values? Industry 4.0 is one of the “sociotechnical mess” challenges of the future – how do we prepare engineers for a future in which their own jobs can be automated? What is their value added beyond simple technical analyses that we might train artificial intelligence to do in the near future? Preparing engineers requires developing moral imagination so that engineers not only learn what engineering ethics principles are in the profession, but also can think critically about those and propose new principles. We need to foster not only systems thinking but also systems of systems thinking where interdisciplinarity is central and where engineers are thinking critically about data because there is so much garbage in garbage out going on with data science – and also putting that in the broader context of systems of power and how organizations play that power out in societal and global contexts (Riley et al., 2021). We need to sharpen our insistence on process. After two decades of an outcomes-­ based accreditation regime in engineering education, I fear we are losing focus on how we achieve our outcomes. The quality of the process matters in itself. If we lose focus on process, we end up with outcomes-centered, rather than student-centered education. I fear we are moving to an ends-justify-the-means Machiavellian way of thinking about engineering education and engineering ethics  – the focus is on whether we got the right multiple-choice answer on the ethics section of the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam, not on what our reflective process was, whose perspectives we considered, and so on. In order to navigate the complexities of ethics in engineering practice contexts, engineers need to develop strategic understandings of their organizations. They need to be better able to navigate their social and political environments effectively in order to cultivate processes within their organizations where ethics matters and due deliberation is possible. This deliberation is in fact the value added that engineers will need to be able to bring in our near and distant future – thinking in sophisticated and careful ways about technology in context. In our present, however, it seems that loyalty (to corporate mission, to brand, etc.) seems to be the value that is held paramount. Riley (2008) described common mindsets in engineering through the lens of typical jokes told by and about engineers.

2  Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life

17

A lawyer, a cleric, and an engineer are scheduled to be executed by guillotine. The lawyer goes first, the executioner pulls the cord, but nothing happens. “Double jeopardy! You have to let me go!” cries the lawyer, and the executioner releases the lawyer. The priest it next, and the same thing happens. “Divine intervention! You have to let me go!” cries the cleric, and the executioner again complies. The engineer is next on the chopping block. As the executioner gets ready to pull the cord, the engineer cries, “Wait! I think I see your problem.”

The old trope of engineers as hired guns (see, e.g., Vesilind, 2006) remains powerful, especially when our students continue learn that this is what they should expect from an industry career. It will take considerable and sustained effort to push against this narrative. We have learned from efforts to “change the conversation” (NAE, 2008) that changing the story must be accompanied with efforts to change the opportunities and lived experiences of emerging engineers.

2.4 Disrupting the Silent Status Quo: Attending to Engineering Ethics Pedagogy When it comes to engineering ethics education, the primary thing students hear is silence. They hear the loudest silence from engineers. That silence is not neutral. Students learn from it that ethics does not matter to engineers. Even if students are taking an ethics course over in philosophy, if they see an engineering instructor they admire who is silent, they will assume this is not something engineers care about or apply in their practice. And then it follows, especially if they see an engineer prioritizing profits, or loyalty, above other considerations, that other considerations are dismissed. Engineers can readily pick up the idea from observing their near peers that fellow professionals do not value empathy or abilities in ethical reflection or strategic navigation of social contexts. Values can often be characterized as “fluff and nonsense,” (K. Haralampides, “personal communication”, October 5, 2010) and not acceptable in engineering classrooms: not “real” engineering. In this way ethics capacities are rendered not even professional skills to be cultivated; they are not even denigrated as “soft skills;” they literally have no place at all and remain at best locked away in a code of ethics. The time has come to radically change engineering education and practice. One of the things Erin Cech (2013) has pointed out is the problem of disengagement. Students develop their disengagement throughout their engineering educations. Disengagement in a tacit way, is an assumed requirement for engineering rigor. If you are too engaged, you might be biased and thus bad technically. On the contrary, engaged engineering is good engineering, harnessed toward joint technical and moral imperatives. That means we must attend to how students prepare for action, not just thinking or decision making in ethics classrooms. Students need to prepare by developing an emotional landscape where empathy is at play, listening is possible, and collaboration and power sharing is the norm. We need to be teaching engineers that they need to solicit all voices and challenge systems that do not afford a proper measure of deliberation, shared power or attention to the knowledges, values and views of different groups affected by a technology. This requires developing cultural and epistemic humility in both technical and moral matters, being able to make moral

18

D. Riley

determinations from a position of engagement and their own locally situated definitions of what public health, safety or welfare might mean (Lambrinidou, 2018). In that kind of world, you would see professional societies engage in self-reflection on the stated and unstated political commitments they have and emerge in the public world by taking a position. What this looks like in engineering education is that we need to focus on the hidden curriculum and the null curriculum (Villanueva et al., 2018). Engineering faculty need to model a commitment to engineering ethics. This means designing classrooms that are themselves values-centric, and making those values come alive in and through classroom relations. If we instead implement traditional engineering education, the lessons of the hidden and null curricula will undermine our efforts. We need to make a profound pedagogical shift that values learning and growth over credentialing and grades. We have to make reflection and mindfulness core learning opportunities. They cannot be relegated to just the first 5 min of class or an extra assignment here or there, but a regular practice. We need to set students up to be moral agents rather than mere observers or judges of others (Whitbeck, 1995). Myles Horton, Paulo Freire, bell hooks, and others have written about the need for students to be deeply engaged in the world through engaged education or liberative pedagogies (e.g., Horton, 1998; Horton & Freire, 1990; Hooks, 1994; Freire, 1970) Critical thinking and reflective action are core educational outcomes of such pedagogies (Freire, 1970). Psychologists Patricia King and Karen Kitchener (1994) have presented a reflective judgment model, supported by decades of experimental research, that shows how challenging students with progressive levels of critical thinking and reflective action contributes to their deepening moral development (King & Kitchener, 1994). Their model builds on Dewey (1938), among others, who wrote about the relationship between experience and knowledge, profoundly connecting being, doing, and knowing. For engineering ethics education, this work presents a call to get beyond case studies and provide richer contexts and stronger connections to action for engineering students. The Box 2.1 contains an exercise for readers who have a role in educating engineering students in ethics, inviting you to envision opportunities for more embodied learning in engineering ethics. Box 2.1 Exercise 1: Embodying Learning in Engineering Ethics Think of a practical context in your teaching where students might be able to focus on values or principles in the context of engineering. If you are already doing this, you might think about some ways to improve or deepen something you are already doing, How can engineering ethics learning be embodied? How might theatre or dance (Boal, 1992) be incorporated in your classroom to embody ethics learning? How might learning engineering ethics be positioned alongside communities with careful attention to power relations (Lambrinidou, 2018)?

2  Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life

19

A narrow focus on grades and credentials is increasingly pervasive in education. Students may resist any pedagogy that subverts or resists this trend. Yet learning is not just about the piece of paper at the end. Students may struggle to find other meanings and need some scaffolding to first become mindful of their assumptions about their education, and then to potentially broaden their framing of what learning means for them. Riley and Claris (2008) suggest engaging students with questions that focus on the “why of why,” delving deeply into motivation with students so that they can discover their own reason and meaning in the work. In this way, students may come to understand engineers’ accountability as more than simple loyalty to an employer. This is core to their professional formation. The classroom can create the space for students to learn new ways of interacting across relationships of power, and experiment with new ways of being, doing, and knowing, to begin to imagine how engineering could be otherwise. A classroom space can emphasize and illustrate different frames and theories and ways of being, and invite students to try them on, critique them, and conceive of something better. Engineers’ current training too often devalues or dismisses voices that diverge from the status quo; several engineering educators have thus identified the central role empathy can play in the engineering ethics classroom (e.g., Hess et  al., 2017; Walther et al., 2012). There are significant pressures on our students as they learn with us: debt, family responsibilities, inequities they may experience based on identity, and many other ways in which they struggle to balance their education with other aspects of their lives. The more we can acknowledge those realities, employing universal design to account for these challenges in our classrooms, the more we can demonstrate empathy and construct a classroom that is not only an effective space for learning, but also a space that teaches empathy itself. One of the common misconceptions engineers experience in learning ethics is fearing the worst. Our tendency to un-nuanced and reductionist conceptualization of situations can lead us to assume we cannot speak up or take any action because of the possibility of severe retribution (i.e. we’ll get fired). Even when less extreme consequences are far more likely, and a range of options is readily identified, it is easy to go to extremes and assume the worst, justifying inaction. The more we can demonstrate in our classrooms a range of possible actions and a range of possible consequences, the more readily students can learn in an embodied way to navigate engineering ethics in organizations. Meeting working engineers they can identify with and trust from early in their career can create space to talk through creative solutions, multiple approaches, and get unstuck from worst case scenarios. The engineering community can and should provide real-world examples from practice that incorporate personal strategies and caring professional relationships that can disrupt engineering workplace norms, and lead to more ethical action.

20

D. Riley

2.5 Changing the Engineering Ethics Landscape: Putting Principles into Practice How can engineering ethics landscapes change for engineers? Philosophers, social scientists, and engineers have been exploring possibilities through critique. For example, Charles Harris (2013) has pointed out that paramountcy (holding paramount the health, safety, and welfare of the public) is a limited principle because it only serves to prevent harm and does not hold out any aspirational good. Members of the network for Engineering, Social Justice and Peace (esjp.org) have implicitly critiqued paramountcy in practice by asking whose health, safety and welfare matters? Whose publics count? And who decides? Erin Cech (2013) has contributed the critique that engineers’ hyper-focus on the technical precludes us even asking such engaged questions. Gary Downey (2012) has noted that generic social value (normative holism) perpetuates injustice. Engineers maintain a false logic of  hubris: Engineering serves society; thus what I’m doing must be virtuous because society is improved by what I do; and thus society must monolithically value technological advancement or progress. This precludes any possibility of voices that might challenge engineering’s status quo. Engineering’s needed competencies in the future are knowledges that depart from dominant engineering thought. How do engineers acknowledge the moral, intellectual, and emotional agency of others, beyond the profession’s members? The need for multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinarity is clear, even as many higher education institutions continue to devalue and defund fields outside of STEM. Engineers must become accomplices and allies of colleagues across campus to sustain and protect liberal education. Academics need to engage the public conversation to make the case anew for the value of higher education and liberal education beyond a narrow focus on credentialing in STEM. Engineers have a lot to learn from other disciplines and other professions that could shape a broader engineering ethics. Architects and pharmacists, for example, have each entertained policy “guardrails” related to the death penalty (Jacobs, 2020; Cobaugh, 2015). And Psychologists continue to debate appropriate limits for their behavior and involvement in interrogations (https://www.apa.org/news/press/statements/interrogations). Could Engineering do things differently? For example, what if the American Society of Civil Engineers took up the ethics of engineers’ participation in privatized water or other public infrastructure? What bounds could be put on the development of AI or drug design and manufacturing by other societies? It would be enormously beneficial to have the conversation and deliberate on these topics, regardless of the immediate outcome. Engineers may fear conflict, but we need to realize that conflict is already present in our professional societies; we don’t all agree with the status quo, or with silence on these matters. We need to have open, healthy, constructive debate with dissent, to keep consensus moving and engage a reflexive process of impermanent agreement (Riley & Lambrinidou, 2015)

2  Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life

21

We can further engage our moral imaginations through thought experiments. For example, Riley and Lambrinidou (2015) drew upon ethics codes from social work to imagine new possible codes and new responsibilities for engineering ethics, centering social justice, cultural and epistemic humility, the inherent dignity and worth of all people, and the importance of human relationships. This led to additional canons in ethics codes articulating respect for the right of communities for self-­ determination, sensitivity to dynamics of power and privilege foregrounding marginalized perspectives, and a commitment to resist hegemonic power and systems of oppression. To close this chapter, I invite you to engage in a moral imagination exercise in Box 2.2: What new principles might you propose for engineering ethics? Why are these important to you, and what concrete actions could you take today toward making those a reality? Box 2.2 Exercise 2: Engineering Ethics Imaginaries Think of a set of public values that matter to you, or identify values central to a profession other than engineering that resonate with you. Using these as a springboard or touchstone, what new principles could you propose for engineering ethics that might improve practice in the profession? What new obligations should engineers assume? What is your rationale for proposing these? What could you do to further these ideas in engineering practice?

References Adams, S. G. (2018). Distinguished lecture: 125th anniversary panel. In ASEE annual conference and exhibition, Salt Lake City, UT. Alltucker, K. (2018). As Theranos drama unwinds, former patients claim inaccurate tests changed their lives. USA Today, July 5, 2018. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/07/05/ theranos-­elizabeth-­holmes-­lawsuits-­patients-­harm-­arizona/742008002/ Baker, M., & Gates, D. (2019). Lack of redundancies on Boeing 737 MAX system baffles some involved in developing the jet. Seattle Times, March 26, 2019 [updated March 27, 2019]. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-­aerospace/a-­lack-­of-­redundancies-­on-­737-­ max-­system-­has-­baffled-­even-­those-­who-­worked-­on-­the-­jet/ Barnett, R. L., & Brickman, D. B. (1986). Safety hierarchy. Journal of Safety Research, 17, 49–55. Boal, A. (1992). Games for actors and non-actors (A. Jackson, Trans.). Routledge. Carreyrou, J. (2018). Bad blood: Secrets and lies in a Silicon Valley Startup. Alfred A. Knopf. Cech, E.  A. (2013). The (mis)framing of social justice: Why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers’ ability to think about social injustices. In J.  Lucena (Ed.), Engineering education for social justice. Springer. Cobaugh, D. J. (2015). Opposing pharmacists’ participation in capital punishment: The right thing to do. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 72(16), 1355. https://doi.org/10.2146/ ajhp150465 Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

22

D. Riley

Downey, G.  L. (2012). The local engineer: Normative holism in engineering formation. In S. Christensen, C. Mitcham, B. Li, & Y. An (Eds.), Engineering, development and philosophy. Philosophy of engineering and technology (Vol. 11). Springer. https://doi-­org.ezproxy.lib.purdue.edu/10.1007/978-­94-­007-­5282-­5_14 Dunn, T., Thompson, V., & Jarvis, R. (2019). The dropout [Audio podcast]. ABC Audio. https:// abcaudio.com/podcasts/the-­dropout/ Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed: Transl. by Myra Bergman Ramos. Herder and Herder. Gates, G., Ewing, J., Russell, K., & Watkins, D. (2017). How Volkswagen’s ‘Defeat Devices’ Worked. New York Times, March 16, 2017 [updated]. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/business/international/vw-­diesel-­emissions-­scandal-­explained.html Gelles, D. (2020). Boeing’s 737 Max is a Saga of capitalism gone awry. New York Times, November 24, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/sunday-­review/boeing-­737-­max.html Gelles, D., Kitroeff, N., Nicas, J., & Ruiz, R. (2019). Boeing was ‘Go, Go, Go’ to beat airbus with the 737 Max. New York Times, March 23, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/business/boeing-­737-­max-­crash.html Glinton, S. (2016). We didn’t lie, Volkswagen CEO says of emissions scandal. National Public Radio, January 11, 2016. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-­way/2016/01/11/462682378/ we-­didnt-­lie-­volkswagen-­ceo-­says-­of-­emissions-­scandal Harris, C.  E., Jr. (2013). Engineering ethics: From preventive ethics to aspirational ethics. In D. P. Michelfelder et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 177–187). Springer. Hess, J. L., Beever, J., Strobel, J., & Brightman, A. O. (2017). Empathic perspective-taking and ethical decision-making in engineering ethics education. In D. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, & Q.  Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Exploring boundaries, expanding connections (pp. 163–179). Springer. Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge. Horn, R.  E., & Weber, R.  P. (2007). New tools for resolving wicked problems: Mess mapping and resolution mapping processes. Strategy Kinetics L.L.C. http://www.strategykinetics.com// New_Tools_For_Resolving_Wicked_Problems.pdf Horton, M. (1998). The long haul: An autobiography. Teacher’s College Press. Horton, M., & Freire, P. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change. Temple University Press. Jacobs, J. (2020). Prominent architects group prohibits design of death chambers. New York Times, December 11, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/11/arts/design/american-­institute-­of-­ architects-­execution.html King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossey-Bass. Lambrinidou, Y. (2018). When technical experts set out to “do good”: Deficit-based constructions of “the public” and the moral imperative for new visions of engagement. Michigan Journal of Sustainability, 6(1), 7–16. Langewiesche, W. (2019). What really brought down the Boeing 737 Max? New York Times Magazine, September 18, 2019 [updated January 9, 2021]. https://www.nytimes. com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-­737-­max-­crashes.html National Academy of Engineering. (2008). Changing the conversation: Messages for improving public understanding of engineering. The National Academies Press. https://doi. org/10.17226/12187 NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineers). (2019, July). NSPE code of ethics. https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/Ethics/CodeofEthics/ NSPECodeofEthicsforEngineers.pdf Riley, D. (2008). Engineering and social justice. Morgan and Claypool. Riley, D. M., & Claris, L. (2008). Developing and assessing students’ capacity for lifelong learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(5), 906–916.

2  Engineering Principles: Restoring Public Values in Professional Life

23

Riley, D., & Lambrinidou, Y. (2015). Canons against Cannons? Social justice and the engineering ethics imaginary. In 122nd ASEE annual conference & exposition. Riley, D., Clawson, R., Maksimovic, D., Myers, B., Santiago, I., Stites, N. A., & Taylor, J. L. (2021). Developing engineering formation systems for sustainability. In 128th ASEE annual conference & exposition. Sloan, D. (Executive Producer). (2019, March 15). The dropout [Television broadcast]. In 20/20 [Television Series]. ABC News Productions. Vesilind, P. A. (2006). Peace engineering. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 132(4), 283. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-­3928(2006)132:4(283) Villanueva, I., Gelles, L., Di Stefano, M., Smith, B., Tull, R., Lord, S., Benson, L., Hunt, A., & Riley, D. (2018). What does hidden curriculum in engineering look like and how can it be explored? In Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education annual conference and exposition, minorities in engineering division, June 24–27, 2018, Salt Lake City, UT, Paper ID # 21884, pp. 1–16. Von Baeyer, H. C. (1999). Warmth disperses and time passes: The history of heat. Modern Library. Walther, J., Miller, S. E., & Kellam, N. N. (2012, June). Exploring the role of empathy in engineering communication through a transdisciplinary dialogue. In Paper presented at 2012 ASEE annual conference & exposition, San Antonio, Texas. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-­2% 2D%2D21379 Whitbeck, C. (1995). Teaching ethics to scientists and engineers: Moral agents and moral problems. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1, 299–308.

Chapter 3

What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto for Socially Situated Professional Ethics Mauricio Leonardo Aguilar-Molina, Walter Antônio Bazzo, Luciano Andreatta Carvalho da Costa, Humberto Henriques de Arruda, Édison Renato Pereira da Silva, and Andrés Santa-María “The real problem for the engineer is where to place what he designs or builds and this does not come from engineering, but from the relationship of engineers with the world they inhabit, and that what they are designing makes sense and is desirable” Humberto Maturana Romecin, Chilean neurobiologist, creator of the theory of autopoiesis and the biology of knowing (1928–2021).

Abstract  This chapter seeks to discuss the directions in which engineering should evolve, with emphasis on the case of South America, in two dimensions. The first, at the national level, refers to the choices made by these countries in terms of developing national engineering capability. We maintain that these choices must prioritize, under all circumstances, the minimization of social and human inequality. And the second, at the individual level, is the training of engineers, who are currently eminently concerned with the technical aspects of design solutions. We believe this M. L. Aguilar-Molina Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] W. A. Bazzo Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, SC, Brazil L. A. C. da Costa Universidade Estadual do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil H. H. de Arruda Instituto Militar de Engenharia, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil É. R. P. da Silva Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil A. Santa-María Department of Humanistic Studies, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, San Joaquín, Santiago, Chile © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_3

25

26

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

training leaves out what, in our view, is perhaps the most important part of the civilizing process today: the human question. For this purpose, the following will be discussed: (1) Engineering challenges in the Global South; (2) an analysis of economic and political aspects of Engineering in Latin America; and (3) Engineering from an epistemological, ethical, social and human perspective. This chapter is an argument to recover what we take as the essence of the engineer’s work: having a broad view of the field of possibilities, in order to make a comprehensive reading of a given situation and, from that, formulate a problem to be solved, through a project solution in which the technical, the human and the social variables can be reconciled. We argue that current engineers’ work in Latin America is far from embodying this essence and thus we discuss how education can play a privileged role in approaching a future generation of engineers to this ideal. Keywords  Engineering challenges · Human question · Global south · Engineering ethics · Engineering education

3.1 Introduction This chapter is a synthesis of four papers presented at the Forum on Philosophy, Engineering and Technology, an event held in November 2020. The four papers discuss the desired profile of new engineers and how this profile could and should be developed. The chapter further explores this issue and touches transversal themes to the training of engineers, such as ethics, engineering design and the role of engineers in a world on the brink of collapse, mainly as a result of their professional practice. The beginning of the twentieth century was characterized by the development and consolidation of fundamental industries for humanity, such as the automobile, aviation, synthetic materials and pharmaceutical industries. The development of science and technology was fundamental in both World Wars, boosting applications that opened the “pandora’s box”, placing ethical, social, human and environmental issues on the agenda of discussions regarding the future of humanity – given the evident corruption and subordination from technology and engineering to prevailing political agendas, reflected in the horrors of war. In this line, Van De Poel (2020) outlines three perspectives that delineate concerns with the implications of technology. The first of them – Technology as autonomous and determinate force – sees technology as an inexorable transforming vector of society, with its risks and benefits. The second – technology as a human construct shaped by human interests and values – is guided by the teleological aspect of technologies, seen now not just from the singular and abstract point of view, warning about the impact that cultural, political and value visions embedded in new technologies we may have in society. The third perspective – coevolution of technology and society – shows a concern with the difficulties of dealing with the unpredictability and unintentionality of technologies, where ‘values, needs and expectations of society’, while not immutable, evolve

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

27

along with technologies in a circularity that can generate space for experimentation, creating new dilemmas and risks. Indeed, a series of discussions in the science and technology community focused at delimiting ethically controversial applications, especially in the context of nuclear weapons and the chemical industry. In the US, the discussion about the protection of the environment originated in 1962, with the publication of the book Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson  – a denunciation of the indiscriminate use of pesticides and their consequences on air and water pollution (Carson, 2002). Such concerns were based on a series of disasters with millions of gallons of oil spilling onto California’s beaches or chemical contamination of Ohio’s Cuyahoga River, which spontaneously burst into flames. Astronauts began to show evidence of these disasters by photographing the Earth from space, with the consequent increase in awareness of the rapid depletion of its finite resources (EPA, n.d.) and the acceleration of planetary degradation processes. In the last three decades of the twentieth century, the development of electronics and computing, in addition to biotechnology and nanotechnology fostered disciplinary hybridization, enabling the emergence of new areas such as genetic engineering and nanoengineering. Today, it is understood that most of the technologies of the so-called “Present Future” (Perelmuter, 2021), the near future that takes us to the middle of the twenty-first century, come from at least one of these areas, and above all from their cross intersections (Marr, 2020a; Diamandis & Kotler, 2015). However, if all these advances are bringing great expectations to humanity, they also brought significant impacts and influences on a wide spectrum, including economic, cultural, legal and political. New forms of production and consumption have changed the relationship between human beings and technology and required the development of different regulations at the governmental level. After all these concerns, we find several ethical-cultural issues not yet resolved, which lead engineers to have to make decisions that can, in the long run, change the history of humanity for the worse  – intentionally or not. This is the potential of emerging technologies, which have caused, however paradoxical it may seem, the immense increase in inequality in contemporary civilization. Such changes, roughly speaking, concern, for example: • The place artificial intelligences (AI) will occupy in society and the rights they will have – whether AI will have rights comparable to those of objects (hence no rights), of animals or of humans. AI are currently seen as a sort of object, but the question is: for how long? • The entire ethical-moral debate and the consequent regulatory framework related to implants in the human body. Internal devices that monitor the behavior of the human body, and that can even complement or replace organic organs are a tendency. What is not clear is whether this is desirable and ethical, and in what contexts it should be allowed or prohibited – a heart implant that can substitute a malfunctioning organ is more easily acceptable, but what about an artificial lung, eye, or something completely new that can counter human limitations? Artificial wings? Artificial gill?

28

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

• The entire debate on genetic editing of living beings, particularly humans, in favor of eliminating diseases and “enhancing” desired characteristics (height, strength, reproduction capacity, body shape, intelligence). In addition to this global concern regarding the future of engineering, there is another concern with the National Engineering Capacity (Silva et al., 2015) of specific countries, especially countries in the global South. With small budgets available for technological development and, above all, social development, they need to make difficult choices in order to prioritize investments in one area over others. The more technology development accelerates, the more difficult it becomes for countries with less investment to keep pace without having to depend on evolutionary acceleration leaps (Ribeiro, 1969). It should be noted that access to technology cannot and should not be restricted to issues previously defined by hegemonic countries because, in many cases, these definitions increase geopolitical asymmetries. In the case of the global South, engineering must have the capacity to promote the reduction of inequality. Therefore, as a main focus, this work seeks to discuss the directions of engineering, with emphasis on the case of South America, in two dimensions. The first, at the national level, refers to the choices made by these countries in terms of developing national engineering capability, which must prioritize, under all circumstances, the minimization of social and human inequality. And the second, at the individual level, is the training of engineers, who are currently eminently concerned with the technical aspects of design solutions. We believe that this training leaves out what, in our view, is perhaps the most important part of the civilizing process today: the human question (Bazzo, 2019). For this purpose, the following will be discussed: (1) Engineering challenges in the Global South; (2) an analysis of economic and political aspects of Engineering in Latin America; and (3) Engineering from an epistemological, ethical, social and human perspective.

3.2 Engineering Challenges in the Global South Engineering in the Global South needs to cope with challenges emerging from a growing population experiencing fast urbanization: exploring new energy sources, democratizing water distribution and sewage treatment, waste management, massive transportation. For its part, the growth of extractive economic activities, with high environmental risk, has resulted in an increase in catastrophes – whether due to the action of nature or the collapse of large-scale works such as dams, nuclear plants, viaducts or buildings, all of them with serious environmental consequences, are events that raise fundamental questions about the role and responsibility of engineers, as the consequences of their decisions impact society and the environment.

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

29

The Covid-19 pandemic has greatly affected Latin America, in terms of health, demographics and economics. Infections and deaths were higher compared to the other parts of the world. In facing the pandemic with health technologies, engineering has an important role in building medical equipment. What was seen in the crisis is that having national engineering capability (Silva et al., 2015) is essential to remedy import dependency of equipment with an overpriced, questionable quality and extended delivery times, as was the case of Brazil. From an economic point of view, the national engineering capacity also refers to the capacity to (a) produce global technological innovations and sell them internationally and (b) introduce technologies currently available in other countries to national markets. An example of the second kind of engineering capability is the need to transform the entire chain of education, tourism and food-away-from-home (FAFH) in the face of a reality of prolonged social distance. In the specific case of education in many Latin American countries, there are still significant bottlenecks in access to technologies such as cell phones, computers and the internet (a problem with economic roots, not only technological ones), difficulties in assimilating new technologies (online classes, online tests, online books) and difficulties in innovating (creating new companies, business models and products that enable online education with quality equal to or greater than in-person). According to Costa (2020), in the Brazilian reality, the percentage of teachers who use collaborative activities with students does not reach 7%. In addition, one-third of students are unable to participate in any online activities. In addition, during the pandemic, several multinationals that had branches in Brazil (Ford, Sony, Roche and Mitutoyo, for example) left the country, causing a wave of deindustrialization. This reduced the engineering labor market, and, coupled with currency devaluation, caused brain drain, particularly in areas where global demand is high (mainly information technology-related jobs such as software engineering). In the Chilean case, companies like Maersk, Nivea, Unilever and Lansa closed their factories in 2020 due to the loss of competitive capacity. According to the vice president of the National Competitiveness Commission, this is mainly due to the stagnation in the quality of higher education and the lack of competition generated by the concentration of wealth (small economy and many oligopolies) (La Tercera, 2020). In Mexico, deindustrialization is a phenomenon observed since the 1980s, with a significant advance of the tertiary sector over the industrial one (El Economista, 2017). Such a change in the employment profile is due, in large part, to the fact that many of the inputs used by the industry are imported, with the consequent decrease in value added in their processing, which is transferred to foreign companies. In Argentina, deindustrialization is the result of political processes that coincide with a cycle of accumulation and reproduction of an increasingly diversified and trans-nationalized capital (Schorr, 2012). Similar processes can be observed in other countries in the region, such as Colombia (Echavarría & Villamizar, 2005). In all cases, globalization is the common denominator, which has definitively affected the development of the industrial sector, by prioritizing natural resources and commodities.

30

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

3.3 Engineering and Society in Latin America: Economic and Political Aspects In economic and market terms, engineering serves two different purposes: it is simultaneously a driver of economic indicators’ long-term trends, and a necessary condition for present economic results. This reflects a dual role of engineers in society from an economic point of view: (a) developing new technologies and products and (b) generating production capacity for goods and services. The latter directly influences a country’s GDP, while the former affects the long-term GDP and can be measured by other indices. In recent years, Brazil has had economic results below the necessary to grow on the international stage. After the positive results in the beginning of 2010, a much more difficult reality came about, represented, among other things, by the small share of industry in the Brazilian GDP (less than 10%). Between 2006 and 2016, industry productivity dropped by more than 7%; in the Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index, Brazil dropped from 5th position in 2010 to 29th position in 2016. Brazil ranks 62nd in the Global Innovation Index. According to WIPO (Soumitra Dutta & Wunsch-Vincent, 2020), Brazil and Chile produce less results in innovation than expected for the level of investment. These numbers show the difficulty of Brazilian engineering in achieving both roles in the economy. Brazil’s position in the Global Innovation Index highlights the country’s backwardness in its ability to internalize and develop cutting-edge technologies embedded in products and services. Even when compared to emerging countries, the Brazilian performance leaves something to be desired. Figure  3.1 below, with data available on the World Bank portal, shows how the GDP per capita (in international prices) of the BRICS and Chile evolved in the last three decades.

Fig. 3.1  GDP per capita. (Data from World Bank portal)

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

31

It is possible to notice that Brazil and South Africa are the countries that did not show an upward trend in recent decades, and it is also worth noting the drop in Brazil’s performance as of 2014. On the other hand, Chile has shown consistent growth, especially from 2008 onwards. A question emerges from such comparison between Brazil, Chile, and the other BRICS: can the way in which engineering is taught and practiced in Brazil help explain the poor economic and innovation results the country is having? Neely et al. (2018) argue that engineering tends to lose its disciplinary importance by increasing its involvement with the use of technical artifacts and value-creating economic issues rather than the development of technologies themselves. To regain their professional importance, engineers need new content in terms of design, business, and management. According to the World Economic Forum’s “Jobs of Tomorrow” survey (Ratcheva et al., 2020), it will be necessary to promote a global reskilling revolution, preparing the workforce for information technology jobs. In general terms, the first three industrial revolutions raised production levels, evolved assembly lines, electricity and information technology. The so-called 4th Industrial Revolution is mainly characterized by the importance of technologies that allow the fusion of different worlds: the metric physical world, the nano world, the digital world and the biological world (de Almeida & Cagnin, 2019). Building an exhaustive list of technologies that guide this process is an impossible exercise, not least because new technologies are always generated. On the other hand, there are some that are already mapped as being fundamental in this movement. Some of these technologies (Marr, 2020b) are, for example: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning; Internet of Things; Autonomous Vehicles; 3D and 4D printing and additive manufacturing; and Nanotechnology and Materials Sciences. From the identification of these technologies as central to technological development in the coming decades, it becomes even clearer that engineering courses in Brazil need to be updated now. There is no growing trend in the number of engineers trained with mastery of these areas. It is still possible to notice in Brazil a high number of graduates in older courses, such as Mechanical and Civil Engineering, and a smaller number of graduates in courses closer to the 4th Industrial Revolution, such as Computer Engineering, Mechatronics or Control and Automation. This necessary reskilling of the global workforce is facing difficulties to be implemented in Brazil. Historically, engineering in Brazilian society is understood as one of the three imperial professions, together with medicine and law (Coelho, 1999). However, the last two are different in that they are generally at the service of specific individuals or companies, while engineering has a broader scope and, consequently, its responsibility is more often related to benefit society as a whole than specific people (Habash, 2018). The demand for engineering majors faces cultural barriers related to difficulties in basic mathematics and science education in Brazil. Indeed, all of South America suffers from poor performance on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) (Schleicher, 2019) exam. These difficulties reflect a lower demand for engineering and technology courses, negatively affecting the already deficient availability of professionals in the sector. The Brazilian Association of Information and

32

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

Communication Technology Companies (Brasscom) estimates a need to train 420 thousand technology professionals between 2018 and 2024 (Brasscom, 2020), 70 thousand per year. Considering that the country trains 46 thousand people with a technological profile each year, this mismatch between labor supply and demand represents an opportunity to develop national capability in this area. In addition, despite its importance to socio-economic development, engineering never shared the same social prestige medicine and law have in Brazilian society (Telles, 2014). The lack of prestige of Engineering in the group of three imperial professions deserves a careful analysis. The first question that needs to be answered, and that should be part of engineering training, is: engineering for whom? For society, for engineers, or for investors? The current educational system discourages students’ capacity for innovation and invention by focusing on problem solving rather than problem formulation. This causes them to be molded into an obedient way of reasoning, subservient to those who actually formulate the problems engineers will solve, characteristic of today’s global production systems. Their obedient behavior makes engineers unaware of complex societal issues and of the adverse consequences of their works. Engineering cannot be merely operational and functionalist: it needs to be socially and ethically responsible. As engineers are the main drivers of both the development and application of technologies, Aslaksen (2015) understands that it is necessary to provide students with a proper understanding of the structure and functioning of society and its interfaces with engineering, in order to make a critical evaluation of its consequences. It involves dealing with hidden curricula and their implicit messages about the value of ethics and professionalism (Doorn et al., 2021), a discussion that has the virtue of awakening a critical vision of the society in which engineering is embedded, which can make students less prone to simply accept, as professionals, ethically dubious demands. In fact, in Brazil, there is a clear observation of the little or almost non-existent participation of engineer’s associations in public discussions that, in many cases, affect – sometimes drastically – engineering itself. From the choice to privilege road transportation to the detriment of the rail network in the 1950s, to the demand for investments in energy and infrastructure in the 2000s, their involvement on the political debate is practically nonexistent. The same cannot be said of the legal and medical professional associations, which actively participate in public discussions with a high impact on society. This is because in these professions – medicine and law – there is a direct interface between the profession and society, which does not happen with engineering (Aslaksen, 2015), as it has a broader scope and is inserted in a productive process whose target is broader than specific people. Thus, it is not possible to consider the value of engineering, or any other effect of engineering on society, without considering the associated production process. Costa (2005) and Bazzo and Costa (2019) present some examples of this omission of Engineering and also the case of the participation of the OAB (Brazil’s National Bar Association) in an episode with the Minister of Education. After a

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

33

meeting between OAB’s president and the Minister, the latter gave in to the entity’s request regarding the creation of new Law courses. The absence of engineering from political debate can be seen in two ways: as a result of an alienation about social problems, resulting from an eminently technical training, or as a deliberate action, in the sense of keeping production processes under the exclusive protection of investors, to the detriment of the participation of engineers and other relevant social groups and voices. What can be inferred, in this context, is an evident discredit of Engineering as merely professional training, and not a full-fledged profession.

3.4 A Human, Social, Ethical and Epistemological Analysis of Engineering According to the previous analysis of the current situation in the global South, now we turn our attention to the challenges that engineering must address in order to recover what we take as its essence. Engineering is defined by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET, 1977) as “the profession in which a knowledge of the mathematical and natural sciences gained by study, experience, and practice is applied with judgment to develop ways to utilize, economically, the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of mankind.” The basic elements of this definition can be found in different geographical contexts and point only to the functional aspect of the profession, without contemplating any ethical consideration regarding the conditions for the use of “natural resources and forces for the benefit of humanity”. In fact, as van de Poel (2009) and Luegenbiehl (2009) show, the discussion about the definition of engineering remains open. More specifically, whether such a definition should include normative-teleological elements (e.g., “for the benefit of humanity”) or should it be free of any connotation of values. Davis (1991) emphasizes the importance of understanding engineering as a profession, which means having its members organized to serve others. That is, the profession is organized for public service. According to ABET (1977), engineers must “uphold and advance the integrity, honor and dignity of the engineering profession using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare”. For us, more than ever, due to the consequences presented and detailed in this work, values must be present. Engineering cannot be value-free, it must be ethically situated. If we consider that it is essential to include the human, social and ethical dimension in the definition of engineering, it is up to engineers themselves to change the order of priority in the intricacies of the profession, which is the motto of this chapter.

34

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

3.5 From Ethics to Epistemology Professional ethics has a direct implication on the professional’s responsibility regarding the effects and consequences of the projects carried out. Defining professional ethics depends upon professional knowledge and practice. According to Davis (1991), in engineering, a professional code of ethics is essential to advise individual engineers on how to behave, to judge their conduct and, ultimately, to understand engineering as a profession. All over the world, different normative instruments embody the engineer’s social responsibility through the concept of professional ethics, which, as a set of principles or standards that guide human conduct, needs to underlie the daily practice of engineering. Along these lines, the professional engineering glossary has incorporated a new term in recent decades, closely linked to the concept of professional ethics. Taken from the Anglo-American legal system, the term “compliance” (from the verb to comply, which means to act in accordance with a rule, an internal or external instruction) places ethics and professional responsibility in direct relation to compliance with legislation and contractual requirements. Thus, the adoption of compliance practices is a fundamental agenda for corporations, which must develop and incorporate codes and practices in terms of effective ethical conduct. Codes of ethics for engineers describe principles, objectives, attributes, obligations, prohibitions and rights that guide the exercise of the profession (CONFEA, 2019; CECH, 2012; ASCE, 2020; NSPE, 2019), addressing the duties and conduct that are prohibited and qualifying possible infringements. However, they are silent on the definition of ethics and fail to provide any useful framework for thinking about how ethical and professional responsibility can be taught in engineering schools and practiced in engineering projects. This limited view of official bodies regarding the role of engineering constitutes an obstacle in the training of engineers, whose professional attributions are defined precisely by the systems that govern the profession, as is the case of the CONFEA-CREA system. This concern becomes more relevant if we consider the decrease in the participation of engineers in the formulation of major societal problems or their subordination to private interests, which contrasts with the view of the engineer as a project professional (in the context of design) aiming to serve society as a whole, as defined in classical literature (Bazzo & Pereira, 2011; Krick, 1969) and also by the different currents within the philosophy of engineering and technology addressed by Aravena-­ Reyes (2019). Problems engineers deal with are often poorly defined. According to Rittel and Webber (1984), they can be described as wicked problems, characterized by their unique and non-recurring character, and whose formulation evolves in parallel with their solution throughout the solving process. Often, a solution will be adopted more because of a deadline to solve the problem than because it is actually an optimal solution. Hence, the definition of engineering problems and their consequent solutions are clearly permeated with underlying ethical considerations, which cannot be simply ignored in favor of some sort of technological solution.

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

35

The emergence of projects of increasing complexity and order of magnitude demand multidisciplinary teams, which makes the role of engineering in projects go far beyond technical interchanges between colleagues familiar with professional jargon and knowledge. There are a number of additional goals that must be achieved long before drawings and engineering specifications are completed, or even started. It is the engineer’s responsibility to design project goals, to anticipate and to be accountable for their consequences, especially the unintended ones. For this, they must be able to anticipate the effects of a given project proposal, as well as specify the actions necessary for such results to be achieved and to counter risks for the project’s beneficiaries and the rest of the society. Therefore, the engineer must be strongly committed to the needs of society, as well as the acceptance and effects of his works. The history of engineering records major catastrophic events, as widely reported by the press around the world, which the same media often label as accidents or tragedies. However, on closer inspection, it is clear that many of these events have highly deterministic characteristics and, as a consequence, could have been anticipated and avoided, taking away from them that aura of misfortune associated with the label of tragedy. Since 2015, two natural disasters of large proportions related to mining dams have occurred in Brazil: Mariana (O Globo, 2015), which cost 19 lives, in addition to the devastation of the Rio Doce by a sea of mud that reached the Atlantic Ocean, in Espírito Santo, and the rupture of the Brumadinho dam (Agência Brasil, 2019) caused the death of more than 270 people and the disappearance of an entire village. In the investigations of these disasters, evidence show the responsibility of engineers. From the design of dams using the “upstream raising” technique, considered outdated (although cheaper), to the issue of periodic opinions unduly attesting that there were no risks in the dams, the work of engineers is closely related to the subsequent catastrophic results. This has led to the accountability of engineers in ongoing criminal cases. Additionally, it is possible to reflect on the question posed by Davis (1991): even if an engineer could individually object and refuse to do a specific job, he could be replaced by another engineer who would not object. It is impossible not to question oneself, then, about the ethical and social debates that should take place in engineering courses. Is it enough to teach engineering techniques without this being accompanied by the development of ethical attributes?

3.6 Engineering Education The need to reframe engineering education is evident, as, unlike scientists, who discover the world that exists, engineers create worlds that never existed, develop new ideas and concepts, invent and build devices and structures (Crawley et  al., 2014) and – more than anything – engineers identify, formulate and solve problems in society (Krick, 1969; Bazzo & Pereira, 2011). Engineering design is the essence of the work of engineers and, according to van Gorp and van de Poel (2001), it constitutes an interesting starting point for ethical issues in engineering for educational

36

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

purposes. van Gorp and van de Poel (2001) show that ethical issues can be posed in engineering design processes in two important steps: (1) in formulating problems (requirements, specifications, and design criteria), and (2) in evaluating trade-offs between criteria and making decisions about what are acceptable trade-offs. Investigations into the catastrophes of Mariana and Brumadinho precisely show that engineering as a whole failed in these two aspects, a conclusion that can easily be extended to many other catastrophes. Not only the responsible engineers failed: engineering professional association and engineering schools are also ultimately part of the tragedy. These questions lead us to observe the various movements around the world that have addressed the modernization of engineering education, especially due to the technological transformation experienced since the second half of the twentieth century. With the transformations experienced in recent decades, today’s higher education students, particularly in engineering schools, were born surrounded by many technological resources. Computers with internet, smartphones, on-demand videos in the palm of their hands, among other things, have been part of their lives since early childhood, which makes them very different from previous generations. Young people today have the power to discover things on their own, are more flexible and therefore have a greater capacity to adapt to changes. They are more immediate and, therefore, long-term projects are of little interest to them. Basically, as everything is on Google, society is going through the decrease of importance of the “how-to” question and the increase of importance of the “what-do-I-do-with-this” question. David Goldberg argues in his book “A Whole New Engineer” that the educational environment today is totally different from the Sputnik era, but the culture of engineering education has not changed: “For example, we need to attract more, and more diverse, engineering students today. But women, more than 50% of the world population, are still underrepresented in engineering courses” (Goldberg, 2014). This global trend of transformation of engineering education presents itself with several approaches, which converge in the recommendations for the teaching-­ learning process to be changed, no longer being centered on the teacher  – who transmit knowledge to students who receive it passively, for a model centered on the student – who start to participate actively (Moloney et al., 2018). With this, active learning methods gain increasing importance in the field (Humberto Arruda & Silva, 2021). Among the movements to modernize engineering education, particular emphasis can be placed in the reformulation of the standards for accreditation of engineering courses in the USA (called EC2000) (Lattuca et al., 2006), the CDIO approach (Crawley et  al., 2014) and, in the particular case of Brazil, the new National Curriculum Guidelines for Engineering courses (called the new Engineering DCN) (Brasil, 2019). In the Brazilian case, however, awakening interest in engineering is not easy. Such educational difficulty manifests itself at all levels: science teaching in elementary and high school is centered on the repetition of scientific concepts, rather than on the familiarization of students with the process of observation and discovery that characterizes scientific activity, including social science. Higher education, especially engineering, suffers from the same deficiency. In a

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

37

world where everything is on Google, except what has not yet been discovered, it makes sense to emphasize the process of discovering, creating and understanding the civilizing process (Bazzo & Costa, 2019). In addition to the pedagogical change itself, the expansion of the use of active learning aims to develop students’ critical thinking and analytical skills. When trying to answer the question “what engineering do we want?”, it is inevitable to emphasize that engineers need to be connected to the needs of the society around them, and not just apply technically adequate solutions to solve problems that they have not thought about or formulated. Thus, it is possible to see that active learning methods have a relevant role in the transformation of the field but are the only change necessary toward the sort of engineering we want.

3.7 From the Social to the Human: The Need for a New Civilization Equation Studies on Science, Technology and Society (STS) argue for the need to develop more than simply piling up more technologies to maximize wellbeing: humanity needs a new civilizing equation (Bazzo & Pereira, 2019). The more technologies increase human productivity and optimize time, people feel the exact opposite: that they have less time. Society is increasingly dependent on companies whose assets are user data provided for free by them (Lanier, 2018). Although we seem to have the world in our hands, we are not happier (Twenge, 2018). In Brazil, engineering culture has been restrictive to critical views, always placing itself on the side of hegemonic power. This option is, in many cases, naturalized, as if it were a contingency of reality and there was nothing else to do (de Souza, 2017, 2018). The consequences of the current civilizing process are already being observed: separatist movement in Spain; BREXIT; construction of a wall between the US and Mexico; and, in Brazil, the proliferation of an ideologically constructed hatred for different worldviews that hampers coexistence between political left and right and that can lead to extreme consequences in the 2022 presidential elections. We are reaching levels of inequality from the so-called Belle Époque period (Piketty, 2013), with stark implications for developing countries. While in the 1960s to 1980s the direct interference of the great powers, in particular the US, was necessary through the support of the dictatorships that were implemented in Latin America, the same was not necessary from the 1990s on. The Washington Consensus agenda promoted a cultural revolution whose main and immediate focus was the end of the USSR, but which actually contributed to starting the downfall of social democracy, especially in Europe. This reality has important repercussions for engineering, and for the role that councils, class associations and engineering schools have played in the face of some historical facts that had a high impact on engineering, such as the “Oil is Ours” movement back in the 1960s, EMBRAER’s privatization (1994) and the pre-salt oilfield discovery (2006). In these three important

38

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

historical moments, despite the contribution engineers could bring, there was no mobilization of national engineering, even in the face of a broad and polarized discussion carried out in society. The same can be seen in the recent privatization of EMBRAER, a Brazilian company considered the third largest producer of aviation jets in the world. The silence of the Engineering class in the face of this operation was embarrassing. Last but not least, the discovery of the Pre-Salt oil reserve was on the agenda of a recent impeachment process for Brazilian President Dilma Roussef. Once the process was consolidated, the market for the exploration of the Pre-Salt was internationalized and the national monopoly for exploration was eliminated, showing how much the discussions about “Oil is Ours” were still latent.

3.8 Conclusion It is widely recognized that there is a lack of political, human and social studies in engineering education, and especially of reflections that can lead us towards a less cruel and individualistic civilization process. We risk having engineering students and professors solve technical problems only through technique and no longer considering that engineering problems are human problems. From here it can be seen that the current engineering training is in general outdated, with the aggravating factor of seeing, from past experience, that, even with clear curricular guidelines, academia does not apply them. Additionally, many engineering professors do not express a genuine concern for the direction of the country and do not engage in political debate. This is a worrying fact, as it shows that this “neutral” view of engineering education can have disastrous consequences. In Brazil, this neutrality is reflected in the omission of engineering, as an interest group, in different situations, from the time of the “Oil is ours” campaign to the delivery of the Pre-Salt to foreign companies, where engineers were quiet despite the collapse of national engineering and the great loss of technical jobs, in domestic industry in general, and engineering in particular, most of which went abroad. In contrast to the lack of reflection, it is clear that students are eager for a new vision of engineering and the need to go beyond standardized technical training. It is necessary to lead them to philosophical reflection, to discuss the philosophy of technology and ethics and related topics, but not from a merely contemplative perspective, but an active one. According to Abaté (2011), training engineers to be moral individuals is an unfeasible task, although it is possible to stimulate the cognitive and practical process, with the use of case studies involving situations, which, even with some limitations, contributes to see the ethical dimension of engineering problems and extract realistic solutions. According to Kanemitsu (2018), the philosophy of technology can provide a new framework for engineering ethics; especially, Peter-Paul Verbeek’s theory of mediation (Verbeek, 2005), apud (Kanemitsu, 2018), which proposes to “follow” technological development, not merely aiming to reject or accept new technologies. Kanemitsu (2018) believes that it is necessary to teach future engineers not only about conventional issues, but also about issues of

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

39

philosophy of technology, as a fundamental basis of the engineering ethics of the future. The importance of considering the epistemological formation of the professor is evident, in order to strengthen the idea that engineering problems are not just technical problems. On the other hand, they show that there is no magic formula to solve them based on defined variables without having as a background an essential control volume, which is planet Earth, where contemporary civilization is inserted. And, in this sense, there it is possible to talk about any methodology without understanding and defining an engineering design problem. However, it is possible to help students to discover how most moral dilemmas focus on certain patterns. Additionally, discovering that recognizing these patterns and knowing how to act in these situations increases the chances of adequately solving real problems when they occur. The use of philosophical problem-solving techniques and appropriate case studies can encourage students to develop the conceptual tools necessary for this process (Abaté, 2011). In the globalized world we live in, it is important to highlight the importance of communication in the construction of these conceptual tools for ethical judgment. Kroesen and van der Zwaag (2009) point out that decisions are more a result of a group process than determined solely by individual reflective reasoning. Thus, they are strongly affected by the quality of communication. Luegenbiehl (2009) argues that this debate on ethical principles needs to emphasize two important elements: (i) the connection of engineering to the business environment and (ii) the need to understand the variety of cultural value systems in the world. In the context of this discussion, there is evidence that in Brazil professionals are being trained to be “obedient engineers”  – engineers who work from previously formulated problems and serve a specific function in an unchanging grand scheme of things, mainly because it is based on the promise of a favorable political and economic insertion, as a legacy of the scheme of the imperial professions (Coelho, 1999). This, in fact, is the denial of engineering as a profession. The essence of the engineer’s work consists precisely in having a broad view of the field of possibilities, in order to make a comprehensive reading of the situation and, from that, formulate the problem to be solved, through a project solution in which a greater number of variables can be reconciled – technical, human and social –, as the classical literature clearly recommends (Bazzo & Pereira, 2011; Krick, 1969). Therefore, it is clear that it is necessary to broaden the discussion on engineering education as a whole, in addition to the fact that a code of ethics is not in itself sufficient to prevent the formation of “obedient engineers”. Herkert (2001) has already pointed out the importance of professional societies in supporting the success of the existence of a code of ethics, but he also identified the great influence that corporations have on such societies as a risk. In this sense, there is an explicit demand from the Brazilian productive sector, articulated around the movement “Business Mobilization for Innovation” (MEI, n.d.) which, in a series of meetings over the past few years, has discussed engineering education in Brazil (MEI, n.d.), having as main motivation the need to train “more and better engineers” (ABENGE, 2018). Such demands call for a different

40

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

vision by engineering schools, in addition to the need for significant changes to break down the watertight walls of the traditional disciplinary vision. More than knowing it as an abstract theoretical concept, it is necessary for the engineer to incorporate ethics as a way of life. To achieve this, students must be provided with elements that enable the development of a more sophisticated and not just intuitive moral reasoning, in order to make them competent engineers from both a professional and citizen point of view. There is no condition to think of a solution without considering all the contemporary variables in engineering education. The omission of the engineer class was evident in the context of the current Brazilian political and economic degradation, which saw high technology, internationalized Brazilian engineering companies being decimated and dragging with them a huge number of high-quality jobs. This shows that the solution to the problems in the training of new engineers is not simply a methodological issue, but an epistemological and ideological attitude of the professors who work in the area.

References Abaté, C. J. (2011). Should engineering ethics be taught? Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 583–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-­010-­9211-­9 ABENGE. (2018). Inovação na Educação em Engenharia – proposta de diretrizes para o curso de engenharia: proposta conjunta ABENGE – MEI/CNI. http://www.abenge.org.br/documentos/ PropostaDCNABENGEMEI_CNI.pdf ABET. (1977). Code of ethics of engineers. ABET. Agência Brasil. (2019). https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/geral/noticia/2019-­11/negligencia-­ causou-­tragedia-­de-­brumadinho-­diz-­escritor. Accessed 2 May 2021. Aravena-Reyes, J.  A. (2019). Pensar a Formação do Engenheiro para o Antropoceno. In 1o Encontro Latino-Americano de Engenharia e Sociedade. https://doity.com.br/anais/ engenhariaesociedade/trabalho/88897 Arruda, H., & Silva, É. R. (2021). Assessment and evaluation in active learning implementations: Introducing the engineering education active learning maturity model. Education Sciences, 11, 690. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110690 ASCE. (2020). Code of ethics. https://www.asce.org/code-­of-­ethics/. Accessed 4 May 2021. Aslaksen, E. W. (2015). The relationship between engineers and society: Is it currently fulfilling its potential? Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales, 148, 159–165. https://royalsoc.org.au/images/pdf/journal/RSNSW_148-­2_Aslaksen.pdf Bazzo, W. A. (2019). In E. de UFSC (Ed.), De Técnico e de Humano, questões contemporâneas. Bazzo, W. A., & Costa, L. A. C. (2019). A Revolução 4.0 e seus impactos na formação do professor em Engenharia. Revista da Abenge. Bazzo, W. A., & do Pereira, L. T. V. (2011). Introdução à Engenharia: Conceitos, Ferramentas e Comportamentos. Editora UFSC. Bazzo, W. A., & do Pereira, L. T. V. (2019). Rompendo paradigmas na educação em engenharia. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad  – CTS, 14(41), 169–183. http:// www.revistacts.net/wp-­content/uploads/2020/03/vol14-­nro41-­cts41.pdf Brasil. (2019). Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do Curso de Graduação em Engenharia. https:// www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-­/resoluÇÃo-­no-­2-­de-­24-­de-­abril-­de-­2019-­85344528. Accessed 4 May 2021. Brasscom. (2020). Relatório Setorial 2020 Macrossetor de TIC. São Paulo. https://brasscom.org. br/relatorio-­setorial-­2020-­macrossetor-­de-­tic/ Carson, R. (2002). Silent spring. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

3  What Sort of Engineering Do We Want? How Far Are We From It? A Manifesto…

41

CECH. (2012). Código de Ética del Colegio de Ingenieros de Chile. https://www.ingenieros.cl/ wpcontent/uploads/2012/06/CODIGO-DE-ETICA5.pdf. Accessed 4 May 2021. Coelho, E. C. (1999). As Profissões Imperiais: medicina, engenharia e advocacia no Rio de Janeiro, 1822-1930. Record, Rio de Janeiro. CONFEA. (2019). Código de Ética Profissional da Engenharia, da Agronomia, da Geologia, da Geografia e da Meteorologia (11a Edição). https://www.confea.org.br/sites/default/files/ uploads-­imce/CodEtica11ed1_com_capas_no_indd.pdf. Accessed 4 May 2021. Costa, L. A. C. (2005). A Engenharia e a educação a distância: uma possível e necessária mediação. In Educação a Distância em Processo (pp. 71–84). Evangraf. Costa, L.  A. C. (2020). Desafios e avanços educacionais em tempos da COVID-19. Revista de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre Ensino Tecnológico (EDUCITEC), 6, e152920. https://doi. org/10.31417/educitec.v6.1529 Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D. R., & Edström, K. (2014). Rethinking engineering education: The CDIO approach. Springer International Publishing. da Telles, L. F. S. (2014). Libertas entre Sobrados: mulheres negras e trabalho doméstico em São Paulo (1880–1920). Alameda Editorial. Davis, M. (1991). Thinking like an engineer: The place of a code of ethics in the practice of a profession. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 20(2), 150–167. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265293 de Almeida, J. S. G., & Cagnin, R. F. (2019). A indústria do futuro no Brasil e no mundo. https:// iedi.org.br/media/site/artigos/20190311_industria_do_futuro_no_brasil_e_no_mundo.pdf de Souza, J. (2017). A Elite do Atraso. Estação Brasil. de Souza, J. (2018). A classe média no espelho. Estação Brasil. Diamandis, P. H., & Kotler, S. (2015). Bold: How to go big, create wealth and impact the world. Simon and Schuster. Doorn, N., Michelfelder, D. P., Barrella, E., Bristol, T., Dechesne, F., Fritzsche, A., et al. (2021). Reimagining the future of engineering. In D. P. Michelfelder & N. Doorn (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of the philosophy of engineering (pp. 736–743). Taylor & Francis. Echavarría, J.  J., & Villamizar, M. (2005). El Proceso Colombiano de Desindustrialización. Bogotá. https://www.banrep.gov.co/es/el-­proceso-­colombiano-­desindustrializacion El Economista. (2017). https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/empresas/Industria-­mexicana-­especie-­ en-­peligro-­de-­extincion-­20170521-­0067.html EPA. (n.d.). https://www.epa.gov/history/origins-­epa. Accessed 4 May 2021. Goldberg, D. (2014). A whole new engineer: The coming revolution in engineering education. Threejoy Associates. Habash, R. (2018). Green engineering: Innovation, entrepreneurship, and design. CRC Taylor and Francis. Herkert, J. R. (2001). Future directions in engineering ethics research: Microethics, macroethics and the role of professional societies. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7(3), 403–414. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11948-­001-­0062-­2 Kanemitsu, H. (2018). New trends in engineering ethics – A Japanese perspective (pp. 243–256). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­91029-­1_17 Krick, E. V. (1969). Introduction to engineering and engineering design (2nd ed.). Wiley. Kroesen, O., & van der Zwaag, S. (2009). Teaching ethics to engineering students: From clean concepts to dirty tricks (pp. 227–237). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­90-­481-­2804-­4_19 La Tercera. (2020). https://www.latercera.com/pulso/noticia/seguidilla-­de-­ c i e r r e -­d e -­p l a n t a s -­d e -­e m p r e s a s -­a l a r m a n -­p o r -­c o m p e t i t i v i d a d -­d e -­c h i l e / BSL4JMRPUFH3NGV56IKSHYYMSY/ Lanier, J. (2018). Ten arguments for deleting your social media accounts right now. Henry Holt & Company. Lattuca, L. R., Terenzini, P. T., & Volkwein, J. F. (2006). ENGINNERING CHANGE – A study of the impact of EC2000. https://www.abet.org/wp-­content/uploads/2015/04/EngineeringChange-­ executive-­summary.pdf Luegenbiehl, H.  C. (2009). Ethical principles for engineers in a global environment. In Philosophy of engineering and technology – An emerging agenda (pp. 147–159). https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­90-­481-­2804-­4_13

42

M. L. Aguilar-Molina et al.

Marr, B. (2020a). The intelligence revolution: Transforming your business with AI (1st ed.). Kogan Page. Marr, B. (2020b). Tech trends in practice: The 25 technologies that are driving the 4th industrial revolution (1st ed.). Willey. MEI. (n.d.). As indústrias brasileiras precisam de políticas públicas que atendam exatamente suas necessidades. Mobilização Empresarial pela Inovação. http://www.portaldaindustria.com.br/ cni/canais/mei/ Moloney, C., Badenhorst, C., & Rosales, J. (2018). Fostering subjectivity in engineering education: Philosophical framework and pedagogical strategies. In A.  Fritzsche & S.  J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp.  201–216). Springer International Publishing. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­91029-­1_14 Neely, A., Fell, S., & Fritzsche, A. (2018). Manufacturing with a big M – The grand challenges of engineering in digital societies from the perspective of the Institute for Manufacturing at Cambridge University (pp. 191–200). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­91029-­1_13 NSPE. (2019). Code of ethics for engineers. https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/ pdfs/Ethics/CodeofEthics/NSPECodeofEthicsforEngineers.pdf O Globo. (2015). http://g1.globo.com/minas-­gerais/noticia/2015/11/barragem-­de-­rejeitos-­se-­ rompe-­em-­distrito-­de-­mariana.html Perelmuter, G. (2021). Present future: Business, science, and the deep tech revolution. Fast Company Press. Piketty, T. (2013). O Capital no Século XXI. Editora Intrínseca. Ratcheva, V., Leopold, T. A., & Zahidi, S. (2020). Jobs of tomorrow mapping opportunity in the new economy. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Jobs_of_Tomorrow_2020.pdf Ribeiro, D. (1969). In A.  Editorial (Ed.), Os brasileiros: Teoria do Brasil (Série Estudos de Antropologia da Civilização). Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1984). Planning problems are wicked problems. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in design methodology. Wiley. Schleicher, A. (2019). PISA 2018  – Insights and interpretations. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/ PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf Schorr, M. (2012). La desindustrialización como eje del proyecto refundacional de la economía y la sociedad en Argentina, 1976-1983. América Latina en la Historia Económica, 19(3), 31–56. http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1405-­22532012000300002&ln g=es&nrm=iso Silva, E. R., Bartholo, R., & Proença, D. (2015). Engineering Brazil: National engineering capability at stake (pp. 95–104). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­16169-­3_4 Soumitra Dutta, B. L., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2020). The global innovation index 2020 – Who will finance innovation? https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2020.pdf Twenge, J. M. (2018). iGen: por que as crianças superconectadas de hoje estão crescendo menos rebeldes, mais tolerantes, menos felizes e completamente despreparadas para a vida adulta. Editora Nversos. van de Poel, I. (2009). Philosophy and engineering: Setting the stage. In Philosophy of engineering and technology  – An emerging agenda2 (pp.  1–11). https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­90-­481-­2804-­4_1 Van De Poel, I. (2020). Three philosophical perspectives on the relation between technology and society, and how they affect the current debate about artificial intelligence. Human Affairs, 30(4), 499–511. https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-­2020-­0042 van Gorp, A., & van de Poel, I. (2001). Ethical considerations in engineering design processes. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(3), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/44.952761 Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Chapter 4

Freedom and Standards in Engineering Erik W. Aslaksen

Abstract  The importance of standards in engineering is undisputed; the assertion put forward is that, in infrastructure projects, there has been an increasing tendency to use standards as a means of strengthening contractual positions in a manner that reduces the engineers’ freedom and ability to optimise project outcomes. The engineering context, as well as the type of standards involved are defined, and the problem that arises due to the treatment of process standards as legal documents is described. A related issue regarding engineering education is raised at the end as a personal comment. Keywords  Freedom · Creativity · Design · Commercial risk · Legal aspects · Constraints · Contracts

4.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to draw attention to an issue that I became increasingly aware of in the course of a 50+ years career in industry, transitioning from product development and manufacturing to infrastructure projects, and that is a certain restriction of the engineer’s freedom through inappropriate application of standards. Consequently, following this brief introduction, the chapter is organised in four sections. Section 4.2 defines the particular engineering context within which this issue is raised, although it is probably relevant in a wider context as well. Section 4.3 focuses on the relationships between freedom, responsibility, and risk, and on the means of controlling these. Section 4.4 gives a short introduction to standards and their use in engineering, and it also discusses the relationship between freedom and creativity, as it applies to engineering. Section 4.5 then brings it all together by identifying how standards can  be, and often are, misused as the E. W. Aslaksen (*) Independent researcher, Allambie Heights, NSW, Australia © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_4

43

44

E. W. Aslaksen

elements of a legal framework, and the resulting impact on the role of the engineer. A brief concluding section presents a personal comment on the relevance of engineering education to this issue. A philosophical aspect is present through all of this, in that the issue under consideration illustrates a basic conflict in the concept of freedom – between the individual and society, or between individual freedom and the common good. Superficially, one would think that in engineering there would be no such conflict; the engineer’s role is obviously to serve the common good. But, as I shall attempt to describe in the last section, the conflict is not directly between the engineer’s freedom and the common good; the conflict arises through who determines what constitutes the common good.

4.2 The Engineering Context Engineering can be defined as the application of technology to meet defined requirements. (A discussion of the definition of engineering can be found in (Aslaksen, 2013, section B2.4), see also (Aslaksen, 2018b)). Technology is engineering’s resource base, consisting of a knowledge base and a construction base. The knowledge is presented partly as application-independent knowledge, often based on science, and partly as application-specific knowledge based mainly on experience, in the form of standards for the objects of the design as well as for the design methodology itself. The construction base contains innumerable standardised construction elements, from fasteners to microprocessors; they provide the foundation for efficiency of the design process and cost-effective realisation of the engineer’s design. The purpose of engineering is to meet a societal need. This broad definition requires engineers to collaborate with other disciplines, as was argued already in (Aslaksen, 1996) and more recently, under the heading of Manufacturing with a big M, in (Neely et al., 2018). The need may appear directly, as in the need for a particular product, or indirectly as the need for a new manufacturing process or a new device, in order to improve the realisation of basic functions. The latter type of engineering is generally classified as Research and Development (R&D); its direct purpose is to increase the technology base, and a typical example would be the development of the transistor as a replacement for the vacuum tube. The former type of engineering may also contribute to the technology base, as engineers, together with other members of the technical workforce, are always looking for better ways to achieve the purpose of their work, but it is important to realise that the by far greatest proportion of engineering is the application of existing technology, with only a small proportion concerned with developing new technology. This relationship between engineering and technology was discussed in some detail in (Aslaksen, 2015) and is illustrated in the following figure from that article (Fig. 4.1). Engineering might also be defined as whatever engineers do in their professional capacity (Aslaksen, 2017, p. 115) – a very wide field of activities, from advanced research into quantum devices to advising financial institutions on the viability of

45

4  Freedom and Standards in Engineering New technology

Engineers

Science Needs

Technology Technical

Services

workforce Obsolete technology

Fig. 4.1  The interaction with technology by engineers and the technical workforce. The dotted arrows indicate that all engineering projects provide some input to technology in the form of experience, and the subdivision of Engineers illustrates the two types of engineering. Services include products

proposed investments. The arguments presented here will be illustrated by observations from a relatively narrow segment of this field: the activities of engineers in the construction industry as opposed to in the manufacturing industry. That is, in projects such as railways, mines, power stations, manufacturing plants, etc., and in many countries, including Australia, these infrastructure projects account for the majority of projects by capital cost. The context in which the engineering in infrastructure projects is performed is a contractual one, between the Engineer and the Principal representing the Stakeholders. The nature of both the Principal and the Stakeholders, as well as the nature of the relationships between them and the Engineer, depend on which of the myriad of contractual arrangements is adopted for a particular project and on the stage of the project covered by the contract, but in any case, the requirements on the Engineer are contained in a contract, and the role of engineering within a project is indicated in Fig. 4.2. In this picture, engineering develops the Works (this is a common name for the ‘product’ of a construction project), as well as a project to create, operate, and maintain the Works, so that when the Works are put into operation, they deliver the required service (where we generalise service to include product). The degree to which the performance of these three entities – the project, the operation, and the service – satisfies the contract requirements is a measure of the quality of the engineering. Within this context, the central activity is design  – the description of a solution. The output of the engineering process – indicated by b in this picture and consisting mainly of specifications, drawings, and instructions – contains the information required to create the Works. It also contains requirements on the manufacturing or construction process, which represent the engineer’s best assessment of what will provide assurance of a successful outcome.

46

E. W. Aslaksen

Fig. 4.2  The context of engineering in infrastructure projects. Here a represents the contract, with requirements on the service, the Works, and the operation of the Works; b contains the output of the engineering, with requirements on the construction of the Works and on its operation

As per the context shown in Fig. 4.2, engineering is tied in intrinsically to the terms of the contract to which it answers. These terms are typically set out in three main parts of the contract relating to the legal/financial requirements (payments, default, duty of care, safety, ownership, confidentiality, etc.); the project requirements (timeframe, process management, documentation, etc.); and the technical requirements (performance, life cycle cost, human factors and safety, availability, resilience, operating and storage requirements, etc.) of the project. All of these represent specific conditions constraining the engineering activity, often referring to specific standards or guidelines to be followed to a greater or lesser extent. In infrastructure projects, there are basically two types of design. The one that comes immediately to mind is the design of the Works; the other – the design of the process to create the works, through all the stages from pre-concept design to successful service delivery – is often given less emphasis. But it is no less important in influencing the project outcome, and it is the part of design I am focusing on here. Also, in the following, it is important to recognise that what society experiences is not technology as some abstract force that has good or bad features, but applications of technology in the form of industrial projects. Engineers are today almost completely embedded in this industrial framework, and the close integration within a multi-disciplinary team in industry is different to the working environment experienced by other professionals, such as doctors or lawyers, and it places additional constraints on the freedom of the engineer. They are additional in the sense of arising from considerations that are unrelated to the aim of providing the most cost-­ effective solution to meeting the stated requirements, and are often of a political nature, or arising from underlying business strategies. And the relationship between engineers and society, including both the requirements of society on the engineer and the limitations placed on the engineer’s freedom to respond to these requirements, has to be seen through this industrial lens (Aslaksen, 2017). It is by recognising these differences that we can understand how a certain tension has arisen within engineering projects, with a shift in importance from engineering aspects to legal aspects, and this is pursued in Sect. 4.5.

4  Freedom and Standards in Engineering

47

The position of the engineer within industry, and the relationship between engineers as employees and the industrial environment in which they are employed, including political and social constraints and influences, is not a new issue and is one that is well understood in the fPET community. A great example of this was documented by Sun Lie in Decision-Making in the 120 MN Shanghai Hydraulic Forging Press Project: Walking a Tightrope Between Politics and Technology (Sun, 2018). An analysis of the relationship between engineering and society with regard to innovation was provided by Albrecht Fritzsche in Open Innovation and the Core of the Engineer’s Domain (Fritzsche, 2017). The potentially conflicting loyalties to employer and to society inherent in the capitalist system was raised already by Thorstein Veblen (1904, 1921) and placed in a modern framework by Tuna Baskoy in Thorstein B. Veblen’s Philosophy of Technology and Modern Capitalism (Baskoy, 2018), and questions about the professional independence of engineers and the dominant role of industry in modern society was raised more recently by Langdon Winner (1977, 1980), David F.  Noble (1977), and Edwin Layton (1971), among others.

4.3 Freedom, Responsibility, and Risk Freedom is a concept we meet frequently and in many contexts, such as in philosophy, politics, and social science, and also more specifically as freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and so on. The concept of freedom has been at the core of various activities over the last few centuries, ranging from very practical ones, such as the opposition to slavery, to highly esoteric speculations in philosophy. This wide scope can be narrowed considerably by two means: Firstly, by realising that the concept can be split into freedom to, in the sense of choice of action, and freedom from, in the sense of the absence of constraint. Secondly, by specifying the context in which the concept is applied; there is a difference between the freedom of a football player to play within the rules of the game and the freedom of an artist in creating a painting or a sculpture. Freedom of the individual is sometimes promoted in absolute terms, as an inalienable right, but in reality, it is always subject to a compromise between the benefits of restricting individual choice in the interest of efficient cooperation and the potential cost of foregone individual contributions. In society, the restrictions are formulated in terms of laws, rules, and customs; in engineering the professional restrictions are mainly in the form of standards and various types of constraints. Freedom is a central issue in both philosophy and sociology; a standard reference is the major work of Orlando Patterson (1991), a more recent article on freedom in the context of the relationship between the individual and society is (Christman, 2004). Given that fPET is concerned with both philosophical and social aspects of engineering, as evidenced by the interest participants in fPET conferences have shown in both, it is reasonable to assert that the concept of freedom is a highly relevant component of any deeper understanding of the nature of engineering within

48

E. W. Aslaksen

the fPET discourse. It is a component of great importance, both for engineering and for society, in this time of unprecedented rate of change in the involvement of technology and its applications in the evolution of society. An evolution that would seem to indicate a bright future for engineering, but the reality is that the interest in engineering, at least in Australia, is declining among the young. And it is not difficult to see the main reason for this. Industry, which is the environment in which engineering takes place, has changed its structure and focus from the excitement of realising the engineer’s vision for an improvement in mankind’s existence – as evidenced in such names of industrial firms as Bell, Benz, Brown, Boveri, Daimler, Eiffel, Edison, Marconi, Siemens, and Westinghouse – to a focus on realising opportunities for investing the ever-accumulating capital and on maximising the return on these investments, to which I shall return in Sect. 4.5. Although the detailed meaning and implication of the concept depend on the particular context in which it is used, there is something that is common to all contexts – a core or essence of the concept of freedom. This is the realm of philosophy, and it is expressed in terms of will – the ability to do otherwise than one actually did, and the responsibility of choice. The essence is the freedom of the will; not a slave to passion or instinct, nor to the arbitrary will of another. This makes freedom a particularly human concept, and thus, the context in which the concept exists is the human condition, which is a social condition. That is, the realisation of freedom depends on the particular society, and as society evolves, so must the realisation of freedom in terms of restrictions and affordances. The same is true within engineering; as it evolved and its importance in society increased, so did the responsibility for the effects of its products on society. Both in terms of safety and environmental impact and in terms of economic performance; there was a shift in the attitude to technology from “Can it be done?” to “Should it be done?” and a corresponding increase in the constraints and responsibility placed on engineering. Engineering firms and their engineers are liable for the consequences of any defects in their work, and as a result the issue of financial (and legal) risk is a major consideration in the planning and execution of infrastructure projects and has given rise to risk assessment as a special task and to professional indemnity (PI) insurance as a means of controlling the risk. For the practising engineer, the issue becomes one of navigating projects through their lifecycles, from conception to completion, evaluating the unavoidable changes affecting all projects, and standards play an important role. To understand the full extent of their role in reference to the engineer’s freedom in this process, it is useful to start with a brief review of some basic consideration.

4.4 Standards in Engineering Even though the idea of a standard has been around for a long time, starting with weights and measures, but then soon relating to manufactured items, as evidenced by the wheel separation on wagons in ancient China and Rome, the standardisation

4  Freedom and Standards in Engineering

49

effort only gained prominence as part of the Industrial Revolution. Today, there are many organisations involved on several levels: international (ISO, IEC, ITU), national (DIN, ANSI, BSI, SAC, etc.), professional organisations (e.g., IEEE), and specialised organisations (e.g., NASA, ESA, railways), and as industry representatives provide a main part of the development effort, it is noted that standards can be used as a strategic tool for promoting commercial interests and gaining competitive advantage. In the context of this chapter, as defined in Sect. 4.2, we are concerned with only a small segment of what is, even restricted to engineering, a vast population of standards, and as it is quite a complex subject matter, a good approach is to start out with an overview in the form of a taxonomy tailored to this context. And a first level of partitioning is into three categories: • General standards that apply to engineers as members of society  – moral and ethical standards, and the laws and regulation that govern the behaviour and duties of all citizens. • Standards that express the duties and responsibilities of any professional group vis-à-vis the rest of society, arising from its specialised knowledge and privileged status, and often expressed as a duty of care. • Standards that relate specifically to the process of engineering and that require an engineering background for their proper application. The standards in the last category are the only ones considered in this chapter, and they can be further subdivided into four categories: (a) Standards that define construction elements, including materials. (b) Standards that define requirements on products and classes of products. (c) Standards that define the ontology of technology, including language, symbols, measurable quantities and how to measure them. (d) Standards that define requirements on the process of engineering – on activities and how to document them. The distinction between items in (a) and (b) – that is, between a construction element and a product  – depends on the particular area of engineering in question; what is a product to one engineer is a construction element to another. The standards in categories (a) and (b) include standards on materials, construction elements, documentation and data, and products, including software; the latter in the form of performance and safety standards, and the proper use of these standards is well understood, and not really a restriction on the engineer’s freedom. On the contrary, without standardised construction elements, engineers would get bogged down in repetitive detail and not be able to exercise their creativity; no engineer in his or her right mind would design nuts and bolts or electrical components for an infrastructure project. Another, and very general benefit is the improved efficiency and accuracy of communication within all processes concerned with the production and exchange of goods. The effort involved in producing documentation in the form of reports, instructions, and specifications is reduced by orders of magnitude by reference to

50

E. W. Aslaksen

standards, and the probability of errors is reduced accordingly. Standards contribute to the acceptance and understanding of new technology, but it is also true that they can promote solutions beyond their use-by date and act as a barrier to alternatives. When we turn to standards on the process of engineering – that is, to standards in category (d) – we find a somewhat different situation with regard to the impact on the freedom of the engineer, and there are two reasons for this: The first is that whereas a thing remains the same, independently of how or where it is applied, and the standard defining it says nothing about where it is to be used, a process is usually dependent on the circumstances in which it is performed. No two projects are exactly alike, so while the standards define activities and deliverables that support project execution, there is always an element of choice and a process of tailoring the requirements of the standards to the characteristics of a particular project. In this sense, process standards have a dual nature – both prescriptive and didactic. The second reason is that major infrastructure projects go through a number of stages over a long period of time, and usually involve a great number of subcontractors and suppliers, so that there are bound to be unforeseen delays and technical problems. There can be changes in legislation, and election outcomes may result in a change of priorities. Consequently, the design of the engineering process needs to be dynamic, and it is the hallmark of a skilled engineer that projects progress smoothly and finish on time despite the inevitable unexpected changes along the way. So, for both of these reasons, engineers need to have a degree of freedom in deciding what activities to progress and the timing of their deliverables. A successful project needs to be created; it does not appear as the result of applying a fixed formula. This creativity is expressed as being able to identify and understand all the factors that influence a project, and then to combine them in a way that optimises the outcome. The creativity of the engineer lies in envisioning the possible project executions that will meet the client’s needs and the contract’s requirements. The freedom of the engineer in the current context is the ability to pursue that creativity and determine the optimal course of action as the project develops. This dynamic process can be likened to playing chess – having an initial strategy and then being able to modify it in response to the moves of the opponent as they occur by looking several moves ahead for their likely consequences. (This may perhaps be a somewhat unfortunate analogy, as computers now win against Grand Masters every time.)

4.5 The Current Situation The point of departure for assessing the current relationship between standards and the freedom of the engineer is a definite change in the nature of engineering projects (Aslaksen, 1996). This change has several aspects, as one would expect from such a complex process as engineering on infrastructure projects, and two are pertinent in the present context. The first is a shift in focus from meeting society’s requirements to providing opportunities for investing the capital that is rapidly

4  Freedom and Standards in Engineering

51

accumulating as the main feature of the capitalist economy, as explored in depth in (Piketty, 2014). Infrastructure projects are not immune to this; on the contrary, the large capital cost involved make them prime financial objects. To protect the investment, the legal aspect of projects is becoming increasingly important, with all sides – the investor, contractor, and engineer – endeavouring to make their contractual responsibilities as tightly defined as possible and to reduce their risk of financial loss to the greatest extent possible. To a large extent, engineering in infrastructure projects has become a servant of financial interests, with its activities circumscribed by a legal profession dedicated to protecting those interests. It is a situation I brought up in an earlier contribution to the fPET series (Aslaksen, 2018a). The second aspect is that standards have become a convenient means of defining requirements pertaining to engineering. As mentioned earlier, using standards to specify requirements on the Works realises the intended use of these standards, although a lack of knowledge in prescribing applicable standards can lead to a need for exemptions at a later stage. This does not limit the engineer’s freedom; it just causes an unwanted increase in the project bureaucracy. But applying standards on the engineering process as legal documents can be a misuse; while many of the requirements in a standard may be applicable in general, the applicability of individual clauses of such standards was always intended to be for the engineer to decide, often as the project progresses. As a result, I have observed activities that have no relevance to the project being performed simply because the standards call for them, whereas activities that would have been beneficial, but that are not required by the standards, are left out. The process design aspect of engineering, from planning through execution to verification, which should be the most significant expression of the engineer’s creativity in this case, has been reduced to ticking boxes. It is possible to see an analogy to this in standards of society – the laws – and the issue of political correctness. The attempt to legislate every aspect of our social behaviour can have the effect of reducing our judgement and responsibility for our actions to simply checking for compliance with requirements formulated in general terms, without considering their applicability to actual situations as they occur. Finally, an indirect effect of standardising the engineering process has been the rising importance of software for control and documentation, in the form of tools for specific processes as well as for the whole through-life process, many of which employ special languages (e.g. UML). This development of the technology has necessitated a high degree of specialisation, which, coupled with the increasing scope and financial impact of individual projects, has resulted in a change in the role of the engineer. Today, most engineering graduates will, on entering industry, be assigned to work in a particular, narrowly defined area of the company’s activities, often using one or more specialised software tools. After some time, they become proficient in working in this narrow area and knowledgeable about the latest standards and techniques, and so valuable to the company in this role that they are completely locked in and have, in effect, become the professional equivalent of machine operators or technicians, just at a technically very advanced level. Their relationship to the purpose of satisfying society’s needs has almost disappeared, and the creative aspect of engineering, which should reflect an understanding of the big picture, has been redirected to operational efficiency.

52

E. W. Aslaksen

4.6 Conclusion The creative aspect described above is an essential part of engineering, and it becomes a task for educators, sociologists, and philosophers to determine and implement what it takes to produce creative engineers – or just engineers, because without that creativity they are not really engineers. This task could perhaps be a suitable subject matter for a cooperative effort within the fPET community. But the issue taken up in this chapter highlights another challenge for the engineering profession and for engineering education, and it arises as a result of the increasing pace of technological change, as indicated in Fig. 4.1. Consider, for a moment, that the content of engineering education consists of two components – one dedicated to a specific are of technology, the other dedicated to more general principles of engineering, with broader applicability and concerned with engineering as an integral part of society. In the early years of the engineer’s career the emphasis will be on applying the specialist knowledge, but even with continuing education that will become increasingly difficult after, say, 20 years, or half-way through the career, due to the competition from new graduates with the most recent technology. At this point, the application of the other component of the education should become dominant, creating effective interfaces between engineering and the social, economic, legal, and political areas of society. It was once my hope that systems engineering would provide the framework for this component, but it has itself become more of a specialty, heavily dependent on software applications, and largely unintelligible to non-engineers. And so, while there have been many attempts to address this second component, through double degrees and by sprinkling some subjects from other faculties throughout the curriculum, I still perceive a continuing deficiency in engineering education, as measured against the evolution of the rest of technology. Acknowledgements  It is a pleasure to acknowledge the many valuable comments provided by Claudia Eckert, Nina Jirouskova, and Daiana Victoria Martínez Monteleone, and the encouragement for pursuing this topic provided by Albrecht Fritzsche.

References Aslaksen, E. W. (1996). The changing nature of engineering. McGraw-Hill. Aslaksen, E. W. (2013). The system concept and its application to engineering. Springer Verlag. Aslaksen, E. W. (2015). The future of engineering. Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales, 148(457 & 458), 159–165. Aslaksen, E. W. (2017). Engineers and the evolution of society, chapter 9. In D. P. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, & Q. Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Exploring boundaries, expanding connections (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer. Aslaksen, E. W. (2018a). Technology, society, and survival, Chapter 12. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Ochs (Eds.), The future of engineering (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer Nature. Aslaksen, E. W. (2018b). An engineer’s approach to the philosophy of engineering, chapter 8. In C. Mitcham (Ed.), Philosophy of engineering, east and west (Boston studies in the philosophy and history of science). Springer Nature.

4  Freedom and Standards in Engineering

53

Baskoy, T. (2018). Thorstein B. Veblen’s philosophy of technology and modern capitalism, chapter 10. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer Nature. Christman, J. (2004). Relational autonomy, liberal individualism, and the social constitution of selves. Philosophical Studies, 117, 143–164. Fritzsche, A. (2017). Open innovation and the core of the engineer’s domain, chapter 19. In D. P. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, & Q. Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering (Philosophy of Engineering and Technology) (Vol. 26). Springer Nature. Layton, E. (1971). Revolt of the engineers: Social responsibility and the American engineering profession. Case Western Reserve University. Neely, A., Fell, S., & Fritzsche, A. (2018). Manufacturing with a big M- the grand challenges of engineering in digital societies from the perspective of the Institute for Manufacturing at Cambridge University, chapter 13. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer Nature. Noble, D. F. (1977). America by design: Science, technology, and the rise of corporate capitalism. Alfred Knopf. Patterson, O. (1991). Freedom (Vol. 1). I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press. Sun, L. (2018). Decision-making in the 120 MN Shanghai hydraulic forging press project: Walking a tightrope between politics and technology, chapter 23. In C. Mitcham (Ed.), Philosophy of engineering, east and west (Boston studies in the philosophy and history of science) (Vol. 330). Springer Nature. Veblen, T. (1904). The theory of business Enterprise. Charles Scribner’s Sons, available from Internet Archive. Veblen, T. (1921). The captains of industry and the engineers. In The engineers and the price system (p. 61). B.W. Huebsch, Inc. Winner, L. (1977). Autonomous technology: Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. MIT Press. Winner, L. (1980). Do artefacts have politics?, Daedalus, no. 109. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (2nd ed., pp. 121–136). Open University Press.

Chapter 5

Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge Mark Addis, Claudia Eckert, and Martin Stacey

Abstract  As most engineering design proceeds by modifying past designs and reusing and adapting existing components and solution principles, a significant part of the knowledge engineers employ in design is encapsulated in the past designs they are familiar with. References to past designs, as well as encounters with them, serve to invoke the knowledge associated with them and constructed from them. This chapter argues that much of this knowledge is tacit consisting in and/or made available by the perceptual recognition of features and situations, using a discussion of design margins to illustrate how engineers use tacit knowledge in reasoning about the properties of new designs. Keywords  Philosophy of design · Tacit knowledge · Know how · Object reference · Engineering epistemology · Design knowledge · Engineering design practice

5.1 Introduction The design of complex products like trucks, cars or helicopters usually builds on past designs (see Eckert and Clarkson 2010). As sources of elements for new design at different levels of abstraction, past designs are important repositories of knowledge for engineering organisations. Many larger engineering organisations use knowledge management methods to capture knowledge about how to develop M. Addis (*) Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK e-mail: [email protected] C. Eckert Department of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK M. Stacey School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_5

55

56

M. Addis et al.

products in terms of procedures, general precepts and indicators of best practice, however as Addis (2016) argues for construction knowledge, the limitations of the codification of knowledge are grounded in the nature of the types of knowledge engineers employ in product development. Understanding how past designs function as repositories of knowledge requires both theoretical insight into the nature of engineering knowledge and the way engineering processes work. Product behaviour is heavily dependent on the context in which it is used and holistic product properties which are difficult to describe explicitly often depend on multiple interacting factors (see de Weck et al., 2011). During testing organisations use various methods (with simulation techniques in particular gaining in importance) to assess holistic product properties, but the assessment of such properties is still heavily reliant upon expert judgement (Tahera et al., 2019). Experts assessing these holistic properties often have years of experience working with one kind of product and talk about having a feeling for a product. Due to their developed sense about how a product behaves they can predict how new designs will behave based on their understanding of existing and similar products. For example, the handling of a car is difficult to describe explicitly as this depends not only on the components of the car like the suspension and seating but also upon road and weather conditions with experienced test drivers having a sense for this. This chapter is interested in how this form of tacit knowledge is related to past design and how past designs serve as a trigger for this form of knowledge. The fPET community has traditionally looked at technology either from a philosophical perspective or a practitioner’s perspective. This chapter comes from a slightly different perspective: Engineering design research, which has the aim to improving practice through the development of guidelines, methods and tools based on a solid understanding of designing (see Blessing & Chakrabarti, 2009). (Whether design research constitutes science, or how much of it does, is a controversial issue, but the term design science is often used for the field.) Horvath (2004) argues that in design science the “knowledge obtained by empirical exploration and/or rational comprehension should be transformed for practical/pragmatic deployment”. To achieve this it studies engineering design processes, for example through interviews or observations, but also through lab experiments, drawing on the methodology of many academic fields (see Eckert et al., 2003). It uses the insights of other fields to elucidate phenomena in design and feeds rich practical examples back to the contributory research disciplines. Archer (1981) has argued that design epistemology is one of the key disciplines of design science. Our contribution is to design epistemology in this tradition. The argument put forward in this chapter is grounded in the second author’s own empirical studies of design processes over a period of nearly 30 years, exemplified by our studies of design margins, which involved the active participation of industry experts, introduced in Sect. 5.4. We seek to connect our empirical observations to a Rylean perspective on the nature of know how (see Ryle, 1946, 1949; Löwenstein, 2017), to understand the role that past designs play as repository of design knowledge and to a Wittgensteinean view of how language is used to communicate concepts (see Wittgenstein, 1953).

5  Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge

57

5.2 Object References in Engineering Design Engineering designers frequently refer to both their own and others’ past designs (Eckert et al., 2005). For example, engineers for a military helicopter used phases like “a radar like the one for the Italians” to refer to an exceptionally heavy radar, which required significant reworking of the helicopter tail (Eckert et al., 2004). For the purpose of this chapter, we use the term “object reference” loosely for verbal or ostensive references to existing products or elements of products. Existing designs contain combinations of components or solution principles which would be difficult or time consuming to describe in other ways than by object references. Such references can be specific or refer to classes of objects. Object references are a powerful and parsimonious way to express engineering designs and think about them. The objects referred to are shorthand ways of expressing relational concepts, solution chunks and experiences during the product development or life cycle process. Object references recall positive and negative experiences in the design process such as those with team working and suppliers. These experiences can be deeply personal, as engineers experienced them in their own way and interpreted these experiences in their own way. This gives object references a degree of subjectivity. As future product behaviour can be partially understood through calculations and simulation, engineers draw on experience of similar products to a certain extent deduce design rationales, recall past product behaviour to predict future behaviour, and often have tacit understanding of how product features and changes to them affect product behaviour. It should be observed at this point that the ways that object references work depend on the other knowledge designers have, their intentions, and the interpretations they put on the object references. Object references differ not just in the intended scope of what they include but also in their specificity; sometimes referring to individual objects, sometimes to individual designs, sometimes to broader categories of types of artefact, which can lead to miscommunication. Because of this, the notion of ‘object reference’ we use is a natural concept emerging from the family resemblance of many different uses (see Wittgenstein, 1953). It follows that a requirement of understanding object references is that there must be intersubjective knowledge of the objects they refer to; however, the hearers’ knowledge and experience will not be identical, so the interpretations hearers put on object references may not be quite the same. This view aligns with a view of language as a practice within a community of users (Wittgenstein, 1953). For object references to be comprehensible engineers must have the technical knowledge to understand what they are seeing and recognise the significance of particular details. Such background can be acquired through gaining general engineering knowledge but much expertise is slowly developed through working with a product and in a particular organisation.

58

M. Addis et al.

5.3 Design Margins in Object References To illustrate the importance of tacit knowledge in object references, we draw on our cases studies on design margins (see Eckert et al., 2019, 2020 for a discussion of case study methodology and the resulting theory). While the concept of a margin intuitively indicates some manner of buffer, the word is mainly used in the aerospace industry. In case studies engineers also used terms such as room for growth, intentionally designed in and protected margins, design margins for allocated buffers against changes in the requirements during the design process, safety margins against misuse of the product and so on; other industries use terms like excess, bias or overdesign for margin-like concepts. For present purposes a design margin is defined as “the extent to which a parameter value exceeds what it needs to be to meet its functional requirements regardless of the motivation for which the margin was included” (Eckert et al., 2012a, b). Margins are critical for determining whether a system part requires significant redesign or can be adapted for the new design. They can be divided into buffers against the variability of uncertain requirements and excesses which can be taken away or repurposed with different groups of engineers adding margins throughout the design process (Eckert et al., 2019). As illustrated in Fig. 5.1 engineers add margin requirements as safety margins, to enable growth in future planned product iterations, and to permit product definition to accommodate requirement changes during the design process. Engineers add design margins from the start, which are slowly eroded during the design process as requirements increase, or the product requirements change; and removed in the product optimisation phase. Exceeding margins can lead to possible large scale change propagation (Eckert et  al., 2004). Yet engineering companies

Needs Room for Growth

Safety Margins Design Margins

Excess and Buffer Change of Requirements Opmsaon

Margins on Design

BUFFER EXCESS MARGINS ON REQUIREMENTS

Pre-Launch (planning)

Change of requirements Product Development

Tolerances In Service

Use

Fig. 5.1  Margin concepts through the product development process (Eckert et al., 2020)

TIME

Margins on Requirements

5  Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge

59

don’t track margins systematically, but experienced engineers working on particular product aspects are aware of these margins through understanding design intentions or interpreting test data. Although it is theoretically possible to establish product margins by testing a product to destruction or running simulations to establish margin values under certain circumstances, in most cases the understanding engineers have of these margins is tacit (Eckert et al., 2004). As margins are not captured explicitly, only engineers with experience of past design processes know at the beginning of the design of the next product generation how easy or hard it is to adapt systems and which margins require protection. Systematically searching for margins can be very time-­ consuming so engineers either remember or use their intuition to identify where there might be usable margins. Such intuitions are grounded in tacit knowledge bringing together multiple aspects of engineering knowledge. For example, engineers try to recollect failure or warranty cases in similar design or check whether a component or an aspect appears out of proportion with judgements of similarity, exception or relevance being tacit. Such judgements require deep contextual knowledge of how the product has been used or what challenges have been faced during the development process. In this sense the past designs serve as indices for knowledge. Margins cannot easily be deduced from conventional design representations (such as CAD models) because margins depend on both on intended product use and interrelationships between different product components. For example, whether a component can carry additional payload depends on the load from other components but also on how the product is used (such as in a hot climate with heat expansion producing vibration requiring extra dampening). Past designs serve as a shorthand for bundled collections of knowledge.

5.4 Object References as Parsimonious Descriptions of Engineering Designs Products can be and are frequently described completely unambiguously in different models, such as CAD models or manufacturing models. However, such models are partial as they only focus on their intended purpose (see Pirtle (2009), Eckert and Hillerbrand (2018), for a discussion of models and their epistemic functions in engineering). For example, a CAD model typically describes the structure of a product, that is the shape of the elements and their relations. As the example of the margins illustrates, not all important information is typically not captured in CAD models, which also do not capture the rationale or the intended function. However, in conversation or when thinking about new designs are in the early stages of development these do not exist yet. Designs can also be sketched, but sketches are partial and ambiguous (see Purcell and Gero (1998) for a review of research on sketching). A verbal description of an emerging design, like any other kind of complex

60

M. Addis et al.

phenomenon, is generated from a particular perspective and expressed through a narrative. This may introduce a bias in the description of the design which is not immediately apparent. Object references are parsimonious descriptions which allow the expression of complex concepts through simple pointers. They are valuable because in engineering design the complexity of the product and the consequent amount of information associated with it can be enormous. Object references allow shifting between levels of details and bringing out explicitly what has come into focus, while leaving the wider context implicit. Conceptualising object references in an epistemological way, as keys into elements of engineering knowledge, enables us to see how the import of object references can be variable and contextualised, with the content and level of detail of the knowledge invoked being dependent on the intended use of the object reference. While information exists on different levels of abstraction, there is a limit to what an individual engineer can know and what they can describe in finite time. Recognising these limits on the scope of individual knowledge and thus the implications of this for intersubjective knowledge and agreement is crucial for the effective use of object references in engineering design practice. Tacit knowledge in practice encompasses both product and background knowledge as both are combined in understanding object references.

5.5 Object References and Engineering Knowledge Engineering knowledge can be sliced up in many different ways (for example see Houkes, 2009). Vincenti (1990) in What Engineers Know and How They Know It influentially outlined a map of engineering knowledge, grouping what engineers know into six categories, namely: • • • • • •

Fundamental design concepts Criteria and specifications Theoretical tools Quantitative data Practical considerations Design instrumentalities

Design know how comes under the category of design instrumentalities but also involves knowing how to make use of his other categories of knowledge (such as quantitative data). Although Vincenti does not disregard the action skills involved in design practice and the other knowledge generation activities he is primarily concerned to characterise the explicit articulated knowledge engineers use, with declarative knowledge of how to conduct procedures forming part of this. Using these distinctions four broad categories of engineering knowledge can be identified: • Information about materials, artefacts, and systems that can be articulated and shared in a symbol system

5  Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge

61

• Explicit shareable information about how to perform processes (Houkes, 2006) • Awareness of properties and behaviour of objects, and relationships between their elements triggered by perceptual recognition of objects and situations • Skills for performing physical and mental actions in context (Ryle, 1946, 1949) Individuals develop tacit knowledge from experience and the application of explicit knowledge. Explicit knowledge can be shared with this process depending on awareness and understanding of past designs. Tacit knowledge can be shared by individuals with common experiences and this enables engineers in an organisation to develop a community of practice that involves understanding specific object references. Experienced engineers have the expertise to recognise a situation or problem from perceiving a small part of it (see Gobet, 2019 on the role of chunking in expertise). They can recall and adapt solutions based on recognition of problems from partial information and often have tacit knowledge of the associated issues. Engineers also use object references to recall and informally classify process experiences, for example they remember the additional work that occurred on past projects when they had exceeded margins and therefore that this should be avoided. Experienced designers have learned where the safe boundaries for changes are. Much knowledge used by experienced engineers is tacit understanding of relationships and effects which depends upon the situation as well as pattern recognition combined with reasoning and imagining skills. Such tacit understanding is used to predict behaviour in existing and new systems, including human interactions with these systems, to anticipate problems, guide testing and apply computational methods. An important part of what experienced engineering designers do is behaviour prediction of new designs in extreme situations based on previous product behaviour. Much of the knowledge required for this, especially that invoked by object references, is situated procedural skill. This includes the envisionment of the interaction of specific design aspects with the context of use of the product. It is important to observe that this claim is grounded upon there being acquired skills for the recognition of features of engineering artefacts and predicting their behaviour which are learned from experience with these artefacts and sometimes from models and simulations of them, and are triggered by looking at the artefacts themselves or representations of them. Young (2018) posits that tacit knowledge rests on a “cultivated receptivity to relevant features of a particular environment”, rather than on something inexpressible but known in advance. Object references are often used to provide evidence by pointing out where something has or has not worked in the past. As Kerr (2017) points out “Evidence and evidence-gathering in engineering is then neither wholly personal nor wholly impersonal; neither wholly interpretive nor wholly practical, although it contains aspects of each type”. Object references function as keys to two distinct repositories of engineering knowledge, first the physically existing artefacts, graphic representations of them and documentation about them, and second the individual’s memories of them. How engineers’ memories work in conjunction with physically present artefacts to produce usable knowledge, and how much is perceived, remembered, and inferred, is not obvious. However, remembering is as much construction as

62

M. Addis et al.

recall (see for instance Koriat et al., 2000). The extent to which feature recognition is possible from mental representations, or how far one can only think with what is explicitly included in representations constructed purely from memories remains controversial in psychology; however the ability to manipulate mental representations differs among individuals. We will not discuss this further except to note that the evocation of knowledge through object references involves a process of active construction. Using Vincenti’s (1990) framework for present purposes significant distinctions are those between: • Explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge which cannot be fully articulated as explicit knowledge • Factual knowledge of concepts, structures, properties, relationships, behaviour and the like, and procedural knowledge of how to design, solve problems, and generate knowledge in various ways • Individual and collective knowledge Objects, and memories of them, can only function as repositories of knowledge (about the form of the objects, properties, function and behaviour) in conjunction with other kinds of engineering knowledge. Vincenti (1990) does not explicitly cover objects as sources of knowledge, or the physical and social organisation of repositories of knowledge. We argue that objects, and, secondarily, memories of them, function as repositories for knowledge in several of his categories. We take the view that the way in which objects function as repositories of knowledge is best understood in epistemological terms by looking at the knowledge that they enable engineers to use rather than trying to unpick the ontological status of the object references and their referents. Whilst formal specification documents make their content explicit, many of the informal criteria that guide designing are in practice expressed through references to past designs. In practice engineering companies derive much of the quantitative data they use either from in-use data of past designs or tests carried out on modified versions of past designs. Currently data is often derived from simulations which are calibrated against past designs. Vincenti’s category of design instrumentalities, that is, engineers’ knowledge of how to carry out design, would also cover experience of past design processes, which they associate and retrieve through references to past designs. However, object references that invoke knowledge of how to design only work in conjunction with knowledge belonging to Vincenti’s other categories. Poser (2013) argues that engineering processes are fundamentally driven by ignorance, i.e. what engineers don’t know, and the goals that they pursue. Object references are means of resolving this ignorance in a way tailored to the goal. The same object references invoke knowledge of fundamental design concepts embodied in the design of the objects they refer to (Stacey & Eckert, 2022). Engineers need an understanding of engineering to understand and interpret other products. Experienced engineers recognise why something is done in a particular way in a competitor’s design. They can often construct the rationale for design decisions from seeing and interacting with a product. The fundamental design concepts and

5  Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge

63

the theoretical tools provide a vocabulary to talk about existing designs and understand observed behaviour. Object references also show the limitation of engineering descriptions and the vocabulary engineers have to construct them. There are many elements or features of machines that do not have specific names or can only be identified with a highly technical reference number.

5.6 Practical Challenges of Handling Object References Much of the knowledge associated with object references is in fact tacit. For example, engineers have a sense of margins on components, without knowing them explicitly. Experienced engineers often have a sense of margins just by looking at a component. For example, if they see a thin strut in a standard material, they know whether this is a likely to be an optimised component, that is, one without margins, just by looking at it, but also by knowing whether the design process of the component would have gone through an optimisation loop. In referring to an object they make many of these judgements simultaneously. Tacit knowledge is implicit and contextual with the consequence that any particular piece of tacit knowledge can be further interpreted and more finely classified (see Young, 2018, for a discussion of tacit knowledge in engineering). The purpose relativity of the use of much tacit knowledge is a further reason why ontological classification is highly problematic (Addis, 2013). As a consequence of this, this chapter does not attempt to draw up a classification of tacit knowledge but wishes to identify some important distinctions. Some tacit knowledge can be made explicit if suitable effort is put into it. For example, many margins can be explicitly described if a suitable test or simulation are run. One engineer might have a tacit sense that there is a not a lot of margin on a component and avoids touching it and another might be able to explicitly see that there is only a 1% margin on a key parameter and therefore make an explicit case that this component should not be changed. For example, Eger et al. (2005) report on an engine company, which froze the design of one their key components, i.e. barred anybody from changing it, but only very few engineers knew that this was due to the component having almost no margin. Here it is important to distinguish between aspects which it is not practical (such as for reasons of cost effectiveness) to make explicit and those which are for various reasons impossible (or at least very hard) to make explicit. Due to the complexity of engineering products and the importance of small details, expressing an element of a product (such as its entire surface) can be very difficult and time consuming. A tacit sense for what the margins are plays an important role when considering the multitude of different use cases. Experienced engineers often know whether a particular component is strong enough for a particular application, because they understand the margins with regards to multiple use cases (see Isaksson et  al., 2014). However anticipating the properties of other design features, such as the exact details of a curve that make it aerodynamic or resistant to accumulating dirt, is

64

M. Addis et al.

something that engineers learn at least partially by looking at examples that work and examples that do not work. While such design features can sometimes be sketched, they are often extremely difficult to describe succinctly, except in terms of how they differ from previous designs. Over the years expert engineers develop finely tuned perceptual skills. This plays a hugely important role in directing designing and targeting testing. A development of Ryle’s well known regress argument (Ryle, 1949) shows that not all tacit knowledge can be converted into explicit knowledge (Addis, 2016). A corollary to this is that recollected or imaginatively generated knowledge is situated in a way that knowledge which is explicitly encoded in a general form is not. The examples of engineering design previous discussed can be seen in various way to illustrate the difference between tacit knowledge which can be converted into explicit knowledge regardless of how difficult or impractical this is and that which cannot. Categorisation of tacit knowledge in object references by the extent to which such knowledge can be converted into explicit knowledge is useful: • Product knowledge which is not explicitly captured (notably margins) • Procedural knowledge such as how to run a design process, do a calculation or manage an organisation. The experiences that engineers have with needing to deal with margins that are exceeded falls under this category. • Contextual knowledge about problems or solutions such as vibration on a particular pavement and suspension type • Experiential knowledge especially non-theoretically grounded A challenge with the use of object references in the design process is that engineers may not be aware of the limits of their individual and tacit knowledge. For example, they might not know whether a system still has margins or about the effects of certain changes during the design process. Not realising such limitations to knowledge has the consequence that engineers might conclude that they understand past designs better than they actually do. They might assume that other people interpret object references in a similar way with divergences becoming evident in implementation problems. The fact that not all tacit knowledge (whether situated in and triggered by design activities, or another kind) is convertible to explicit knowledge provides further theoretical grounding for the earlier discussion about the importance of expert tacit knowledge in design margins. These problems with significant practical implications demonstrate the importance of continued theoretical and practical research into the nature of know how in vocational and professional environments.

5.7 Conclusions This chapter is aimed at advancing understanding of what engineering knowledge is and how it is used in engineering design in industrial practice. It argues that in engineering design the past designs that engineers are familiar with constitute an important repository of knowledge. References to objects, that evoke this knowledge, are

5  Past Designs as Repositories of Tacit Collective Knowledge

65

extremely effective and powerful representations of complex design ideas. In particular they play a crucial role in the generation, communication and application of tacit knowledge whether that knowledge is not explicated for practical reasons or is knowledge about elements of design which is extremely difficult to express. Object references enable the construction of details from general engineering knowledge when required without necessarily invoking long complex narratives or excessive detail. However, interpretations of object references by others and periodically by oneself after a significant time lapse are strongly influenced by personal experience and knowledge, thus are subject to interpretation in different ways. Object references are taken for granted by practitioners and have been overlooked in the philosophical discussion of engineering knowledge, which rarely engages with the messy practice of engineering design in industrial practice.

References Addis, M. (2013). Linguistic competence and expertise, special issue “Tacit knowledge: New theories and practices”. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 12(2), 327–336. Addis, M. (2016). Tacit and explicit knowledge in construction management, special issue “Theorising expertise in construction”. Construction Management and Economics, 34(7/8), 439–445. Archer, L. B. (1981). A view of the nature of design research. In R. Jacques & J. A. Powell (Eds.), Design, science, method (pp. 30–35). Butterworths. Blessing, L. T. M., & Chakrabarti, A. (2009). DRM, a design research methodology. Springer. De Weck, O. L., Roos, D., & Magee, C. L. (2011). Engineering systems: Meeting human needs in a complex technological world. MIT Press. Eckert, C. M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2010). Planning development processes for complex products. Research in Engineering Design 21(3), 153–171. Eckert, C., & Hillerbrand, R. (2018). Models in engineering design: Generative and epistemic function of product models. In P. Vermaas & S. Vial (Eds.), Advancements in the philosophy of design (pp. 219–242). Springer. Eckert, C. M., Stacey, M. K., & Clarkson, P. J. (2003). The spiral of applied research: A methodological view on integrated design research. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on engineering design (ICED’03). Design Society. Eckert, C. M., Clarkson, P. J., & Zanker, W. (2004). Change and customisation in complex engineering domains. Research in Engineering Design, 15(1), 1–21. Eckert, C. M., Stacey, M. K., & Earl, C. F. (2005). References to past designs. Studying Designers, 05, 3–21. Eckert, C.  M., Stacey, M., Wyatt, D., & Garthwaite, P. (2012a). Change as little as possible: Creativity in design by modification. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(4), 337–360. Eckert, C. M., Isaksson, O., & Earl, C. F. (2012b). Product property margins: An underlying critical problem of engineering design. In Proceedings of TMCE 2012, Karlsruhe, Germany. Eckert, C.  M., Isaksson, O., & Earl, C.  F. (2019). Design margins: A hidden issue in industry. Design Science, 5, e9. Eckert, C. M., Isaksson, O., Lebjioui, S., Earl, C. F., & Edlund, S. (2020). Design margins in industrial practice. Design Science, 6, e30. Eger, T., Eckert, C. M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2005). The role of design freeze in product development. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on engineering design (ICED’05). Design Society.

66

M. Addis et al.

Gobet, F. (2019). Three views on expertise: Philosophical implications for rationality, knowledge, intuition and education. In M. Addis & C. Winch (Eds.), Education and expertise (pp. 58–74). Wiley Blackwell. Horvath, I. (2004). A treatise on order in engineering design research. Research in Engineering Design, 15(3), 155–181. Houkes, W. (2006). Knowledge of artefact functions. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 37(1), 102–113. Houkes, W. (2009). Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. In A. W. M. Meijers (Ed.), Handbook of the philosophy of science (Vol. 9, pp. 309–350). Elsevier. Isaksson, O., Lindroth, P., & Eckert, C. M. (2014). Optimisation of products versus optimisation of product platforms: An engineering change margin perspective. In DS 77: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2014 13th international design conference. Kerr, E. (2017). Evidence in engineering. In D.  Michelfelder, B.  Newberry, & Q.  Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering. Philosophy of engineering and technology (Vol. 26). Springer. Koriat, A., Goldsmith, M., & Pansky, A. (2000). Towards a psychology of memory accuracy. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 481–537. Löwenstein, D. (2017). Know-how as competence. Klostermann. Pirtle, Z. (2009). How the models of engineering tell the truth. In I. Van de Poel & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering (pp. 95–108). Springer. Poser, H. (2013). The ignorance of engineers and how they know it. In D.  P. Michelfelder, N. McCarthy, & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 3–14). Springer. Purcell, T., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Drawings and the design process. Design Studies, 19, 389–430. Ryle, G. (1946). Knowing how and knowing that. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, 212–225. Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Hutchinson. Stacey, M. K., & Eckert, C. M. (2022). Objects as carriers of engineering knowledge. Engineering Studies, 14(2), 87–108. Tahera, K., Wynn, D. C., Earl, C. F., & Eckert, C. M. (2019). Testing in the incremental design and development of complex products. Research in Engineering Design, 30(2), 291–316. Vincenti, W.G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it: analytical studies from aeronautical history. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Blackwell. Young, M.  T. (2018). Intuition and ineffability: Tacit knowledge and engineering design. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering (pp. 53–67). Springer.

Chapter 6

A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design José Aravena-Reyes

Abstract  Engineering is understood as a profession that involves a formative process, through which the conditions that allow the recognition of its phenomenal field and the ways to approach it are generated. The epistemological basis of the current formative process is largely conditioned by the notion of qualified problem solving. However, more than addressing the problems in all their openness, the epistemological basis promoted by this perspective does not allow to easily incorporate the variability and dynamics of the social and cultural processes that go along with their phenomena. The cause of such difficulty may be in the previous structuring of engineering problems based on a given field of solutions strongly based on the natural sciences. In this condition, problems are not dealt with to the full extent that are proper to them. In this article it is argued that problems reside in an open problematic field and that Engineering operates to extract from it the reality from the field of solutions. In this sense, an Engineering perspective is proposed that open up its meaning for educational purposes from the contributions of the philosophy of technology and engineering, in order to promote a subtle shift in the epistemological basis of the engineers education towards a privileged openness of the problematic field where the problems reside. For this, conceptual operators extracted from the thought of Gilbert Simondon and Gilles Deleuze are used so that the concept of Engineering can be built on a broader and more flexible basis. The proposal is to place Engineering in the process of individuation or updating a problematic field that is always open. Keywords  Simondon · Deleuze · Engineering design · Philosophy of engineering

J. Aravena-Reyes (*) Faculty of Engineering, Civil Construction Department, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_6

67

68

J. Aravena-Reyes

6.1 Introduction One of the most remarkable characteristics of Engineering is that it operates from a set of very well-structured knowledge, which implies that in order to practice it, it is necessary to have acquired it in some legally recognized educational institution. Although it is recognized that this has not always been the case, − for example we also call Egypt’s pyramids engineering (Blockey, 2012) – nowadays it is understood that solid institutional education is fundamental to operate in the phenomenal field of Engineering. We can think of Engineering as something based in a kind of knowledge-power relationship: on the one hand, it is a formative process that structures knowledge, and on the other, a power that determines who has responsibilities to operate in this field (Foucault, 1996). However, it is in the first one where Engineering is established or should be: its tasks, its fields of action, its rules, methods and behaviors, and many other things that accompany it and make it an entity with its own meaning. The concept that brings together all these characteristics gives meaning and directs professional life, but not only as the pure description of a disaggregated set of duties or activities that engineers carry out but also as a mentality, a mindset, a concrete way of thinking and acting that guides the actions and decisions that accompany professional life and why not say, life in general. In other words, we could state that during the formative process both the phenomenal field and the particular epistemological condition that characterizes Engineering are established. Much of the formative process is based on the idea that students should practice solving problems according to methodological perspectives for each subject in the formative curriculum. Additional efforts are devoted to activities of design that promote the systemic or holistic perspective that integrates this set of knowledge in the real condition that engineers will deal with in practice. In general, a discipline called Introduction to Engineering instructs on the first teachings about what Engineering is and what its characteristic manifestations are. Its main objective is to offer an integrative perspective that allows the student to recognize the unity and limits of the field of phenomena of what will be recognized or not as Engineering. In this sense, such discipline operates in a prescriptive way, providing the first elements of the epistemological basis that allows to recognize and differentiate what is proper from it and what is not. Considering that the formative process is moving towards a diversified and flexible curriculum for this changing world, it is pertinent to think that the issue of what Engineering consists of is not equated only by prescribing what it is, but also what the most appropriate epistemological condition for incorporating the evolutionary dynamics of its phenomenal field is. What is proposed here is that such an approach can be carried out by adopting a more oriented definition for educational purposes that also allows recognizing its transformations, shifting understanding from a purely prescriptive perspective, based on professional practices, to one with a more open philosophical basis that manages to integrate the evolutionary dynamics that has marked Engineering in

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

69

recent times. In the following lines, an epistemological ground implicit in several perspectives that are commonly used to define Engineering is opposed to a more open one, based on recent contributions from the Philosophy of Technology and Engineering, which highlight the role of problematization and invention in the constitution of individuals, that is, in their individuation process.

6.2 General Context In philosophical terms, Engineering is a field that is still open (Jaramillo, 2015). Its recent claim as an autonomous area of philosophy does not hide the difficulties that exist in establishing some foundational consensus that can guide reflection (Poel, 2010). There is no consensus on the definitions and this leads the scientific community to continue investing efforts to clarify fundamental issues of its phenomenal field, including whether or not there is a single definition for it. Carl Mitcham (2021) has recently corroborated this situation, but first identified some directions of analysis. After asking the well-known questions regarding the relationship between Engineering and science and technology or the etymology of the word, Mitcham organized the understanding of the term through an approach to Engineering as a design, profession, or modernity, a way already used to describe Technology as an object, knowledge, activity or volition (Mitcham, 1994). The essence of Engineering seems to be implicitly defined from an Aristotelian perspective from a set of meanings partially elaborated that determine it as such: being is said in many ways (Aristotle, 2015). However, Engineering as … does not reveal the interrelationships that exist between its characterizations. Modernity, for example, could be thought of as a design of modernity, as well as the profession could be thought of as an effect of modernity. Furthermore, we could characterize the design as art, as science, or use the well-known characterization of Engineering as problem-solving. The latter is one of the most used by engineers and non-engineers to define the field; it is common to hear that Engineering is the solution of problems using scientific knowledge. In this case, it does not matter much whether the problems appear when trying to mobilize the energies of nature, based on the demands of society, or even if engineers solve such problems based on science, heuristics, norms, morals, or art. It predominates the notion that the determinant underlying it (including it as a design, profession, or modernity) is the effort dedicated to solving the problems that arise. Engineering is commonly understood as a qualified way of solving problems, where the ways of solving problems can be qualified from a given cognitive condition, either based on a specific set of knowledge or from a given social, cultural, or institutional condition. In this sense, for most engineers, it is obvious to think that engineering problems are solved by using scientific knowledge, which in a way implies adopting a way of thinking that privileges the objective status of reality. For many engineers, it is also obvious to think that engineering problems are solved

70

J. Aravena-Reyes

guided by a prospective attitude, where scientific knowledge is used to give objective guarantees of validity to the solutions found; using a hypothetical-deductive method of science and using the heuristic method (Koen, 2003, 2013) of engineering are ways to qualify the way engineers solve their problems. Problem-solving, therefore, in addition to being an operational characterization of Engineering, works as an epistemological ground that guides engineers’ thinking and acting. It determines that the reality to be dealt with by them must first be structured in terms of problems and solutions. From this perspective, engineers are essentially qualified problem solvers and the essence of all Engineering characterizations would be qualified problem-solving. The epistemological ground opened by the notion of problem-solving has quite interesting implications for Engineering, such as that of being a highly complex and a high-cost activity, which operates through a network of agents inserted in the hegemonic socio-economic structure of the capitalist model.1 To the extent that the psychic structure of engineers is constituted under the epistemological ground of problem-solving, the idea that problems already exist and are to be solved is consolidated: the original condition of the problem is purified under the perspective of a given field of solutions. Thus, with total obedience to this field, engineers solve problems defined by others, and even more, based on a distance between the subject and the typical object of the Natural Sciences approach, which translates into the development of a so-called neutral and objective perspective. In other words, the qualified way of solving problems in Engineering puts the task of questioning the type of problems they solve out of the psychic structure of engineers. Hence, in addition to solving problems obediently, engineers are called to distance themselves from all beliefs and experiences that define their subjective values, so that they do not influence operational tasks. As a result, it is possible to think that qualified problem solving operates as an epistemological basis that produces obedient engineering lacking in social or political criticism, which deals with the demands of a qualified (capitalist) society, where ethical or moral issues must negotiate concessions to be included as variables in the field of solutions. Nonetheless, it seems that this way of proceeding has encountered some limitations. The predatory extractive practice of nature understood as a pure resource, has caused a degradation of ecological systems at a planetary level and future risks for the human species. Nowadays, it is at risk even the very value system of the capitalist economy. The term that best represents this planetary condition of accelerated degradation is Anthropocene (Crutzen, 2002), which calls into question the radical separation between technique and nature and warns about the possibilities of planetary collapse with implications for all lives on Earth. Thus, even when the capitalist economy has long prevailed as a hegemonic economic model, the current productive demands require thinking of the unthinkable (Blok et al., 2016) to bring a paradigm change that considers the deep effects of technical activity on the planet  A non-capitalist engineering is on the agenda of a minority group of engineers and researchers (for example, see Stiegler (2021: 63, 178), Dagnino (2014), and Chap. 23 of this book, by Cordeiro Cruz, Ochoa-Duarte and León). 1

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

71

and their lives (Stiegler, 2017); a kind of ecosophy (Guattari, 2009) committed to the health of the planet’s lives by the subjects that produce the technology (scientists and engineers) and by an empathy more than necessary for the next civilizing steps (Rifkin, 2009). In this direction, a more committed Engineering can be promoted in the formative domain in order to provoke an epistemological opening effect: thinking the unthinkable can arise from a change in the mentality of engineers, which can be accomplished if the teaching of Engineering as a qualified resolution of problems opens the way to a definition that allows incorporating the new as a privileged ontology category and the design as an operational category of field that is still open, in order to overflow the methodological requirements that structure a priori a field of solutions for a fundamentally open problem. This work suggests that this can be done from the teachings of Gilbert Simondon, Gilles Deleuze, and Felix Guattari.

6.3 Individuation as an Alternative Ontological Model Gilbert Simondon surpasses an artifact’s ontology (Mitcham, 1994). His main work is a broad ontological treatise that addresses physical, biological, psychic, and collective beings, providing a basis for thinking about various processes of reality from the perspective of the being as becoming. Such thinking is organized around the criticism of the hylomorphic model – the set composed of form and matter – and the fundamental question that the individual cannot be explained from an already constituted individual, but through the process of individuation that constitutes it as such (Simondon, 2020: 32). By eliminating the privilege of the constituted individual, the individual comes into existence by extracting its reality from its own pre-individual condition, which contains an internal incompatibility and forces in tension that allows it to differentiate from itself, generating individual and environment. What is considered pre-­ individual corresponds to the initial condition of the homogeneous being in metastable equilibrium, which, through a complete ontogenetic operation, is structured and gives rise to the individual and its environment; the initial tensions are solved and the individual being comes into existence under a structure that is preserved in its own changing process (Simondon, 2020: 5, 60). Within the being there is much more than one: it finds itself overwhelmed, in excess of itself, and carries within itself a potential to change, to differentiate itself from itself or better – from the process of individuation  – to dephase and to become the being that it is (Simondon, 2020: 4, 154). To illustrate the individuation process, Simondon begins by describing the paradigmatic case of physical crystallization. He asserts that the crystals arise from a type of substrate of molecular constitution with no defined structural form, called mother water, in which the insertion of a germ initiates the crystallization process. In the metastable state of the disordered and unstable molecules of the mother water, the germ acts as a shock, causing a real change in the original matter. This

72

J. Aravena-Reyes

germ is understood as a piece of information that causes a new energetic condition that transmits a structure and geometry to the matter. As the disordered matter is structured like a crystal, the structured nucleus amplifies the original condition, informs, and causes a new transformation on its surface, which causes the crystal to expand its limit ad infinitum while there are metastable conditions for it, its particular form of individuation. Its boundary surface is neither pure mother water nor pure structured crystal; it is neither pure power nor pure structure, neither pure past nor pure future; the surface represents the locus present where the crystal growth is taking place, where being and becoming are related and interact: Simondon considers that this limit is where the crystal information happens, where, due to the present energetic conditions, a region that is rich in potentials but without a structural form acquires structure, that is, it is updated in the form of a crystal from a piece of information that acts on the entire system, causing the mediation of the potential differences that allow the growth of the crystal: its individuation. Information advances through a process of transduction that maintains the uniqueness between the different phases of the being by amplifying the original structuring information in order to act, at the limit of its being, on the formless environment, which, after that, will be structured as another phase of that same being  – information and progressive structuring (Simondon, 2020: 77). This perspective explains the operation of the being as becoming that characterizes the individuation process of all individuals; other beings differ from physical beings by the dynamics of their individuation processes, but not by a posteriori characterization, built from classifications about already constituted individuals (Simondon, 2020).2 In all cases, individuation takes place in a zone where the poles of the relationship are constituted in the relationship itself, so for Simondon the relationship has the status of being and the being is a relationship: the common surface where the being is structured based on compatibilization of energy regimes, it is understood as a quantum, an originating condition, which is polarized and embraces the constitution of the originated parts. The relationship between pre-individual and individual is elevated to an ontological status in which the very terms of the relationship are constituted; they do not precede it, on the contrary, they form a system. The individuated individual is not in a state of finalistic equilibrium, an absolute term; it has a reserve of being that allows it to be constantly individuated from the amplifying internal resonance that accompanies it; the being is a relationship because with each new change it does not become a new substance, but incorporates the previous phase and informs the new tensions that come from the new state of its becoming: in this sense, it is relative to the pre-individual and the resulting phases from it.

 Based on this principle, Simondon explains the different modes of individuation of biological, psychic, collective and technical beings. 2

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

73

6.4 The Problematic Field in Simondon and Deleuze The pre-individual is understood as the condition from which the individual extracts its reality and is determined according to the different energy regimes that communicate and inform the internal tensions that initiate a process of compatibility at the point of structural balance that become the individual. Heterogeneous energy regimes interact transductively in this field of tensions until they find the compatibility that produces the dissolution of internal tensions and have a stable structure. In his conclusions, Simondon states: … becoming is being as present insofar as it actually phase-shifts into past and future… The being’s present is its problematic in the process of resolution … the individuated being is not substance but the being called into question, the being across a problematic … Becoming is not the becoming of the individuated being but the becoming of the being’s individuation: what happens comes about as a calling into question of the being, i.e. as an element of an open problematic which is what the being’s individuation resolves … time itself is essence … but as the being’s resolutive constitution. Such a conception is possible only if we accept the notion of phases of being (Simondon, 2020: 364, emphasis original).

The statement that the becoming of the being is “the being as present”, is complemented with the statement that it is also “a perpetuated and renewed resolution, an amplifying, incorporating resolution that proceeds via crises”, that is, individuals arise from an individuating process that operates within an open and constant problematic field, without beginning or end; accessible through the environment, in a present that unfolds the past and the future: “to individuate and to become is a single mode of existing” (Simondon, 2020: 367). Ontogenetic individuation is described (by dephasing) as the resolving dimension of the first state of internal tensions and incompatibilities. There are no predefined forms or structures in the original being of all phases; there is also no statement of a problem that encloses the possible individuating solutions since all these aspects appear “through the real becoming of resolutive invention”, that is, precisely, that becoming. Thus, what is contained in all becoming is “the capacity of resolutive becoming is contained in the being before any becoming through the incompatibility that it will be able to make compatible” (Simondon, 2020: 372), but not predeterminations. Simondon states that individuation is not the result of becoming, but the becoming itself and, therefore, it is not possible to get to know about individuation process from the individual alone; to ascend to individuation, it is necessary to turn to the individual-environment pair, whose genesis results from inventive quantum leaps that operate in the relational center. The individuation is the becoming itself that is increasing or enriching the original problem by the appearance of new informing germs that provoke the amplifying internal resonance of an active transition; information is one aspect of individuation: “it is that through which being phase-shifts and becomes”. As can be seen, references to a problematic condition within the individuation process, place the problematic in a field where different energy regimes communicate, make their potential differences compatible, and become individual. That is,

74

J. Aravena-Reyes

the reality of an individual is extracted from that pre-individual as a problematic field that is open to everything and has no pre-determinations, as they only appear in the inventive lines of the real becoming. The problem itself is understood as an incompatibility of energy regimes – differences or intensities that start to communicate  – and the inventive, as the resolution of the tensions of these regimes  – the appearance of an informing flow that becomes structure and operation. The emphasis given to the open aspect of the problematizing field is one of the most remarkable features of Simondon’s ontogenetic, but also the philosophy of difference. Likewise, the being as becoming also guides the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze (Deleuze & Guattari, 2007). The French philosopher not only thinks of the difference itself but also offers a set of operators for a differential ontology that allows thinking of the being as a difference that is self-differentiating, that is expressed in a univocal and immanent way in the multiple imbrications of the entities. In this sense, the being is becoming and considers itself univocally, that is, it has a single meaning that occurs in an open incorporeal event, full of semantic resonances and not by the determination of meaning: it is exactly the immanent expression of an ontic multiplicity. It is expressed in an incorporeal event, that is, something that is not a thing, but it is also not nothing (Craia, 2002); it is on the border between propositions and things and therefore requires an ontology that can make the difference positive. Thus, the difference in the being as self-differentiation – which is not captured in the representation – is a pure intensity that as such, is not determined, is unstable but real: it resides as a virtual field that is actualized. The virtual-actual pair – which is not to be confused with the potency-action or possible-real pairs – places the being within a field of virtuality because the difference is pure intensity and the expression of the being as difference occurs exactly in its actualization, in its presentification. Being actual, the being is nothing more than an expression of the virtual and of all the differential potential that exists in it. In fact, from this field of virtuality, the constant actualizations that determine the expressions of the being are fed. Virtuality is the depository of an intensive reality, which is actualized in the process of differentiation: it becomes extensive. The transition from the virtual to the actual occurs in the actualization process that takes as a fundamental characteristic the resolution of a tense state, that is, an intense condition resulting from the appearance of internal differences within the virtual. In Deleuze, the resolution is then linked to a problem, or rather, to a problematic: a field in which resides the infinite set of problems of the sense of the being. The sense inhabits the problematic field but referred to problems that are not traced over solutions, but problems that exist and insist on the margin of solutions and not those that, as the solution is given by a knowing subject, disappear. This alert becomes relevant because for Deleuze it is not in the solution where the truth or falsehood of the sense resides, but in the problem, that is, in its creation as such. In other words, the true or false of thought has a genesis in the problem; the problem is its differential element and, therefore, the resolution depends on the internal characteristics that determine the problem. In general, solutions only acquire meaning when referring to their problematic horizon, from which they receive their condition of possibility. That is why it is important to determine “the conditions under which the

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

75

problem acquires a maximum of comprehension and extension must be determined, conditions capable of communicating to a given case of solution the ideal continuity appropriate to it” (Deleuze, 1994: 162). Without being purely transcendent to its solutions, the problematic field is also immanent; a ground that is internally constituted, evidencing its character of unregulated and decentralized multiplicity: self-differentiation of sense embodied in the real, which when actualized, become solution in which the problematic field insists and exists. The virtual-actual relationship, therefore, places the problematic field in a genetic condition of the resolutive sense, which appears as a solution in the very actualization process. The Deleuzean problematic field is an open one.

6.5 Problematic Field and Ontology of Engineering No problem arises a priori in a pre-qualified territory, for example, of Engineering. If the problem as such is established from a pre-qualified statement, this procedure shows the existence of a previous link that unites statements and solutions, or a link between those who state the problems and those who solve them. In this case, who enunciates the problem gives an operational and evolutionary direction to Engineering solutions.3 However, this operative direction appears in a problematic field that has no predeterminations, that is, where problems and solutions are ontogenetically produced by an inventive quantum. In fact, when referring to the individuation of technical objects, Simondon attributes to humans the ability to operate the inventive quantum that gives rise to the technical individual, that is, it is the man who, by operating in the problematizing field, dissolves the original tensions and causes the technical becoming by the invention (Simondon, 2007). The invention is described by Simondon as a phase of the image’s becoming; a kind of final stage in the evolutionary cycle of the mental image, of the imagination (Simondon, 2013: 10). The image is not a visual representation of the world that resides passively in consciousness; it is a complex, an intermediary reality between object and subject, concrete and abstract, past and future (Simondon, 2013: 13–15), in which such poles are dynamized by driving, cognitive and affective, external and internal forces that make it something like a semi-object, materialized as an object-­ image that prefigures a near or distant future in the form of a new way of reality. There is a becoming of the image, which advances in phases ranging from the sensorimotor stage to reaching the productive anticipation of individual and collective reality: a proactive force that articulates the sense and the experience in the production of imagetic reality (Simondon, 2013, 2014). The invention is understood as a change on the adult image system, produced by a change of level over a new state of free images that allows the resumption of the inventive cycle; the level of reality is raised in a process that has its origins in the

 Cf. “[…] engineering is what engineers do in their capacity as engineers” (Poel, 2010: 3).

3

76

J. Aravena-Reyes

anticipation rich in pre-perceptual and cognitive stimuli, it is fixed as a memory image and symbols that guide the experience, which, when saturated, that is, when the experience cannot welcome anymore the new that it experiences, it makes the subject modify its own structure for more powerful organizations, capable of solving the incompatibilities experienced. However, this does not mean that the invention operates in any energetic condition; just as in the crystal, we cannot think that inventing is free from the present energetic conditions. For example, when considering the normative conditions or regulations that a technical object must meet when it is designed, the inventive act may probably have little potential, because, if the normative elements strongly configure the relational field, they can inhibit the appearance of other articulation elements. In this case, it is even difficult to speak of an inventive or designing act, since the potential for structural changes is small and there is not much intensity to be incorporated. Perhaps it would be better to think that the norm itself is the result of the inventive quantum and not its very application in a given problematic field. The inventiveness itself seems to be established concerning an intensity that is never the same, that is, it is always a new one, something that comes to exist, but that did not exist before; what experience stresses so that it can be incorporated into its most stable structures: it anticipates, reflects and systematizes by reconciling the tensions of the relationship that is experienced as that which overflows the stable; the known or already structurally absorbed. Apparently, the transductive process takes place around the new, the different, and, if we consider the similarities between the preindividual-individual pair and the virtual-actual pair, we can place within the actualization the operation of an inventive or designing process that unites them. To affirm difference as pure differentiation (that is, the difference is neither something nor nothing, it is expressed as the pure event) seems to have the same nature with which the imagery cycle of the invention is given the status of real. This space between where the process of actualizing the virtual resides seems to be very similar to that of the invention that connects the pre-individual to the dephased individual. Differently, when an object is predetermined, when it exists as a model, as a concept that requires organization for its materialization, it is more likely to be of the possible-real relationship than the virtual-actual relationship. From this perspective, planning, management, or projecting, have a set of operations that take place in the field of choices, calculations, decisions, or compositions and not in the inventive differential field; perhaps this is why most of the design theories that describe the technology through these operations, favor technical rationality (logos) over the inventive component (métis) of the technique (Aravena-Reyes, 2018) since such theories require that something is predefined, that is, that is in the field of the possible and are oriented towards finalistic stability.

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

77

6.6 To Engineer To engineer (i.e., the act or action of engineering) is different, it operates directly in the transduction of pre-individual intensive regimens to individual objects. The preindividual field is virtuality, which embraces the transductive process that actualizes an individual – inventing it. The inventiveness of engineering, in this sense, does not need to be linked to a subject or the brilliance of a genius, but to a context where there is a virtual rich in potential for actualization. Although the concept of an engineer is often associated with a person’s brilliance, such as Thales of Miletus or Leonardo da Vinci, the term genius can also be seen in the light of the socratic term daimon (Sloterdijk, 2015: 386–387). The latter, more than characterizing a particular gift, an inventive superiority, represents a contact surface of an intimate double, a kind of communication with an original complement, a common surface that is neither pre-individual nor individual, something between virtual and actual where man constitutes relational reality. The repercussions on the formative process from this perspective are important, as the design is so closely linked to the inventive process that it is difficult to find a set of skills that enhance a certain brilliance. Thus, the designing capacity, more than responding to a process of development by competences, can be developed by a process that expands the conditions of its emergence in professional life. As an alternative to efforts to define methodologies to aid the design, it may be pertinent to expand the conditions of operating in an open problematic field by adopting an epistemological ground that gives access to a broader spectrum of signs of reality than another ground that encodes these signs in favor of a way of interpreting reality that fits a pre-established field of solutions. But it is not only the design – understood now as a transductive procedure that connects the virtual with the actual, open, without predeterminations, but that responds to the tensions that arise when the experience is no longer able to incorporate its own becoming in the stable structures that accompany it – which takes on another connotation on the basis of a broader epistemology. To engineer, in itself – as an inventive and relational dimension operating on a problem field – places engineering onto a more open perspective and is able to incorporate its becoming across categories such as design, profession, or modernity since they are only the modes of individuation that characterize the constant dephasing produced by the inventive and relational activity that operates on the open problematic field. In this sense, there is no reason to place the artifact as a physical being on the one hand and on the other, individual psychological or biological procedures such as the design or technical inventiveness, or even to oppose psychic beings to the collective and social processes that are consolidated in norms and professional institutions. The relationships that are established in the individuation processes show that the open problematizing field is much richer and has much more potential for individuation than those that are constituted from individuals already individuated. Based on a more open epistemology, to engineer can show a more complex sort of relationships than those that take rigid domains a posteriori based on already

78

J. Aravena-Reyes

constituted individuals. In this more open context, thinking the unthinkable can find more resolving potential than that found in an ontology-based on individuals already individuated.

6.7 Conclusions Among most of Engineering’s characterizations, qualified problem-solving works as an epistemological basis that guides engineers’ thinking and acting. Such a basis structures a priori the field of solutions to engineering problems as part of the formative process, largely inhibiting the critical-creative attitude and reinforcing a hegemonic and global way of existence. The adoption of an ontology that puts the being as becoming favors operations that are made in the problematic field from which the problems are stated, offering relational openings and compositions that overflow the stable without resorting to predeterminations or decals from fields of pre-established solutions. The fundamental operations act on the differential or new and are problematizing and inventive. Defining Engineering from this perspective can induce a more open and flexible professional education that incorporates its becoming as part of its own process of self-understanding.

References Aravena-Reyes, J. (2018). Métis: Reconfiguring the philosophy of engineering. In A. Fritzsche & J. Sascha (Eds.), The future of engineering (pp. 123–136). Springer. Aristotle. (2015). Metaphysics. Brazilian edition: Metafísica (E. Bini, Trans.). Edições Profissionais Ltda ICE. Blockley, D. (2012). Engineering: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. Blok, V., et al. (2016). A new planetary orientation for philosophy of technology in the anthropocene?. Call for special track at SPT 2017. Darmstadt. Craia, E. (2002). A problemática Ontológica em Gilles Deleuze. Edunioeste. Crutzen, P. (2002). Geology of mankind. Nature, 45(3), 23. Dagnino, R. (2014). Tecnologia social: Contribuições conceituais e metodológicas. Editora Insular. Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1991). Qu’est-ce que la Philosophie?. Brazilian edition: (2007). O que é a Filosofia? (B. Prado & A. Muñoz, Trans.). Editora 34. Foucault, M. (1970). L’ordre du discours. Brazilian edition: (1996). A Ordem do Discurso (L. Sampaio, Trans.). Edições Loyola. Guattari, F. (1989). Les trois ecologies. Brazilian edition: (2009). As Três Ecologias (M. Bittencourt, Trans.). Papirus Editora. Jaramillo, D. (2015). Existe una Filosofia de la Ingenieria? Universitas Philosophica, 32(64), 313–328. Koen, B. (2003). Discussion of the method: Conducing the engineer’s approach to problem solving. Oxford University Press.

6  A Simondon-Deleuzean Characterization of Engineering Design

79

Koen, B. (2013). Debunking contemporary myths concerning engineering. In D.  Michelfelder, N.  McCarthy, & D.  Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 115–137). Springer. Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy?. (C. Nieto & R. Stingl, Trans.). The University of Chicago Press. Mitcham, C. (2021). What is engineering. In D. Michelfelder & N. Doorn (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of the philosophy of engineering (e-book). Routledege. Poel, I. (2010). Philosophy and engineering: Setting the stage. In I. Van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 1–14). Springer. Rifkin, J. (2009). The empathic civilization. Spanish edition: (2010). La Civilización Empática (G. Barberán & V. Casanova, Trans.). Ediciones Paidós. Simondon, G. (1958a). L’Individuation à la Lumière des Notions de Forme et d’Information. English Edition: (2020). Individuation in light of notions of form and information (T. Adkins, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. Simondon, G. (1958b). Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. Spanish edition: (2007). El Modo de Existencia de los Objetos Técnicos (M. Martinez & P. Rodriguez, Trans.). Editorial Cactus, La Cebra Editores. Simondon, G. (2006). Cours Sur la perception. Spanish edition: (2014). Curso Sobre la Percepción (1964–1965) (P. Ires, Trans.). Editorial Cactus. Simondon, G. (2008). Imagination et invention. Spanish edition: (2013). Imaginación e Invención (1965–1966) (P. Ires, Trans.). Editorial Cactus. Sloterdijk, P. (1998). Sphärem. Spanish edition: (2015). Esferas I (I. Reguera, Trans.). Siruela. Stiegler, B. (2009). Pour une nouvelle critique de l’économie politique. Spanish edition: (2017). Por una Nueva Crítica de la Economía Política (M. Martinez, Trans.). Editora Capital Intelectual. Stiegler, B. (2020). Bifurquer: il n’y a pas d’alternative. English edition: (2021). Bifurcate: There is no alternative (D. Ross, Trans.). Open Humanity Press.

Chapter 7

How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How Philosophy Can Help Nina Jirouskova and David E. Goldberg

Abstract  The chapter reviews key foundations and principles of the burgeoning discipline of executive or leadership coaching and explores how these relate to the practice, profession, and philosophy of engineering. In exploring and comparing objectives, approaches, cognitive preferences and future challenges of coaches and engineers, the authors identify a number of kindred properties between the two disciplines. This common ground would invite us to believe that engineering would naturally draw upon coaching for the development of its students, educators, and practitioners, but evidence shows that this is not the case. Although many late-stage engineers get coached upon reaching the C-suite or other high positions in the public or private sectors, early and mid-career engineers do not have ready access to the coaching support seen elsewhere. Equally, very few initiatives to integrate and tap into this resource are seen in the global engineering education system for academic leaders, educators, or engineering students in ways that would benefit future generations of engineers. This chapter aims at providing a possible explanation for this gap, whilst suggesting why and how coaching could possibly be the untapped resource that engineers may need to successfully meet the challenges and demands of today and tomorrow. The authors call on philosophers to join in the efforts, drawing out some key paths for collaboration and helpful future investigative questions. Keywords  Coaching · Engineering · Philosophy · Engineering education · Engineering profession · Missing basics of engineering · Five shifts

N. Jirouskova (*) Resallience, Paris, France e-mail: [email protected] D. E. Goldberg ThreeJoy Associates, Inc., Douglas, MI, USA University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana and Champaign, IL, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_7

81

82

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

7.1 Background to and Aims of the Chapter This chapter was conceived at the 2020 virtual fPET conference when the co-­ authors met for the first time. To their surprise both were trained executive coaches with the first author just finishing coach training from The Coaching Academy in London program in the UK and serving as a coach in a novel PhD coaching program at Imperial College London and the second author having 10  years of coaching engineering academics, students, and professionals since graduating from the Georgetown University leadership coaching certificate program as part of a 45-year career as engineer and engineering faculty member. Much is made of the millennial-­ boomer divide, but in those first fPET interactions despite our generational and ideological differences, we recognized a shared belief in the values and processes of coaching as ways to help students, faculty, and practicing engineers develop. In unison, we both wondered why coaching and coaching processes were not more widely disseminated within both engineering education and engineering practice. Herein, we share our experience and impressions of coaching to the fPET community of engineers and philosophers with a number of goals in mind. First, the term “coaching” is an overloaded term and is most often encountered in sports; here, we both define coaching and convey our sense of what executive or leadership coaching is as an emerging discipline as distinct from the related disciplines of counselling and consulting (and sports coaching). Second, we discuss some of the ways in which we see coaching as connected to philosophy and engineering. Third, we share a number of key experiences in which we have used coaching as a way to help develop engineering, engineering education, and the profession. Finally, we invite our fPET engineering and philosophy colleagues to use and contribute to the coaching framing as a valuable one in the development of engineers and the engineering profession.

7.2 What Is Coaching? Whilst coaching has gained momentum and visibility in certain fields (Coutu & Kauffman, 2009), coaching remains foreign to a large part of the world and professional fields. We therefore start by defining coaching, providing background on it and surveying engineer Fernando Flores’s important contribution to coaching foundations, before seeking to investigate its interface with engineering and philosophy.

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

83

7.2.1 Coaching Defined Although many definitions of coaching exist (see Machado & Davim, 2021; Rosha & Lace, 2016; Bachkirova et  al., 2014), here we describe coaching as a process aimed at empowering an individual (herein the coachee) to define and successfully meet a self-set target through open-ended questions, curious listening, heightened full-person awareness, and an opportunistic, yet goals-driven, time-bound approach.

7.2.2 A Young and Dynamic Practice Coaching arose in the 1980s to meet the need for a positive, future-focused and outcome-driven approach to personal growth. Building upon the long philosophical traditions of dialectic and reflection for the advancement of the understanding of the meaning and the means to the pursuit of a “good life”, coaching historically stems from humanistic psychology (Maslow, 1943), client-centered therapy (Rogers, 1951, 1978), and later, positive psychology (Seligman, 1998). Through one-to-one and group practice as well as applications in organizational behaviour (McGregor, 1960) and management consulting (Schein, 1969), coaching emerged as an institutionalised professional relationship where trust, facilitated freedom, and “non-­ possessive” caring would enable the creative and non-judgemental exploration of one’s self-defined “best” course of action to achieve one’s goal (Green et al., 2006) – thereby addressing the demand of the fast-paced and creatively buoyant environment of the time. An interesting note for readers of this volume is how a trained Chilean engineer, Fernando Flores, laid the intellectual foundations of modern coaching in his trail-­ blazing dissertation at Berkeley (Flores, 1981). The story begins in 1970 with Flores, as a 27-year-old engineer, was tapped by the Allende government of Chile to be minister of finance and works to streamline the government’s computer systems. A coup takes place, and Flores is imprisoned and tortured for 3 years before he and his family are rescued by Amnesty International and taken to California where he enrols In Computer Science and completes an interdisciplinary PhD dissertation advised by Hubert Dreyfus and John Searle. Combining elements of continental philosophy and analytic philosophy of language, the date of its completion is arguably the starting date of a rigorous practice of executive coaching. Since then, coaching has gained in maturity and uptake, specifically in the space of wellbeing (Green et al., 2006) and performance enhancement (Fry, 2000; Côté & Gilbert, 2009; Gould et al., 2017). Building on a wide evidence-based portfolio of success stories, and thanks to vocal ambassadors for the profession, its popularity has kept increasing. It is now common to see coaching positions being opened within companies to support the acquisition, development, and retention of talents and teams (Wyles, 2013; Egan & Hamlin, 2014; da Motta Veiga & Gabriel, 2015), following the three human resource development paradigms of “learning,

84

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

performance and meaning of work” proposed by (Bates & Chen, 2004). Coaching competencies are now increasingly required of leadership positions and help tackle many of the modern workplace challenges (Krug, 1999; Cox et al., 2014; Baker, 2018; Potter, 2005).

7.2.3 Managing Coaching’s Embarrassment of Riches Despite coaching’s march through the executive C-suite (e.g., CEO, CTO, COO…) and increasing adoption in organizational life, it claims no single body of knowledge as its own. Instead, it freely draws on many knowledge bases as well as spiritual and body practices to form a practice. Dealing with notions of self-determination, enablement, and learning, through contemplation, creative exploration, reflection, and action in a space articulated around structured open-questioning, freedom and trust, coaching is inevitably an intrinsically complex interdisciplinary practice. It is underpinned by strong philosophical concepts and utilises theories from the fields of psychology, biophysics, neurosciences, economics, as well as cognitive, behavioural and broader social sciences, among others (Green et  al., 2006; Mendonça & Wallace, 2007; Côté & Gilbert, 2009; Renshaw et al., 2009; Jensen, 2012; Collins & Collins, 2016). Depending on the coaching approach, these foundational elements are more or less apparent in the process, but they are key, even tacitly, to any of them. Considering the breadth and depth of its core field of knowledge, coaching has hence sometimes been criticised for being insufficiently robust with respect to the complexity of the developmental matters at hand. Compared to the training of most experts within the fields that coaching is founded upon, coach training is short, almost fully process oriented, and many of the models and methods that individual coaches learn are picked up from experienced coaches or on the fly. Cox et al. (2014) suggests that this limitation to coaching might be justified given the almost impossible task of robustly embedding the concepts of all the disciplines mentioned above. Ultimately, coaching, similarly to engineering, is more concerned by walking the talk than by theorizing, sometimes to the detriment of the professionalisation of the practice (Drake et al., 2008). The conceptual and theoretical robustness as well as the aptitude to embrace the truly holistic approach of coaching is, ultimately, a highly individual characteristic of each coach. Most often, coaches will have at least one additional professional training, and life experiences that will nourish and give a specific “flavour” to his/ her approach – hence also justifying why we chose to share our two induvial paths to coaching here, recognising the importance of these factors. The inevitable challenges arising from the many variants of coaching practice (Cox et al., 2014; Clutterbuck & Megginson, 2004, 2009) and (ab)-use of the coaching term have only recently started to be addressed by institutions such as the International Coaching Federation. A variety of coaching accreditation and certification systems have emerged to provide sets of standards for knowledge and

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

85

practice The largest of these being the International Coaching Federationi (coachfederation.org), which both accredits programs that train coaches as well as offering credentials to individual coaches based on both time on task as well as mentoring by a master coach. Consumers of coaching are increasingly savvy about the existence and value of these accrediting bodies, and this has aided the sense of coaching as a legitimate profession setting it apart from consulting, mentoring, and counselling. Nonetheless, the term “coach” is rarely regulated by a government body, and a plethora of self-­ defined coaches exist, and with them, a broad spectrum of coaching variants (Cox et al., 2014). Readers of this volume will note the parallel with some of the struggles engineering has faced as a profession, with the term “engineer,” and with the web of different agencies and institutions that weigh in on defining engineering knowledge, practice, and accreditation.

7.2.4 Earliest Efforts to Carry Coaching to Engineering Education Throughout coaching’s short history, engineers at sufficiently high levels of organizational practice have sometimes had the opportunity to receive the benefits of one-­ to-­one executive coaching. The history of explicit embedding of coaching practices in engineering education is much shorter, and dates to the second author’s carriage of the lessons of coach training to the National University of Singapore in 2011. Hired to assist in the successful implementation of a Design Centric Curriculum (DCC) project, co-author Goldberg travelled to Singapore for a 1/3 time appointment over 3 years with the goal of “unleashing” (Goldberg & Somerville, 2014) supposedly shy and reserved Singaporean engineering students. Working from his Georgetown training and from his experience at Illinois with the iFoundry (Illinois Foundry for Innovation in Engineering Education) initiative (Goldberg & Somerville, 2014), Goldberg developed a 5-module training course in 2011 called Teaching as Servant Leadership (TASL). The five modules were as follows: • • • •

TASL01: Servant leadership, teaching, and learning TASL02: Noticing and listening TASL03: Socratic inquiry, opened-ended questions, and spacious dialectic TASL04: Effective engineering & speech acts I – stories, distinctions, assertions & assessments • TASL05: Effective engineering & speech acts II  – coordinating and creating action through requests, commitments, and declarations These five modules landed well, and almost immediately traditional faculty started to see how conversations with “shy and reserved” students opened up with spacious, open-ended coach-like dialogue.

86

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

The following year, Goldberg developed another 5-module program for faculty called POCA or Personal and Organizational Change Agency: • • • • •

POCA01: Personal transition, change & transformation POCA02: Organizational change and the academy POCA03: Effectuation & creativity vs. planning POCA04: Change, culture, and the war of words POCA05: Change artifacts, incubators & dot connectors

These modules were especially helpful to understand the influence of culture in resisting change and the importance of sticky language in nudging it. A short article (Goldberg, 2012) explores the Singapore experience in more detail, and given the original aims of the DCC project for student unleashing, one anecdote stands out. At the end of the year, the students in the DCC were to hold a daylong Expo celebrating the projects they worked on. Without permission, one of the “shy and reserved” students wrote an email to Singapore’s Minister of Education suggesting how cool their projects were and invited him to come, and he did! The courage to take chances like this is exactly the kind of response the DCC program had hoped for.

7.3 Two Views of Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering In this section, we present two views of the relationship and value of coaching to both philosophy and engineering, each from our individual perspectives. We shift to writing in the first person singular to make the individual nature of the contributions clear and the writing easier to read.

7.3.1 Dave’s Perspective As we consider philosophy, coaching, and engineering, I came by my interest in engineering quite naturally at the dinner table. My dad, Jerry, was an aeronautical engineer (stress & structures) with a diverse career building airplanes and blimps, nuclear plant heat exchangers, automotive and truck frames and wheels, trucks and trains. I took schooling at the University of Michigan in Civil Engineering in hydraulics with a special interest in computational models. This led to MSE and PhD degrees at the same school (with an intervening 4-year work experience at a small computational hydraulics consulting firm) with a dissertation applying a type of artificial intelligence (genetic algorithms) to gas pipe flows. I liked the engineering subjects I liked, in part, because they were less well defined than well-­established areas of engineering, allowing room for an engineer’s reflection and creativity. After engineering, between philosophy and coaching, philosophy was my first love. Although I never took a formal philosophy class in school, listening to dozens

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

87

of Teaching Company classes (now, TheGreatCourses.com) on tape and CD while running and exercising helped make me philosophically dangerous. A blog post in 2006 (Goldberg, 24 May 2006) led to an email from the UK relaying there was interest in philosophy and engineering in the Institution of Civil Engineers, and did I know that my own National Academy of Engineering had a working group on philosophy of engineering? No, thank you, I did not, and some poking around (to Billy Koen and Walter Vicenti and some others) led to an invitation to a meeting at MIT in 2006, and shortly thereafter, Ibo van der Poel at TUDelft and I put on the first Workshop on Philosophy and Engineering in 2007, which led to the establishment of fPET. My informal studies of philosophy were enormously helpful to writing an early paper on Change in Engineering Education (Goldberg, 1996), the establishment of something called Teamwork for a Quality Education (Goldberg et al., 1998), and the subsequent founding of iFoundry initiative as documented elsewhere (Goldberg & Somerville, 2014). The success of the iFoundry Freshman Experience (iFX) pilot in fall 2009 led me to look for a job as a school head or dean, which led to hiring an executive coach named Bev Jones. Her powerful questions and listening led me to pivot away from that search, start ThreeJoy Associates, resign my tenure and professorship at UIUC, and go out into the world to change engineering education. It also led me to take training as a coach from the program Bev attended, the Georgetown Leadership Coaching Certificate program, finishing in May 2011. 7.3.1.1 Early Efforts Integrating Philosophy and Coaching for Engineering Practice In the early days of the iFoundry educational initiative at Illinois, I would talk about the importance of soft skills and my colleagues would ask, “But wouldn’t that dilute the basics?” by which they meant math, science, and engineering science. In response, I created the “Missing Basics of Engineering” (Goldberg, 2010, 2011) or seven “philosophical” failures of engineering education based on my observation of senior student design teams over 20 years at Illinois: • • • • • • •

Failure of Socrates 101: Inability to ask good questions. Failure of Aristotle 101: Inability to categorize Failure of Hume 101: Inability to build simple causal models Failure of Descartes 101: Inability to decompose problems into smaller ones Failure of Locke 101: Inability to measure in the empirical world Failure of da Vinci 101: Inability to visualize Failure of Newman 101: Inability to communicate (Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke)

From this perspective, philosophy is useful to engineering as a way of filling lacunae or gaps. After leaving Illinois and iFoundry, I found coaching to be immediately helpful as detailed in Sect. 7.2.4 in the TASL and POCA training. In this way coaching also

88

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

fills gaps, except these were gaps in the training and classroom manner of engineering educators. As part of that early work, I also found students, both graduate and undergraduate, eager to learn about noticing, listening, questioning, and other coaching skills. 7.3.1.2 The 5 Shifts Framework Since these efforts, I’ve looked for ways to integrate philosophy and coaching to advance engineering practice and education. The latest iteration is what I call the five shifts (Goldberg, 2018a, b). The shifts are changes in mindset and skill that help professionals develop and excel in fast-paced times as follows: • Yogi’s shift: The shift from practice as the application of theory to particular situations, to practice as reflection – and conversation-in-action. • Brain-on-a-stick shift: The shift from head to heart, body & hands. • Wittgenstein’s shift: The shift from language as description to language as action. • Little bet’s shift: The shift from planning to entrepreneurial thought and action. • Polarity shift: The shift from problem solving to managing polarities. I briefly discuss the first shift in some detail and then discuss the ways philosophy and coaching are connected to each shift. Yogi’s shift is based on Schön’s (1983) distinction between practice as technical rationality—the application of theory in particular situations—and practice as reflection-in-action, a dialectic process of conversation and introspection. Along with Schön, I believe many practitioners are mistaken about the nature of knowing in practice and the overemphasis of theory is a kind of theory privilege captured in the Yogism: “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.” Philosophically, questions of how we know things in practice are epistemological in nature, and Yogi’s shift is important to correcting the ways engineers are taught and think about practice. Methodologically, the shift is rooted in philosophy’s asking and answering deep reflective questions as the royal road to understanding. From a coaching perspective, Yogi’s shift begs us to teach engineers and educators how to notice, listen, and question like coaches, not only for better engineering practice, but for better integrated living. The brain-on-a-stick shift comes from coaching and reminds us to combine head, heart and body in our lives; It also connects to important traditions in existential philosophy. Wittgenstein’s shift comes from that great philosopher and through the branch of the philosophy of language now called speech acts (Searle, 1999); as discussed earlier, Flores’s transfer of speech acts to the workplace is an important milestone in coaching. The little bet’s shift comes from business school research into entrepreneurship (Sarasvathy, 2005; Sims, 2011). It reminds us that means-end planning depends on accurate causal modelling, which we may not have in new situations; a lack of knowledge often forces actors to perform little experiments (to effectuate) as a way to both learn and decide what to do next. Polarity management

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

89

comes from a therapist’s reflections around patient struggles with opposites in their lives (Johnson, 1996), and for Johnson, polarities are opposites that need each other: teamwork & individual work, research & teaching, work life & personal life, and so on. Polarity management urges us to use EITHER/OR thinking less often and thinking more often. Interestingly, all five of the shifts are themselves in polarity with a dominant pole of the status quo. In this sense, the five shifts urge us to manage each of the core shifts in a harmonious way. Philosophically, this recalls Aristotle’s golden mean (Kraut, 2018; Aristotle, 1992) as well as Chinese notions of Ying and Yang (Wang, 2021). Polarities are a relatively new tool in the coach’s kit, but increasingly they are being mainstreamed into coach training programs. 7.3.1.3 Learning from a Decade of Practice The year 2021 is the tenth anniversary of leaving the university and graduating with my coaching certificate. In that time, I’ve wandered the planet, giving talks and workshops, doing consulting work, and coaching students, faculty, and practitioners around the globe. I close with a list of three observations from this period of experience: • Coaching and philosophy complement each other. • Good process practice goes a long way. • Helping individuals change is about facilitating insight and story change. In the remainder I discuss each in turn. I start by observing how smoothly coaching and philosophy work together for me. Philosophy reminds me to get to the heart of the matter, to ask penetrating questions, to make sharp distinctions, to decompose and summarize well. Because I studied philosophy first, these things came easily to me as a coach. Coaching reminds me to care about the coachee as an individual, to be curious and listen to their distinctions, to use their language in feedback, to integrate rational, emotional, and intuitive factors, to ask permission when making assessments, to not be an insufferable know-it-all. Coaching and philosophy have taught me the importance of good process. Philosophy cares about asking questions, careful reasoning, and articulate arguments. Coaching cares about great noticing, listening and questioning, careful assessments, and keeping the coachee in charge of the agenda. The content of both coaching and philosophy goes where it needs to go, but the invariant is a respect for sound process. One-on-one coaching is always about working with people who want change in their life. In this matter, philosophy and coaching diverge somewhat. Philosophy cares about making good arguments, but it is somewhat indifferent to whether the arguments are believed or used in practice. Coaching succeeds or fails whether the coachee makes a change and uses it or not. And to accomplish this, it is insufficient to help an individual reason differently or simply know something must be different.

90

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

Coaching requires the coach to facilitate deep insights for the coachee in head, heart, and body, rework deeply ingrained habits, and carefully monitor contrary emotional and body signals to bring about change. Perhaps it is the engineer in me that finds this concern for results in the real world with a living, breathing human being so inviting.

7.3.2 Nina’s Perspective 7.3.2.1 The Why Granddaughter of the philosopher and political dissident – Julius Tomin, my inclination towards philosophy might have been somewhat passed down through generations. What is certain is that, raised in an artistic household with books on all walls and where my mother fed me with constant radio shows showcasing Alain Finkielkraut, Raphael Enthoven, and Michel Onfray among others, for breakfast, lunch and dinner, I had but little choice to gain an interest in my early age for the field. I probably wouldn’t have guessed, at the time, how much those long hours of listening and discussing at length, freely, any topic at hand, would shape my approach to life. I learnt to love and appreciate these skills and developed, without necessarily knowing it, a taste, and possibly some capability, of enquiry and exploration, bolstered by a curiosity for others’ views and paths – of life and of mind. And in the culturally philosophically-inclined France where I was raised and where Philosophy is a mandatory subject at A-level for all French students, my interest only grew, supported by a more formal education in the topic. The surprising aspect of my involvement with philosophy and engineering might have therefore more to do with my choice of engineering as a profession rather than with my exploration of the philosophical realm. Aside from coming from a long lineage of engineers and scientists on my mother’s side, I think that what might explain my choice is that I see engineering as a somewhat very satisfactory down-­ to-­earth endeavour which anchors the curious, creative and holistic thinking in practice, tapping into intuition and rules of thumb as much as big ideas and scientific foundations. It is also essentially team-based, which, as a single child in a family unit of two, in a first-generation refugee household, is probably as desirable as a bunch of candies to a kid. Time passed by, exercising as an earthquake civil engineer at Arup, carrying out a PhD at Imperial College in Resilience Systems Engineering, and I found myself missing a key piece to my life’s puzzle. Possibly because my PhD experience proved to be the most solitary experience I’d ever had, seeing no one around in my academic environment with whom to share what I considered to be one of the most valuable explorations of my research – tapping into philosophy to enhance systems engineering modelling, improve uncertainty resilience and enable co-creation … I

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

91

ended up looking for support far and beyond all I would have envisioned normally… and I found coaching. Benefitting from the coaching programme offered by Imperial College (see Sect. 7.3.2.3), not only did I find a path forward, identified a community of kindred spirits in which to have the conversations I needed to have – fPET, of course; but I also discovered a new discipline which could enable my whole self to flourish. I shifted from shaping purposeful actions to creating an actionable purpose. I allowed myself not to choose between deep thinking OR target-oriented practice, creative freedom OR rational thinking, but embracing these “polarities” for the richness they bring (see Sect. 7.3.1.2); finding a new path to the “Joy of Vocation” (Threejoy.com). Naturally, I wanted to learn more about the behind-the-scenes skills necessary for this alchemy to work. And I couldn’t resist my wish to be able to support others the way I had been supported. So I went and got certified as a coach through the ICF-accredited path offered by the London Coaching Academy. Boosted by my coach, I contacted the head of the coaching programme at Imperial College, and I have since then been part of the coaching team of the Graduate School, supporting postgraduate students on top of my own private practice and my continuing involvement as a resilience enabler, utilising my engineering, philosophical, and coaching competencies to enhance humanity’s resilience to disasters. By building capacities of communication, resilient growth and creative autonomy, I believe coaching is now more than ever required to help shape the future of engineering. In a world of heightened anxiety, aggravated by a growing awareness of surrounding complexities, uncertainties, and risks; where the place and value of humans is increasingly questioned in light of the ever-growing performance and human-like (?) behaviour of machines and systems, coaching provides a window of opportunity to re-think, explore and expand upon our identities (Siller et al., 2021), our purpose, the value we contribute to the world; and the unique and untapped resources that we hold – building resilience and bringing hope for a brighter future (Jackson, 2011; Ottosson, 2019). 7.3.2.2 The How Rather than seeing coaching as a skillset to be taught to engineers to bridge a key gap in engineering higher education, as my co-author suggests, my perspective has therefore shaped itself as one of integrative and continuous developmental support that engineers may call upon, as and when needed, throughout their (whole – rather than only “professional”) lives. Incidentally, considering the trends in the evolution of professional education and the rise in continuous whole-life-learning frameworks, coaching could prove to become, from that perspective, a useful resource, inspiration and support to this educational shift. Following a whole-self approach to development and utilising systems engineering principles, I enjoy exploring the interfaces and integration of the body, mind (and spirit). A particular focus of my practice and research in the field also lies in seeking the value in synergies between coaching, philosophy and engineering, in

92

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

the way that those disciplines all contribute, in their own way, to shape our future through formulating powerful and integrative visions, creating consistency and purpose in our lives; exploring and searching with curiosity, modesty and boldness new ways anchored in old ones; and ultimately seeking to deliver tangible and positive impacts to the real-world we experience. Philosophy is particularly key in providing the method and conceptualisation frameworks to the coaching enquiry, ensuring that it remains robust, open and on-point, whilst (systems) engineering, in my view, is an essential complementary asset to facilitate the mapping of the coachees’ reality, their aspirations and “world of possibles”, as well as anchor their “can-do” attitude. 7.3.2.3 The Imperial College Coaching Programme: A Precursor in the UK As mentioned above, I have been involved as a coach for postgraduate students at Imperial College since 2020. I share here a return on experience of the programme to showcase how it came to be; how it works and performs. Since 2016, Imperial College (IC) offers coaching to its postgraduate STEM students. The programme consists in providing students with the opportunity of accessing six sessions of coaching for free, by qualified coaches. The sessions can be aimed at tackling any developmental topic of their choosing, confidentially and independently from their departmental and supervisory environments. This coaching initiative, which contributed to IC’s Guardian University Award in 2017 – Student Experience, is unique in the United Kingdom. It was initially created to address needs identified through a recurrent exercise of college-wide wellbeing assessment, the analysis of sector-wide national data, and the recommendations of the college Working Party (WP) for world-class research supervision (IC, 2015). According to the WP report (IC, 2015), the targets of the coaching programme were seen as being primarily associated to the improvement of the “professional skills” of students. In a recent follow-up interview of the head of the programme, its primary aim was indeed defined as building “effective” and “better working relationships” (L.  G. Lane & N.  Jirouskova, personal communication, Performance feedback of the coaching programme at Imperial College, London, 2021). Coaching was also recognised for its contribution in increasing the coachee’s “productivity”. Its acknowledged benefits additionally included supporting the development of a greater “understanding of how others work and interact”; of “excellent communication skills”; and of an enhanced “ability to work with a range of stakeholders” (L. G. Lane & N. Jirouskova, personal communication, Performance feedback of the coaching programme at Imperial College, London, 2021). Another aspect of the coaching programme’s value relates to improving the wellbeing of students. Though the report refers to coaching in relation to its section on “wellbeing” as a secondary item, mentioning that “a case could be made to increase/ expand coverage of resilience” (IC, 2015), the recent interview accentuated rather more the positive impacts of the coaching programme in this area. It is seen not only

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

93

as “provid[ing] another support mechanism for doctoral students to complement existing wellbeing services” (IC, 2015), but as a key benefit to students in helping them develop their “confidence to deal with immediate challenges” and enhance their “self-awareness” (L.  G. Lane & N.  Jirouskova, personal communication, Performance feedback of the coaching programme at Imperial College, London, 2021). However, although the programme has received very positive feedback from the students (Lane & De Wilde, 2018), less than 0.5% of the total number of postgraduate students reach out to this service annually. Such strikingly low numbers need an explanation that is yet to be found. Is it a question of communication and marketing of the programme? A lack of awareness of what it is and can bring to them? Or a socio-cultural resistance of engineering students towards coaching and soft skills like might suggest the return on experience by Evans (2013) or be challenged by Bowen (2010) for example in the engineering ethics space? As attested by the head of the programme, the value of the programme is clear, both to the students who have experienced it and to external stakeholders, such as funders. But an effort is clearly needed to answer the questions raised above; communicate the value of coaching better; and accompany the necessary cultural shift for the future generations of engineers to benefit from it.

7.4 Coaching, Philosophy & Engineering: Wrap Up & An Invitation This chapter began by asking how did two such different members of the fPET community share an interest in the practice of executive coaching? We then defined coaching, examined some of its influences, origins, and practices, and drew attention to Fernando Flores’s pioneering work in carrying speech acts and existential philosophical ideas over to the foundations of coaching. We also likened coaching’s embarrassment of riches to those of engineering itself (Sect. 7.2.3), both tapping into a wide field of intellectual and practical foundations. This opening segment concluded by surveying some details of an early effort to carry coaching ideas to a curriculum change project in Singapore in 2011. Thereafter, we told separate and individual stories of how the two of us became engaged with engineering, philosophy, and coaching. For Dave, the story started at the supper table, continued with informal study of philosophy while running and exercising, and continued when the one-on-one help provided by his own coach changed the trajectory of his life. The personal recognition of coaching’s power led Dave to coach training, which he immediately applied to a three-year curriculum reform gig at the National University of Singapore. For Dave, both philosophy and coaching fill gaps in an engineer’s education as reflected in the missing basics and five shifts frameworks he has used in a variety of change efforts.

94

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

For Nina, the story is rooted in her family’s fertile ground of free-thinkers AND – doers and her education in a philosophically-inclined French culture. Further down the line, following 4 years working at Arup, then carrying out a PhD in Resilience at Imperial College, she found herself facing the difficult challenge of finding a space to realise her whole self. Seeking a safe, holistic, forward-looking and impact-­ driven space to approach this shift, she came across the coaching program at Imperial College for PhD students. Her experience led her immediately to train as a coach herself and then become one in the same program. Although it is early in her coaching career, she strives to combine systems engineering and philosophical perspectives to address large engineering questions with technical competence, practical humanistic concern, and humility.

7.4.1 Initial Takeaways Here we invite philosophers and engineers to join us in our explorations of the relationship between engineering and coaching on the one hand, and coaching and philosophy on the other, whilst we offer some initial reflections about those relationships. 7.4.1.1 Coaching and Engineering Engineering and coaching share a concern for results in the world, engineering for the design, manufacture, installation, and sustenance of technology, and coaching for the planning, execution, and sustenance of a human life. Both share an embarrassment of riches in that they draw from large bodies of knowledge and practice not owned by the discipline. Both struggle with issues of professional recognition, certification, and accreditation  – the International Coaching Federation having been instrumental in supporting the early stages of the ongoing professionalisation efforts of the practice. Whilst engineering sometimes misunderstands engineering practice as the mere application of theory to particular situations—as technical rationality—coaching understands the importance of reflection- and conversation-in-action as fundamental to good practice. One of the ways coaching can contribute to engineering could therefore be by helping overcome theory privilege with practical approaches to holding deeper and better conversations and reflection episodes in engineering practice broadly conceived. In addition, engineers have cognitive and behavioural preferences shaped by their theoretical and practical background – such as their understanding of design, analysis, and systemic thinking, that can be hard for many generalist coaches with a background in psychology, social sciences or human resources to apprehend. This can hinder and lengthen the process of integrating engineering and coaching understandings, necessary to enable the unlocking of coaching benefits for engineers.

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

95

Perhaps the way forward to truly leverage the value of coaching in engineering would be for more engineers to take training as coaches. We also note that the strong cultural association of engineering to words such as “technical”, “hard”, “rational”, “difficult” or “robust” leads to such cognitive biases that when authors Rizzo et  al. (2013) report on an experiment carried out at the University of Vermont to increase the students’ exposure and learning of what they call “transferrable skills”, although the students acknowledge the value gained from the program in general terms, they cannot see how the skills relate to their development as an engineer. It is therefore of utmost importance to keep actively working against the common limiting belief that engineers may not be “wired” for the type of thinking that coaching taps into. We hope this chapter contributes to this effort, as does the field of philosophy of engineering and communities such as the one congregated at fPET. Though much remains to be done to best integrate engineering and coaching, Dave’s and Nina’s practices around the world as well as recent works in the form of handbooks and step-by-step guides for all engineers to tap into the benefits of coaching (e.g., Fasano, 2015; Machado & Davim, 2021) are a sign that the awareness and appetite for coaching capabilities keep growing within engineering. 7.4.1.2 Coaching and Philosophy The relationship of philosophy and coaching is an interesting one. Philosophy has provided important source materials, particularly in speech acts (Green, 2021) and existential philosophy (Burnham & Papandreopoulos, 2021) to coaching’s foundations in the 1980s. Although philosophy tends not to think of itself as an applied field, coaching strives to apply philosophically useful ideas with a vengeance. As engineers and coaches, we see Philosophy and Coaching as both valuing reflection, good questions, and purposeful conversation. Whilst philosophy may be seen as more concerned with larger issues that can be generalized, coaching tends to be more concerned with particular life, career, or professional challenges faced by specific individuals. Dave’s and Nina’s coaching practices both strongly benefit from referring to philosophical foundations and methods, formally for the former, informally for the latter. The complexity and richness of the areas where reflection and practice in coaching intersects with philosophy is such, though, that the work around identifying, exploring and managing these intersections and potential interdependencies remains a constant and ongoing effort. To our knowledge, philosophers have yet to actively and explicitly engage with this space, and we invite them to join us on this journey.

96

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

7.4.2 Coaching: An Invitation to a Humble Humanistic Bridge For both philosophy and engineering, coaching can serve as a way to notice, listen to, and serve individual human beings in a practical way that adds value to good arguments or good technical work. In this way, we think of coaching as a kind of humble humanistic bridge for philosophers and engineers, both. This conclusion comes from two different individuals, in different generations, and two very different life paths into coaching practice, but the bridge is made possible by coaching’s indifference to coachee subject matter, its strong process orientation, its humility about its ability to direct coachees, and its trust and respect for coachee autonomy. In this spirit, we invite readers of this chapter to explore coaching in a number of ways: 1. Hire a coach and see the benefits of coaching for yourself 2. Check out coaching and coaching training on the International Coach Federation website (coachfederation.org). 3. Consider supporting the creation of a coaching programme for staff and students, as per the Imperial College example in your own institution. 4. Explore the application of coaching ideas in engineering and engineering education reform (Goldberg & Somerville, 2014; threejoy.com). 5. Explore coaching as a way to shape and empower the engineer(ing) of the future For us both, coaching integrates smoothly with our work as engineers and our deep interest in philosophy, both. The ability to serve others in this way is special, and the return in our own ability to understand and facilitate insight in ourselves and others is worth the price of admission. Over the coming years, we expect to see coaching continuing to rise, and we hope to see more fruits of its application to and combination with both philosophy and engineering. Acknowledgements  Nina would like to thank Laura Lane, head of Strategy and Operations at the Graduate School of Imperial College, London, for her time and invaluable contribution to this study.

References Aristotle. (1992). Nicomachean ethics. In R. McKeon (Ed.), Introduction to Aristotle (pp. 316–584). The Modern Library. (Original work published circa 350 BCE). Bachkirova, T., Cox, E., & Clutterbuck, D. (2014). Introduction. In The complete handbook of coaching. Sage. Baker, T. (2018). Bringing the human being back to work: The 10 performance and development conversations leaders must have. Palgrave Macmillan. Bates, R., & Chen, H. (2004). Human resource development value orientations. Human Resource Development International, 7, 351–371. Bowen, W. R. (2010). Prioritising people: Outline of an aspirational engineering ethic. In I. van de Poel & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering – an emerging agenda (Philosophy, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology). Springer.

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

97

Burnham, D., & Papandreopoulos, G. (2021). Existentialism. In Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/existent/ Clutterbuck, D., & Megginson, D. (2004). Techniques for coaching and mentoring (Vol. 1). Butterworth Heinemann. Clutterbuck, D., & Megginson, D. (2009). Techniques for coaching and mentoring (Vol. 2). Butterworth Heinemann. Collins, L., & Collins, D. (2016). Professional judgement and decision-making in adventure sports coaching: The role of interaction. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34(13), 1231–1239. Routledge. Côté, J., & Gilbert, W. (2009). An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 4(3), 307–323. Coutu, D., & Kauffman, C. (2009). What can coaches do for you? Harvard Business Review, 87, 91–97. Cox, E., Bachkirova, T., & Clutterbuck, D. (2014). Theoretical traditions and coaching genres: Mapping the territory. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(2), 139–160. da Motta Veiga, S.  P., & Gabriel, A.  S. (2015). The role of self-determined motivation in job search: A dynamic approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(3), 350–361. Drake, D., Brennan, D., & Gortz, K. (2008). The philosophy and practice of coaching: Insights and issues for a new era (p. 353). Jossey Bass. Egan, T., & Hamlin, R.  G. (2014). Coaching, HRD, and relational richness: Putting the pieces together. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(2), 242–257. Evans, R. (2013). Engineering as performance: An “experiential gestalt” for understanding engineering. In D. P. Michelfelder, N. McCarthy, & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer. Fasano, A. (2015). Engineer your own success – 7 key elements to creating an extraordinary engineering career. Wiley/IEEE Press. Flores, F.  C. (1981). Management and communication in the office of the future [Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation]. University of California at Berkeley. Fry, J. P. (2000). Coaching a kingdom of ends. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 27(1), 51–62. Goldberg, D.  E. (1996). Change in engineering education; one myth, two scenarios, and three foci. Journal of Engineering Education, 85(2), 107–116. Won 1996 ASEE Best Paper (Wickenden) Award. Goldberg, D.  E. (2006, May 24). Philosophy of engineering not a contradiction in terms. The Entrepreneurial Engineer [blog]. https://entrepreneurialengineer.blogspot.com/2006/05/ philosophy-­of-­engineering-­not.html Goldberg, D. E. (2010). The missing basics and other philosophical reflections for the transformation of engineering education. In D. Grasso & M. Burkins (Eds.), Holistic engineering education: Beyond technology (pp. 145–158). Springer. Goldberg, D. E. (2011). 7 missing basics of engineering. TEDxUIUC Talk, Urbana, IL. https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp9PfqUQ8a4 Goldberg, D. E. (2012). Singaporean engineering students can do X. Innovation: The Singapore Magazine of Research, Technology, and Education, 11(1), https://www.innovationmagazine. com/volumes/v11n1/coverstory1.html Goldberg, D. E. (2018a). Revisiting Schön’s reflection-in-action in transforming the practice of engineering education. 2018 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering, and Technology Abstract Booklet. Goldberg, D. E. (2018b). Revisiting Schön’s reflection-in-action in transforming the practice of engineering education. Powerpoint presented at 2018 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering, and Technology. College Park, MD. Goldberg, D. E., & Somerville, M. (2014). A whole new engineer: The coming revolution in engineering education. ThreeJoy Associates, Inc.

98

N. Jirouskova and D. E. Goldberg

Goldberg, D. E., Hall, W. B., Krussow, L., Lee, E., & Walker, A. (1998). Teamwork for a quality education: Low-cost effective engineering education reform through a department-wide competition of teams. Proceedings of the 1998 ASEE Annual Conference, 3.541.1–3.541.13. Gould, D., Pierce, S., Cowburn, I. H. J., & Driska, A. (2017). How an elite coach’s philosophy drives his coaching to facilitate psychological skills development of young athletes: A case study of J Robinson. International Sport Coaching Journal/ISCJ, 4, 13–37. Green, M. (2021). Speech acts. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2021 edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/speech-­acts/ Green, L.  S., Oades, L.  G., & Grant, A.  M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral, solution-focused life coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being, and hope. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3), 142–149. IC. (2015). Final report from the working party for world-class research supervision. Imperial College. Jackson, N. J. (2011). Learning for a complex world: A lifewide concept of learning, education and personal development. AuthorHouse UK. Jensen, K. (2012). Who cares? other-regarding concerns – decisions with feeling. In P. Hammerstein & J. Stevens (Eds.), Evolution and the mechanisms of decision making. The MIT Press. Johnson, B. (1996). Polarity management: Identifying and managing unsolvable problems. HRD Press. Kraut, R. (2018). Aristotle’s ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2018 edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/aristotle-­ethics/ Krug, J. (1999). Dealing with professional burnout. Journal of Management in Engineering, 15(3), 23–24. Lane, L. G., & De Wilde, J. (2018). The impact of coaching doctoral students at a university in London. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 16(2), 55–68. Machado, C., & Davim, J. P. (2021). Coaching for managers and engineers. Springer. Maslow, A.  H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.334.7586. McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. McGraw-Hill. Mendonça, D.  J., & Al Wallace, W. (2007). A cognitive model of improvisation in emergency management. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics  – Part A: Systems and Humans, 37(4), 547–561. Ottosson, S. (2019). Developing and managing innovation in a fast changing and complex world – benefitting from dynamic principles. Springer. Potter, B.  A. (2005). Overcoming job burnout: How to renew enthusiasm for work. Ronin Publishing. Renshaw, I., et al. (2009). Insights from ecological psychology and dynamical systems theory can underpin a philosophy of coaching. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 40(4), 540–602. Rizzo, D.  M., Dewoolkar, M.  M., & Hayden, N.  J. (2013). Transferable skills development in engineering students: Analysis of service – learning impact. In Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer. Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory. Constable. Rogers, C. (1978). On personal power: Inner strength and its revolutionary impact. Robinson. Rosha, A., & Lace, N. (2016). The scope of coaching in the context of organizational change. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(1), 2. Sarasvathy, S. (2005). What makes entrepreneurs entrepreneurial. Harvard Business Publishing. Schein, E. (1969). Process consultation: Its role in organizational development. Addison-Wesley. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books. Searle, J. (1999). Mind, language, and society. Basic Books. Seligman, M. (1998). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life. Free Press.

7  How Modern Coaching Can Help Develop Engineers and the Profession: And How…

99

Siller, T., Johnson, G., & Korte, R. (2021). Broadening engineering identity: Moving beyond problem solving. In Engineering and philosophy – remaining technology and social progress (Philosophy of engineering and technology). Springer. Sims, P. (2011). Little bets: How breakthrough ideas emerge from small discoveries. Free Press. Wang, R. W. (2021). Yinyang (Yin-yang). The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep. utm.edu/yinyang/ Wyles, G. (2013). Coaching in engineering. Plant and Works Engineering, 375, 52–54.

Part II

Reflections on Artifacts

Chapter 8

What Do Overhead Lines Reveal? Daiana Martinez Monteleone

Abstract  The energy transition has become one of the most important issues on the European political agenda, setting precedents for the energy management worldwide. In the case of Germany, the chosen strategy consists in the transport of wind energy generated in the North to the Southern metropolitan areas by means of new electricity highways. The announcement of the project triggered a wave of protests, many of them related to the aesthetic of the landscape. Since the political institutions were openly aiming to increase the acceptance of the measure among citizens, the variant of laying the cables underground was legally defined in 2015 as the standard method, despite of its higher cost, compared to overhead lines. Although it is known that natural beauty has long become a relevant variable in planning, the present text examines whether this concept, when used in governmental nature conservation policies, is pervaded by obsolete aesthetic clichés. For this purpose, other aspects are also addressed in this text, like the role of technology in human life and our reactions towards technical objects in the landscape. If this postulate turns out to be true, we should become aware, that the burying of the cables could lead to indirect damage of our environment, namely, to the maintenance of our excessive consumption habits and to misguided investments of public resources. Keywords  Energy transition · Underground cables · Landscape aesthetics · Environmental awareness · Aesthetic clichés

D. Martinez Monteleone (*) Stiftung Universität Hildesheim, Hildesheim, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_8

103

104

D. Martinez Monteleone

8.1 Introduction The discussion about the “energy transition” has grown so massively in the recent years, that the grid expansion has become one of the most important issues on the European political agenda and what is decided in those countries sets a precedent for energy management worldwide. Moving away from what should be our focus, namely, the reduction of energy consumption, alternative energy sources are instead being sought and that presents both technical and social challenges. In the case of Germany, transporting wind energy generated in the Northern part of the country to consumers in Southern metropolitan areas is particularly complex. Due to the plan to connect new producers of decentralized energy to the grid and given that the existing grid is already reaching the limits of its capacity, projects of electricity highways which cross the entire country, have emerged. The announcement of the routes triggered a wave of protests. In addition to those who question the necessity of the projects and those who problematize the election of specific routes, there are some who argue for a particular electricity transmission technology: one group supports overhead lines and the other underground cables. While the already familiar technology of overhead lines presupposes conductor cables that run attached to pylons above ground, the technology of undergrounding – which has so far been limited to the level of distribution grids – promises a seemingly inconspicuous grid expansion. Since the protests have made the negotiation processes very complex and time-­ consuming, state and federal parliaments have passed laws1 that not only permit the undergrounding of extra high voltage lines, but also give priority to this technology.2 In this way, the political institutions were openly aiming to increase the acceptance of the grid expansion among citizens. In this sense, the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy comments: “These [underground cables] are more expensive [compared to overhead lines], but they increase acceptance because the impact on the landscape is significantly less.”3 Despite the implementation of this strategy of acceptance, some disputes remain. The arguments to prefer one or the other technology are very heterogeneous: some citizens have concerns about nature protection, some about their health, some about

 This laws are: the German Electricity and Gas Supply Act (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz EnWG), the Energy Transmission Expansion Act (Energieleitungsausbaugesetz EnLAG), the Grid Expansion Acceleration Act (Netzausbaubeschleunigungsgesetz Übertragungsnetz NABEG) and the Law on the Federal Requirements Plan (Bundesbedarfsplangesetz BBPlG). 2  According to the Act Amending Provisions of the Law on Electricity Grid Construction (Gesetz zur Änderung von Bestimmungen des Rechts des Energieleitungsbaus, which came into force in December 2015 through the Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) Volume 2015 Part I No. 55), new direct current projects must be planned as underground cables. Previously, overhead lines had priority and underground cables were the exception. 3  “Diese [die Erdkabel] sind zwar teurer [im Vergleich zu den Freileitungen], erhöhen aber die Akzeptanz, da der Eingriff in die Landschaft deutlich geringer ist.” (Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, 2020). 1

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

105

the value of their property, some about possible losses in the agricultural activity, some about the preservation of old traditions, etc. This text analyses a particular aspect of those to be considered for the choice of the technology to be implemented in the different routes of the grid development: the factor of visibility of the transmission grid and how it affects the beauty of the landscape and our ecological awareness. Although natural beauty has long become a relevant variable in planning, the present work examines whether this variable is pervaded by obsolete aesthetic clichés. Questions such as what is meant by the term “nature”, what role technology plays in human life, and why technical objects evoke certain reactions in their viewers are addressed in this text in relation to the visibility of the power grid. In addition, this subject is worth analysing for these two other points: First, this case study aims to show that the understanding of some basic terms, which can be found even in official governmental texts of nature conservation policy, may turn out to be contingent. That is, the meaning of such terms is not essential, and they can be interpreted differently depending on contemporary readings of social reality. In particular, this study is concerned with the concepts of “beauty” and “nature” of which a certain arbitrary understanding has become entrenched (Fischer, 2004). In this way, the opportunity to show alternative ways of thinking arises, which can go beyond the framework of supposedly reasonable opinions. And secondly, it becomes clear how the weight of such obsolete interpretations paradoxically takes out of focus a top priority of the political agenda, specifically, environmental protection. While the measures to protect soil, plants, animals, biodiversity, etc. refer to direct physical damage to the protected goods, it will be shown later that the obsolete definition of the protected good ‘landscape’ can also lead to indirect damage, namely, to the maintenance of excessive consumption habits and to misguided investments of public resources. Like Hillerbrand und Goldammer say, “in most contexts it is far from obvious what defines sustainable technology or behavior” (Hillerbrand & Goldammer, 2018). A revision of the visibility criterion of the grid expansion is advisable because the laying of underground cables is not technically equivalent to the construction of overhead lines, as the testing of this technology is still in an early stage of development, because its security of supply and service life are lower, and because it is much more expensive (according to the German Federal Network Agency and the transmission system operator Amprion, they are at least six times more expensive than overhead lines).

8.2 To See or Not to See, That Is the Question The theme of this chapter is prompted by the approach raised by the sociologist Lucius Burckhardt: “One can be surprised at how little are people aware that the enjoyment of the landscape and the way of enjoying it, that the choice of where to direct one’s steps for a walk, also contain supreme philosophical questions. It is

106

D. Martinez Monteleone

always a confession of how humans relate to nature” (Burckhardt, 1980, my translation). Reformulating Burckhardt in the context of the underground cable/overhead line protests, it might be stated as follows: Why do visitors to rural suburbs find the visibility of cables so off-putting that they change their preferences on strolling places? What do they feel when they come face-to-face with an overhead cable line? First of all, let us say that the majority of the protesters demonstrating in favour of burying the cables for aesthetic reasons consists of city dwellers who want to perceive a natural counter-world in the neighbouring agricultural landscapes during their leisure time, suburban residents who accept the daily commute to and from the city in the hope of gaining a better quality of life and those who are concerned about the preservation of land and property values (Schweizer-Ries, 2010). It is not the agricultural sector that protests against the visibility of the grid, which is understandable since, although they are the ones who are more in contact with the landscape, “pleasure in aesthetic contemplation requires the muse and the free time to develop those emotions” (Hillerbrand & Goldammer, 2018). The protests, although very heterogeneous, articulate uniform demands at regional level and act, at least in part, in a coordinated manner. For committed people, a high level of involvement results when, for example, the destruction of one’s own homeland (in German: Heimat) is framed in a highly emotional way. Affections generally play an important role, even if the argumentations strive for rationality (Weber, 2018). While the majority acknowledges the need for grid expansion, the Nimby position prevails. A significant portion of protesters shares the view that people should guide a reversal to the “old,” “natural” values and ways of life. Some of them perceive in technological elements of the landscape a kind of “technical violence” that leads to the feeling of loss of closeness to nature. Some think that the image of humans resulting from the technified landscape corresponds to a machine-­ like being that always strives to maximize its utility (Weber, 2016). Since objects themselves have no good or bad will, it is proposed to reflect on what the feelings depicted above, supposedly inspired by technical elements, reveal about their claimers. And not only in the context of the expansion of the electrical grid, but also in relation to a much more fundamental conflict, namely the understanding of the relationship between technology and nature. Firstly, one can see that the protesters’ statements imply their understanding that nature and technology are at odds with each other, so that nature would be spoiled by contact with “human things” (Association of citizens’ initiatives along the SuedLink, 2015). Secondly, it can be read in their discourses that for them “true” standards and models of life should be sought in nature. This attitude, according to which moral guidelines can be found beyond the existing social orders, could indicate an inner-societal mistrust. Thirdly, it is interpreted from their speeches that the protesters feel stress and blame it on the “unnatural” urban-technical civilization (Körner, 2006). Fourthly, it is understood that for these citizens, the landscape existing before any constructional measure would fulfil the conditions to provide for a real contact with nature.

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

107

After showing the beliefs on which demonstrators stand, the following are five lines of thought to counter these technology-versus-nature views.

8.2.1 What Is Understood by “Nature” and “Technology” First of all, it must be said that the fact that understanding can only arise from human modes of cognition, or their frames of interpretation is not a reason for the assumption that such explanations are to be discarded  – human can never reach universal truths anyway. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that since subjective interpretations are involved in the comprehension of concepts, the reflexive catching up of this kind of comprehension is imperative. As for the concept of nature, in its widespread understanding since modern times, there is a denial to consider us and human creations as part of nature. Since we rely so much on reason, nature remains for us only something that can be perceived from a certain distance. In other words, humans are described as biological excess beings (Hubig, 2010) and taken out of nature, so that they can now look at it as a stranger. This phenomenon, which is crucial for the “bourgeois aesthetics of nature”, is thus an expression of a human being who is not able to recognize nature in itself and therefore seeks it outside, as a utopian counter-image of its own social existence (Böhme, 1989). In this sense, the designation “natural” is aimed in opposition to the intellectual in humans, i.e., “natural” would be what is not shaped by humans, so that “nature” in its conceptualization depends on “technology” as the primary concept of reflection, because it is characterized ex negativo (Hubig, 2010). However, this position must be countered by the fact that humans, with everything that constitutes them, are part of nature. Humans and human works cannot be strangers who entered nature and did not manage to fit into the balance given by it and therefore broke it (Böhme, 1989). Now regarding the concept of “technology”, it is important for the present analysis to emphasize that it is not to be understood as accessory to humans, but as constitutive. In words of the philosopher Andreas Hetzel: “the human being becomes a human being only by the fact that he does not relate to the world directly but makes use of technical mediation steps” (Hetzel, 2005, my translation). It is precisely part of the human essence to shape oneself and one’s environment actively and creatively. Thus, paradoxically, human unchanging nature proves itself while human beings strive to change or mold themselves. And that is precisely what we do through technology. Technology is an apparent sign of human rationality. Paraphrasing the philosopher John Dewey, it is in technology – that is, in “applied” science, which includes engineering and construction – where we use our knowledge to participate as active partners in what is taking place, to make it different from what it would be if we did not act based on our own knowledge (Dewey, 2019). After revisiting the concepts of nature and technology, can be concluded that technology does not have to be understood as something opposed to nature. Nevertheless, postulates like “respect for nature” deepen the gap between humans

108

D. Martinez Monteleone

and their works on the one hand and the rest of nature on the other hand. One could instead, by integrating human works into the landscape, understand the human-­ nature relationship as a connection of nature with its inner self, where harmony has more to do with interactions within a complex system or with creative transformations (Weber, 2016). This would mean no longer thinking in terms of opposites – such as “technology” versus “nature” – but in terms of relationships.

8.2.2 “Real” Nature? Or Human-Tailored Nature? It is necessary to revise the belief that a visit to a particular landscape before the installation of a power line provides a moment of real communion with nature. For many it seems obvious that an overhead power line with lattice towers leads to the complete loss of the aesthetically “high quality” of the initial landscape, but at the same time they do not find critical that this landscape may be a highly effective and fertilized cornfield. What is often labelled as “beautiful natural landscapes” are those landscapes which, although appearing as “authentic”, have resulted from exploitation, i.e., they are not exclusively the product of nature. Much of the green environment today “come into being” through the nurturing, trimming, consuming, devastating human organization (Seel, 1991). Thus, we find ourselves praising some forms of human intervention on nature and condemning others. From the above, the proposal to argue for underground cabling to protect the “natural”, or non-human-made landscape is considered inconsistent, because almost all the landscapes that the underground cable proponents want to protect are already anthropogenically deformed anyway, so they are already not untouched natural landscapes.

8.2.3 Transformation Belongs to the Landscape A particular notion of “real landscape”, which is supposed to be preserved at any cost, makes little sense if one considers that landscapes are always being changed. No one questions that through the erection of pylons a change in the landscape takes place, but such changes should not be considered a problem themselves, because not every human intervention necessarily spoils the beauty and identity of a landscape. Even if the landscape factor deserves to be considered in infrastructural planning, it should not be forgotten that landscapes are to be understood as dynamic compositions. Even the term “cultural landscape”, which for some suggests something like eternity, refers to “culture” and thus it is not eternal, but corresponding to a historical snapshot (Weber, 2018). On this ground, one might conclude that the refusal to see the hanging cables has more to do with a desire to preserve an

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

109

arbitrarily prescribed form of the natural than with a genuine longing for nature. In this sense, the installation of overhead cables, as long as they are harmoniously inserted into the landscape, could be taken as a testimony of the dynamics of contemporary society.

8.2.4 Façades of Sustainability If it is intended to counteract the monotonization and mechanization of the landscape, the method of “sweeping under the carpet” is simply not enough. Will the connection to nature be more genuine if the cables are 1.50 m underfoot instead of 30 m overhead? No. The claim that underground cabling will contribute to a non-­ instrumental interaction with the natural world fails. A life closer to nature is not favoured by visiting a place crossed by underground cables, even if it is considered to be “outside populated areas” and has a value in the revenues of tourist companies. Just as in the case of the English landscaped gardens, underground cabled landscapes attempt to “look natural”. But are English gardens less artificial than the French ones, strictly geometrically planned and decorated with filigree?4 Through such alleged solutions, both the English gardens and the underground cabled landscapes avoid being seen as a complete subjugation of nature to human principles of life (Böhme, 1989). Nevertheless, far from being a granting of nature, this alternative is highly artificial.

8.2.5 Perceiving with All Senses Just as more and more buyers are becoming apprehensive about fruit without any damage, perfectly straight cucumbers, or evenly coloured peppers, the visually “immaculate” field may no longer appear credible to those who witness, at least through the news, the laying of the cables. Just as spotless fruit arouses suspicion of nitrates and pesticides, the ostensible measure of “acceptance by invisibility” and the resulting “genuine-looking” fields could turn into massive distrust of green spaces. Even by law, not only the sense of sight is included for the evaluation of the landscape: in 1991, the German Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) established standards for the evaluation of landscape, which are related to the “landscape experience” (Runge et al., 2012).  French gardens, to which the English garden was designed to contrast, stand out by their layout; thus, they were accused of needing their beauty to be “thought out.” As an alternative, the English garden emerged, which, instead, has its charm in the changing scenes and views presented to the wandering visitor (Böhme, 1989). 4

110

D. Martinez Monteleone

Just as one knows that a certain tree is an apple tree, even if no apple hangs down in January, one can accuse those who proclaim against the mechanization of the living environment and for the underground cabling of providing a superficial solution, because it is not only the sight of cables and pylons what reminds of the existence of the power line in a place. As Eva Schürmann notes, you see “something” when, for example, someone you expected at the station does not arrive. In such a case, “not seeing something” acquires the status of seeing something (Schürmann, 2008), and this “seeing of the invisible grid” is exacerbated precisely by the current protests and debates. The natural environment is a space in which humans reside and experience in their own bodies. To consider the human mood or mental state as a relevant statement about the perception of a landscape corresponds to the so-called “aesthetic theories of atmospheres” (Böhme, 1995) and the “aesthetics of experience” (Nohl, 2015). If one analyses the underground wired landscape according to the criteria of these aesthetic theories, it can be concluded that the knowledge of the invisible wiring leads to the loss of that atmosphere of respect that once surrounded the landscape. Extrapolating this reasoning, one might think that if overhead power lines were no longer visible in the landscape, the presence of hidden wires could be suspected anywhere, which, instead of maximizing the recreational potential of the environment, would promote a sense of alienation to the extreme.

8.3 The Ugliness and Beauty of Landscape and Overhead Lines The procedures required to determine the routes and technologies to be implemented for a grid section include elaborating landscape evaluations. For this purpose, the Federal Nature Conservation Law (BNatSchG) defines three main indicators on which a scoring system is based to compare the suitability of different corridors: Diversity, Uniqueness and Beauty. This means that the law considers it possible to objectively determine not only the perceptual intensity of the facilities to be built, but also and especially the value of pre-existing landscapes. And this is supposed to be done comparing the data collected in field studies to normative target-statements on the protected good. It is not surprising that some pro-undergrounding groups refer to such analysis when looking for evidence of the supposed disfigurement of the landscape by overhead lines. One might argue, however, that such judgments – even if compliant with the law – can be questioned because the target-statements on which they are based are contingent. By this is meant that the criterion of beauty on which they are based cannot be defined “once and for all”. Beauty is a concept that evolves along with numerous aspects of human existence. There are no criteria for the adequacy of such imagery of beauty, even though we inevitably establish them. As Hubig says, it is good that many of these imageries

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

111

coexist, because then the danger that we think, our particular understanding is the only and the right one, decreases (Hubig & Luckner, 2008). Thus, it is not appropriate to give an “objective beauty evaluation” by means of a law  – no matter how refined and complex its parameters are – as this promotes a monopolizing attitude, even transgenerationally. Since the beauty perceived in an element depends not only on the element itself but also on the observer, the question arises whether the repulsive feelings at the sight of overhead power lines could be transformable by introducing a change in the observer’s way of life. In other words, it is proposed to transform not the observed object but the glasses through which it is seen, because habits of seeing function as glasses through which it is first defined what something becomes visible as (Schürmann, 2008). Moreover, the unveiling of the beauty of the technological object should not be left solely to perception. Philosopher Gilbert Simondon writes that it must be understood and thought about, in other words, technical education is needed so that the beauty of technical objects can come to manifestation (Simondon, 2012). This position leads to the statement that the more technical understanding one has, the more the feeling of distance and alienation towards technological objects decreases. Thus, the alternative and pattern-free way of looking at the pylons as a positive contribution to the beauty of the landscape arises. The facts that pylons are human-­ made objects, that their geometry is angular and rectified and that they are enablers of industrial activity are not sufficient reasons to necessarily label them as impoverishment of the beauty of a landscape. The character of a landscape is not only reflected in the nature that has hardly been influenced by humans, but equally by their historical character. Even the BNatSchG states that historically evolved cultural landscapes, including their cultural, architectural monuments are to be preserved (§ 1 paragraph 4 sentence 1 BNatSchG). According to the judgment of the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht – BVerwG), there is a disfigurement of the landscape on the one side if a project is grossly inappropriate to the landscape from an aesthetic point of view – which could be a question of moderation instead of a question of the laying technology to be applied – and on the other side if a project is perceived by an “observer open to aesthetic impressions” as encumbering (Judgment 15.5.1997 – 4 C 23.95 confirmed by BVerwG decision of 15.10.2001 – 4 B 69.01). It is known that people associate ideas to landscape elements. Thus, some technological objects such as a church dome, a sailing ship, a windmill, a lighthouse, a train, etc. may even deserve a place in paintings and inspire poems. Since in them is seen the growth of communities and the free and energetic spirit of human beings, these structures are much less often accused of aesthetic damage to the landscape (Nohl, 1993). Following these thoughts, one could also see embodied in hanging cables running on a pylon above the ground, an imprint of invention, the capacity of human planning and the accumulation of supra-generational knowledge.

112

D. Martinez Monteleone

8.4 The Energy Transition and the Visibility of the Power Grid In the following, we will reflect on how the success of the energy transition and the visibility of power lines are related. First of all, three issues should be clarified: Fundamental is the explanation of what energy transition actually consists of. While the term is often associated with getting green electricity instead of nuclear and fossil fuels, it is often forgotten that energy transition also aims to reduce energy demand in the long term. This means that the targeted transformation relies on renewable energy, as well as energy efficiency and energy demand management. Although the climate crisis cannot be stopped as long as one continues to live and consume as before, only with the creation of awareness the problem is not at an end either: Ortega y Gasset wrote that while mere life – life in the biological sense – is a fixed quantity and is fixed once and for all for every species, what we call living  – living well or well-being  – is an ever-moving, infinitely changing concept (Ortega y Gasset, 1978). This means that part of the essence of human beings is to always long for further possibilities of development and to seek the means to achieve them. Second, it is not realistic to expect changes in social consumption patterns merely as a result of private initiatives. The guiding concept for change in social behaviour should be systemic and directed by public institutions, because, as Martha Nussbaum says, if each person tried to think individually about what is to be done, this would be a recipe for massive confusion and failure (Nussbaum, 2006). Thirdly, it is relevant to repeat that underground cabling is not necessary for the implementation of the grid expansion, because this is already feasible with the considerably more cost-effective technology of overhead lines.5 However, the topics “energy transition” and “underground cabling” are often discursive mixed together, which gives the false impression of a certain necessity of underground cabling. In view of these points, the question arises, whether the invisibility of cabling could possibly have a negative impact on the energy transition for at least two reasons:

 About the high cost of underground cabling, the fact that the decision to change the technology was made in the middle of the planning process, results in an additional increase in costs (redefinition of the study area, planning of several alternative corridors, etc. become necessary) (Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railway, 2016). 5

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

113

8.4.1 Energy Transition Through Changes in Consumer Behaviour The reduction of energy consumption has a direct impact on the achievement of the formulated targets for renewable energy (O’Sullivan et al., 2018). But as far as consumer behaviour is concerned, it is noted here that underground cabling could act as an alibi for not thinking about our current standard of living, according to the motto: what has not passed through the eyes is not presented to the mind. The unpleasant feelings that arise at the sight of overhead power lines, exposing the treatment of nature as an object of human exploitation, are silenced by the underground cabling. The awareness strategy of highlighting negative aspects of a phenomenon in order to obtain, through emotional reactions, changes in habits is not new, neither at the private nor at the public level. An example of this is the European Union’s Tobacco Directive, which, with the aim of establishing an effective means of communication, added pictorial warnings to cigarette packets to make clear to consumers the harms that are not obviously related to smoking. One can see a parallelism between those shocking images and the overhead lines as well, in that both strategies try to reduce any positive image of excessive consumption, such as the one that leads to the underestimation of risk through the reference to terms such as “light”, “mild”, “natural” or “ecological” in cigarette advertisements (Gleibs, 2019). Because of the breaking of the systematic connection between seeing and insight that results from underground cabling, it is claimed here that the technology of underground cabling does not help to consider the natural environment changed by humans as a critical problem, because we do not get to feel of these changes (Böhme, 1989).

8.4.2 Energy Transition Through Technological Means In addition to the grid expansion, which will enable the connection of renewable energy producers, actions to increase energy efficiency are another technological supporting pillar of the energy transition. Examples of such measures include simple methods, such as insulation of buildings, and also more sophisticated ones, such as energy storage systems, which are necessary in perspective, but which are still mostly expensive today and some of which are still in the development stage, meaning that investment in research is needed. Funds are available: beyond those available in Germany, research in the energy sector is also supported by EU research programs; but research on the suitability of the technology of underground cabling for extra-high voltage corridors – which, as explained above, aims to protect the landscape for aesthetic reasons –, takes up most

114

D. Martinez Monteleone

of the available funds and has characterized the increase in investment in the infrastructure sector recorded after 2010.6 The wide range of relevant technologies for increasing energy efficiency makes the task of incorporating them into a comprehensive and systematic economic program an immense challenge. Nonetheless, their research should be seen as a priority because this is the only way to achieve the necessary cost reduction potentials that can make their implementation possible. For this reason, prioritizing underground cabling can be considered a short-­ sighted measure, because investing in its suitability testing wastes both human and material resources that could be used to research into more necessary and useful technologies. The following saying, attributed to Henry Ford, illustrates the idea: “Many people are busy trying to find better ways of doing things that should not have to be done at all. There is no progress in merely finding a better way to do a useless thing.”

8.5 Conclusion The example of the impact of the grid expansion on the landscape was taken to address the use of formalized valuation approaches within planning processes, through which vain attempts are made to ensure transparency and intersubjectivity. Such standardizations rely on concepts (in this case of “nature” and “beauty”) that may correspond to contingent and outdated value assignments. As a result, decisions are made in a particular direction that may prove detrimental to higher goals in the long run. In the case of the grid expansion, underground cabling is used to try to suppress the impression of ugliness of the technological elements on the landscape, resulting in two negative consequences; on the one hand, the chance to question the current consumerist way of life and the opportunity to do something about this social reality – instead of killing the messenger – is missed. And on the other hand, research funds for the development of energy-efficient technologies are made available only to a comparatively small extent. Neither the inexorable mechanization of the landscape nor the elimination of technological elements will lead to a more ecological approach to the environment. As long as the technological elements are kept in an acceptable proportion and do not represent an “army of occupation in enemy territory”, they do not challenge the natural character of the landscapes (Nohl, 2016). The presence of such elements in the landscape, contrary to popular belief, can even be enriching. They can contribute to the shortening of the distance of people to nature, in which we see ourselves fused with nature precisely through our works.

 For new extra-high voltage three-phase lines, for example, the law has even expanded the criteria and the number of pilot projects for underground cabling in order to have more experience with this new technology more quickly. 6

8  What Do Overhead Lines Reveal?

115

References Association of citizens’ initiatives along the SuedLink. (2015). Verbund der Bürgerinitiativen entlang des SuedLink. Joint declaration printout. Accessed Oct 2020. https://biweserbergland.wordpress. com/2015/04/18/was-­wir-­gemeinsam-­mit-­der-­erdkabel-­offensive-­suedlink-­erreichen-­wollen/ Böhme, G. (1989). Für eine ökologische Naturästhetik. Suhrkamp. Böhme, G. (1995). Atmosphäre. Essays zur neuen Ästhetik. Suhrkamp. Burckhardt, L. (1980). Warum ist Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswissenschaft. Martin Schmitz. Dewey, J. (2019). Sozialphilosophie. Vorlesungen in China 1919/20. Suhrkamp. Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt) Volume 2015 Part I No. 55, issued at Bonn on 30 December 2015. Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie). (2020). Ein Stromnetz für die Energiewende. Accessed Sept 2020. https://www. bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Dossier/netze-­und-­netzausbau.html Federal Nature Conservation Law (Bundesnaturschutzgesetz: BNatSchG). Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railway (Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen). (2016). Position paper of the Federal Network Agency for applications according to § 6 NABEG. Bonn. Fischer, L. (2004). Projektionsfläche Natur. Zum Zusammenhang von Naturbildern und gesellschaftlichen Verhältnissen. Hamburg University Press. Gleibs, J. (2019). Die Relevanz der Meritorik im Kontext des libertären Paternalismus für die Bewertung der Gesundheitspolitik der Europäischen Union. Shaker. Hetzel, A. (2005). Technik als Vermittlung und Dispositiv. Über die vielfältige Wirksamkeit der Maschinen. In G.  Gamm & A.  Hetzel (Eds.), Unbestimmtheitssignaturen der Technik. Eine neue Deutung der technisierten Welt. Transcript. Hillerbrand, R., & Goldammer, K. (2018). Energy technologies and human well-being. Using sustainable design for the energy transition. In A. Fritzsche & S. Julian (Eds.), The future of engineering (pp. 151–176). Springer. Hubig, C. (2010). Kulturbegriff – Abgrenzungen, Leitdifferenzen, Perspektiven. In G. Banse & A. Grunwald (Eds.), Technik und Kultur. Bedingungs – und Beeinflussungsverhältnisse. KIT Scientific Publishing. Hubig, C., & Luckner, A. (2008). Natur, Kultur und Technik als Reflexionsbegriffe. In P. Janich (Ed.), Naturalismus und Menschenbild (Deutsches Jahrbuch Philosophie Vol I). Meiner. Körner, S. (2006). Gesunde Erholung in gesunder Landschaft: die Entwicklung der Landespflege zu einer versachlichten, legislativ geregelten Planungsdisziplin. In U. Eisel & S. Körner (Eds.), Landschaft in einer Kultur der Nachhaltigkeit. Universität Kassel. Nohl, W. (1993). Beeinträchtigungen des Landschaftsbildes durch mastenartige Eingriffe. Werkstatt für Landschafts – und Freiraumentwicklung. Nohl, W. (2015). Landschaftsästhetik heute. In Auf dem Wege zu einer Landschaftsästhetik des guten Lebens. Oekom. Nohl, W. (2016). Warum moderne «Energie-Landschaften» nicht schön sind. In G. Etscheit (Ed.), Geopferte Landschaften. Heyne. Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Belknap (Harvard University Press). Ortega y Gasset, J. (1978). Betrachtungen über die Technik. In Gesammelte Werke, Band IV. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. O’Sullivan, M., Edler, D., & Lehr, U. (2018). Research report 2018: Ökonomische Indikatoren des Energiesystems Methode, Abgrenzung und Ergebnisse für den Zeitraum 2000–2016. GWS. Runge, K., Baum, S., Meister, P., & Rottgardt, E. (2012). Umweltauswirkungen unterschiedlicher Netzkomponenten. OECOS GmbH. Schürmann, E. (2008). Sehen als Praxis. Suhrkamp.

116

D. Martinez Monteleone

Schweizer-Ries, P. (2010). Umweltpsychologische Untersuchung der Akzeptanz von Maßnahmen zur Netzintegration Erneuerbarer Energien in der Region Wahle – Mecklar (Niedersachsen und Hessen). Forschungsgruppe Umweltpsychologie. Seel, M. (1991). Eine Ästhetik der Natur. Suhrkamp. Simondon, G. (2012). Die Existenzweise technischer Objekte. In C. von Pias & J. Vogl (Eds.), Schriften des internationalen Kollegs für Kulturtechnikforschung und Medienphilosophie, Band 11. Zürich. Weber, A. (2016). Enlivenment. Eine Kultur des Lebens. Versuch einer Poetik für das Anthropozän. Matthes & Seitz. Weber, F. (2018). Konflikte um die Energiewende. Vom Diskurs zur Praxis. Springer VS.

Chapter 9

AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values Ibo van de Poel

Abstract Due to their self-learning and evolutionary character, AI (Artificial Intelligence) systems are more prone to unintended consequences and more difficult to control than traditional sociotechnical systems. To deal with this, machine ethicists have proposed to build moral (reasoning) capacities into AI systems by designing artificial moral agents. I argue that this may well lead to more, rather than less, unintended consequences and may decrease, rather than increase, human control over such systems. Instead, I suggest, we should bring AI systems under meaningful human control by formulating a number of meta-values for their evolution. Amongst others, this requires responsible experimentation with AI systems, which may neither guarantee full control nor the prevention of all undesirable consequences, but nevertheless ensures that AI systems, and their evolution, do not get out of control. Keywords  Artificial intelligence · Control · Unintended consequences · Values · Machine ethics · Value sensitive design · Experimentation · Machine learning

9.1 Introduction The worry that technology can get out of control is an old one (e.g., Winner, 1977). It has been expressed in stories and cautionary tales like that of Frankenstein and Prometheus, which express the concern that we, as humans, can construct a technology that henceforth becomes autonomous and takes over from us, or has otherwise destructive consequences. It is therefore not amazing that this worry has also been voiced with regards to Artificial Intelligence (AI) (e.g., Bostrom, 2016;

I. van de Poel (*) Department of Values Technology and Innovation, School of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_9

117

118

I. van de Poel

Cellan-­Jones, 2014). One of the more specific forms that this worry has taken is that AI systems become so (generally) intelligent that they surpass humans and will take over or will eradicate humans as an inferior form of intelligence. Although this is an intriguing worry, it does not seem a very realistic one, at least not in the foreseeable future. We, for example, seem to have currently more reason to worry about AI systems that are not intelligent enough for the tasks we let them carry out, than about AI systems that become too intelligent (Levesque, 2017). Nevertheless, there seem to be good reasons to worry that AI systems can autonomously evolve in undesirable ways due to their adaptive characteristics. It is, for example, well conceivable that AI systems will disembody the values for which they were initially designed (cf. Vanderelst & Winfield, 2018; Cave et al., 2019).1 In this chapter I discuss how we can keep AI systems under human control. To do so, I start with exploring the specific characteristics of AI systems, such as autonomy, interactivity and adaptability, that distinguish them from more traditional sociotechnical systems. I argue that these characteristics make it more likely, and harder to avoid, that AI systems will have unintended consequences. To deal with such unintended consequences, I consider two proposed approaches, designing AI for human values and machine ethics, and argue that these both fall short by insufficiently addressing the evolutionary character of AI. I then suggest that in order to bring AI systems under meaningful human control, we need a set of what I call meta-values, such as transparency, accountability and reversibility, that apply to the evolution of AI systems. The consequent approach treats the introduction of AI systems in society, and their subsequent evolution, as a moral experiment, and accepts that while we will not be able to anticipate all consequences of their employment, nor can avoid all unintended consequences, we nevertheless should ensure that evolutionary AI systems remain correctable and leave enough room for human intervention.

9.2 What Is AI and What (If Anything) Is Special About It? There are many definitions of AI. Here I employ a broad definition or characterization along the following lines: AI systems are systems that can carry out tasks that, if carried out by humans, would require intelligence. This definition does not say that AI systems themselves are intelligent, whatever that would exactly mean.2 It also does not assume a specific set of techniques that need to be employed to call something AI.  I take AI here to cover the broad field of so-called Good  We may say that an AI systems disembodies a value V if it adapts itself in such a way that it is no longer conducive to V (under normal circumstances), even if it originally embodied V (Van de Poel, 2020). 2  It indeed also does not say what intelligence is. That is, of course, a huge philosophical question. For now, I am just assuming that we have at least a rough idea of what tasks require human intelligence and which ones not. 1

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

119

Old-­ Fashioned AI (GOFAI), connectionism, as well as dynamic approaches (Walmsley, 2012). GOFAI goes back to 1950s and 1960s and is based on a representational theory of (human) cognition and the mind; it can be understood as trying to build a computer model of the mind, based on the idea that the mind largely functions as a representational device. Connectionism employs neural networks, and might be said to be based not on a representational but on a neurological (or brain) model of the (human) mind. Many of the current machine learning (ML) techniques are based on neural networks (e.g., Russell & Norvig, 2016). Dynamic approaches are based on an embedded notion of cognition, where cognition is not just in the mind but also in the (human) body and the environment, also sometimes expressed in terms of the ‘extended mind’ (Clark & Chalmers, 1998). Many approaches in robotics seem to be consonant with this idea (e.g., Bruno et al., 2018). Although the focus is often on specific AI techniques, algorithms or applications, AI systems are probably best conceptualized as sociotechnical systems.3 Sociotechnical systems are systems that consist of three basic building blocks, namely technologies (or technological artifacts broadly conceived), human agents and institutional rules (Ottens et al., 2006). The latter refers to the social rules that regulate the behavior of human agents vis-à-vis each other, and vis-à-vis technologies. Elsewhere, I have argued that AI systems consist of two additional building blocks compared to traditional sociotechnical systems, namely artificial agents and what I call ‘technical rules’ (Van de Poel, 2020). Artificial agents can carry out human-like tasks and roles in a sociotechnical system. The term ‘technical rules’ may be somewhat confusing in this context as it does not refer to the rules humans (should) follow in designing or acting with technology, rather it is meant here as an equivalent to social rules, but in this case regulating the behavior of artificial agents vis-à-vis each other, and vis-à-vis other elements of the systems (viz., technological artifacts and humans). Given this broad characterization of AI, one might wonder whether there is anything that AI systems have in common and that sets them apart from other sociotechnical systems. I believe the crux is to be found in the fact that AI systems also contain artificial agents which may have properties such as ‘autonomy’, ‘interactivity’ and ‘adaptivity’ (cf. Floridi & Sanders, 2004), properties that traditionally only human agents have in a sociotechnical system. I take artificial agents to be autonomous in the sense that they have the capacity to adapt their own behavior or mode of operation without interference from the environment, and more specifically without human interference. Artificial agents are not just autonomous, they are also interactive, which means that they (can) interact with their environment, both in the sense that they act upon their environment, and can hence affect or change it, as well as in the sense that they can pick up signals from their environment. Combined with their autonomy, this interactivity makes artificial agents adaptive, in the sense that

 It is therefore somewhat unfortunate that much of the discussion about the ethical and social implications of AI has focused on algorithms, while many of the concerns are raised, and need to be addressed, at the level of AI systems as sociotechnical systems. 3

120

I. van de Poel

they can pick up signals from the environment and autonomously adapt their own functioning on basis of these signals. I take the inclusion of artificial agents with autonomy, interactivity and adaptability to be characteristic for AI systems, and to set them apart from other sociotechnical or engineering systems.4 Therefore, in the remainder of this chapter I will focus on what the combination of these three characteristics implies for the way in which AI systems have unintended consequences, and for how we can, or cannot, control these consequences and the (moral) values that should be upheld in the development of AI systems.

9.3 Unintended Consequences Like any other technology, the use of AI may have unintended consequences. It is useful to distinguish between three broad causes of such unintended consequences, namely: (1) Lack of due care in the development and employment of the technology for unintended consequences, in particular lack of foresight or anticipation of the potential effects of the employment of a technology; (2) Epistemic ignorance, i.e., lack of knowledge. Here I am particularly interested in those cases where this lack of knowledge is not the result of a lack of due care (category 1), but rather is of a more fundamental nature, i.e., those cases in which developers and users of a technology could not have reasonably foreseen the unintended consequences; (3) Indeterminacy, i.e., situations in which the causal chain towards the ultimate (unintended) consequences is still open, and in which their occurrence for an important part is determined by agents or factors beyond the control of those designing (and employing) the technology. Whereas in the second case, unintended consequences may be hard or impossible to prevent due to a lack of knowledge, and hence to limitations in our ability to know certain things, in the third case, the consequences of the employment of a technology are underdetermined in a more ontological sense because the possibility of unintended consequences depends on things that still need to happen or choices that are still to be made. In a concrete situation, the distinction between the three categories may be sometimes hard to make. For example, we may not always know whether we are in a situation of indeterminacy or of epistemic ignorance (cf. Poser, 2013). Similarly, once certain unintended consequences have materialized, it may be debatable whether  In current (ethical) discussions about AI systems, opacity is also often seen as a typical characteristic of AI systems. While AI systems may indeed be opaque, and this may raise ethical worries, it is in my approach here not a characteristic of all AI systems, as it very much depend on the AI techniques employed; in general ML techniques are much more prone to opacity than GOFAI. 4

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

121

these could have been prevented if due care had been exercised or are due to a more fundamental form of epistemic ignorance. Nevertheless, the distinctions are useful to compare the potential causes of unintended consequences between different technologies. This allows us to say something about which technologies are more prone to unintended consequences that are hard if not impossible to foresee and prevent. Here the three characteristics of artificial agents – autonomy, interactivity and adaptivity – are particularly relevant. It would seem that these characteristics make AI systems more susceptible for indeterminacy compared to traditional sociotechnical or engineering systems. After all, these characteristics mean that the properties of an actual AI system do not just depend on how the system has been designed, and how it is (currently) used, but also on how it has evolved over time, and will evolve in the future. While this is also true for traditional sociotechnical systems, AI systems seem to have a higher likeliness to evolve in indeterminate ways, particularly in ways not intended or foreseen by the human agents in the system. The outcome of this evolution is not only indeterminate but it may also very hard to know how the system would possibly evolve (i.e., epistemic ignorance). More than traditional engineering systems, AI systems then are plagued by indeterminacy and epistemic ignorance when it comes to the occurrence of unintended consequences. This has not only consequences for how likely it is that such intended consequences occur, but also for the effectiveness of current strategies to avoid possible unintended consequences. I will first discuss in the Sects. 9.4 and 9.5 existing approaches to deal with unintended consequences, and then propose a somewhat new approach in Sect. 9.6 and later. This new approach builds on design for values approaches discussed in Sect. 9.4 but extends it with a new set of meta-values for the evolution of AI systems (Sect. 9.6), as well as a more ‘experimental’ approach (Sects. 9.7 and 9.8).

9.4 Designing AI Systems for Human Values One of the existing approaches for avoiding undesirable unintended consequences of AI is to design such systems pro-actively for human values. There is now an extensive literature available on AI ethics and a range of human values and moral principles have been articled that should be adhered to in the design of AI systems. For example, the European High-Level Expert Group on AI (2019) has articulated the ethical principles of respect for human autonomy, prevention of harm, fairness and explicability. There is indeed much to be said for designing AI systems for such human values and moral principles. However, such strategies basically amount to increasing the due care for unintended consequences in the design of AI systems. This is likely to reduce unintended consequences, and it may also diminish some of the current moral pitfalls in the employment of AI systems, such as bias and opacity. However, it will most likely not eliminate the occurrence of unintended consequences due to epistemic ignorance and indeterminacy, and, as we have seen, these factors are

122

I. van de Poel

larger for AI systems than for most traditional sociotechnical systems. So while designing AI for human values is necessary to address potential unintended consequences, it will not be enough. One way of stating this issue is to say that most of the (moral) values and principles that have until now been articulated for the design of AI systems tend to address such systems at the object level. That is to say they are aimed at embedding certain values in the design of an AI system upfront, but they do, as such, not address the further evolution of these systems. However, AI systems often get their shape due to how they evolve and adapt themselves in interaction with their environment rather than due to their initial design. Some have therefore argued that we need to design AI systems that do not just meet a range of human values, but also have themselves reasoning capacities so that they keep their own employment and evolution within certain moral boundaries (e.g., Wallach & Allen, 2009).

9.5 Machine Ethics One proposed approach to deal with the evolutionary character of AI systems, and the fact that such systems are more prone to unintended consequences is to try to build AI systems that have the capability to keep their own development within certain moral boundaries. Some believe that this requires AI systems with certain moral capabilities (e.g., Wallach & Allen, 2009). This indeed is the basic idea behind what is often called machine ethics (e.g., Anderson & Anderson, 2011). Machine ethics may be seen as an attempt to reduce the unintended consequences of AI and to keep these systems within certain moral boundaries by building moral capabilities into AI systems themselves. While this motivation is certainly laudable, the offered solution seems me mistaken for at least two reasons.5 First, we are still very far removed from anything like artificial moral intelligence (Winfield, 2019; Müller, 2020). There are many reasons for this, one of them being that we do not yet fully understand what grounds or makes up human moral capabilities. So if it really were true that machine ethics is needed in order to responsibly develop AI systems, we would seem to have good reasons for a moratorium on AI as artificial moral intelligence is really not ready for its task yet. (Luckily, it is not true, and there are other ways to oversee the evolution of AI systems as we will see below). Second, even if it were possible to develop artificial moral agents with the required moral capabilities, it would very likely not be enough to prevent unintended consequences, as it will not take away the more fundamental reasons why AI systems has unintended consequences that I have discussed before such as epistemic ignorance and indeterminacy. On the contrary, if there is one thing we can learn from the philosophy and history of technology then it is that by developing

 For criticism of the various reasons that have been given for developing artificial moral agents, see Van Wynsberghe and Robbins (2019). 5

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

123

complex systems that aim to better control their environment, we may well increase rather than decrease the amount of unintended consequences. One reason is that in such cases, we tend to create more complex and more tightly coupled systems that are more vulnerable to unexpected or unforeseen events (cf. Perrow, 1984; Collingridge, 1992).

9.6 Meaningful Human Control: The Need for Meta-Values Rather than aiming to let AI control its own development, we better bring it under what has been called meaningful human control. The term ‘meaningful human control’ was initially coined for the development and use of military drones, as it was considered undesirable – in terms of morality and international law – to develop and use drones that would autonomously decide to kill a potential enemy (Horowitz & Scharre, 2015; UNIDIR, 2014). The idea is that such decisions should be ultimately made by humans in a meaningful way, i.e., based on sufficient and adequate information, with proper time to reflect and decide.6 The principle has been developed into a more general one for the design of AI and robot systems (Santoni de Sio & Van den Hoven, 2018). Here I am not so much interested in applying the principle at the object level, like the design of a specific AI or robot system (like a drone or autonomous car), but rather as a principle that should be adhered to in the evolution of AI systems. In that case, it would require that we only allow AI systems to evolve in such a way that the process of their evolution remains under meaningful human control. What would this exactly mean? First, we would need to put in place ways to monitor how AI systems evolve over time and to intervene in this evolution if necessary. This means that we need to extend the value-sensitive design of such systems to their entire life cycle rather than to restrict it to their initial design (Umbrello & Van de Poel, 2021; De Reuver et  al., 2020). AI systems may, over time, require undesirable properties or disembody their initial embedded values. Meaningful human control would therefore mean that we can reverse this process if necessary. This can, for example, be effectuated by letting an AI system make over time stored versions of itself, so that we can return to an earlier version, not unlike what we do with software updates. Meaningful human control would then imply that the

 This is not to suggest that in traditional warfare, decisions to kill an enemy are, or can, always be made in a meaningful way. This is often obviously not the case. Meaningful control in this situation seems more like an ideal, and the relevant moral question with respect to introducing autonomous or semi-autonomous drones in war(like) situations seems to be whether they will increase meaningful human control rather than they can fully guarantee it. (There might be of course also other moral considerations that speak for or against the use of drones in warfare or similar situations). 6

124

I. van de Poel

evolution of AI systems should meet some minimal requirements in terms of reversibility and adaptability.7 In order to achieve control that is meaningful, we would also need some understanding of how the system has evolved over time. This requires adherence to values similar to ones that are now already often mentioned in relation to AI like explainability, transparency and accountability. Again, however, these are now usually applied at what I have called the object level. For example, if an AI system is to make important decisions, like in a court case, we want those decisions to be transparent and explainable.8 Here, however, I am interested in the application of such values to the evolution of AI systems. At this level, these values are required because if we believe that an AI system has evolved in an undesirable way, we want to know why and how it did, both to be able to return to an acceptable earlier point in its evolution, as well as to avoid such an undesirable evolution to occur again in the future. We might call the values that are needed to retain meaningful human control over an AI system during its evolution meta-values. Such meta-values do not apply to AI at the object level, but rather set constraints on how we allow AI systems to evolve over time. If meta-values are to be guaranteed also during the evolution of an AI system, it means that we need to build these values in an immutable way into AI systems, so that they cannot be disembodied during the evolution of the AI systems; these are hence to be designed as hard constraints (or for example technical rules) into the system. The above discussion suggests some candidates for meta-values, such as reversibility, adaptability, accountability and transparency. There might be more meta-­ values than these ones. Some might want to argue that also other values often mentioned in AI ethics like non-maleficence (doing no harm) and fairness should be seen as meta – values. After all, it seems highly unlikely that in the future we would morally want AI systems that do harm or are unfair. However, it should be noted that what counts as ‘harm’ and as ‘fair’ is much more context-dependent, and also more open to future change than reversibility. For such reasons, we might want to restrict meta-values to those values that are needed to keep AI under meaningful control, while the more substantive values can, and should, be addressed at the object level, where we can better do justice to context and value change over time.

 I am not suggesting that we should require that all consequences of (the use of) AI systems are reversible; that would seem unfeasible and unrealistic. Rather I would want to require that the evolution of specific AI systems is made reversible, so that we can go back to an earlier moment in their evolution. 8  Robbins (2019) complains that explainability, or explicability, is often applied to the AI (or ML) system rather than to the decisions made by such systems. It is the latter that in his view should (at least sometimes) be explainable. I agree for those cases in which we consider AI at what I have called the object level. However, at the evolutionary level, values like explainability or explicability would apply to the evolution of the AI system itself. It should be noted that such explainability at the evolutionary level is not enough to guarantee explainability at the object level. So when designing AI systems that make important decisions, we need explainability at both levels. 7

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

125

9.7 An Experimental Perspective Keeping the evolution of AI systems under meaningful human control by adherence to a set of meta-values as proposed above will not guarantee that AI systems are free from unintended consequences. After all, meaningful human control as such does not reduce epistemic ignorance or indeterminacy. My proposal then is not aimed at preventing all unintended consequences, which would seems me illusionary any way, but rather at ensuring that the evolution of AI systems remains correctable and, to some extent, reversible if undesirable unintended consequences materialize. The ultimate aim then is not so much to control the development and evolution of AI systems in the sense of strictly guiding or regulating it, but rather to make sure that such systems do not get out of human control. As I have argued elsewhere, we best think of technological development and the introduction of new technology into society as an experimental process (Van de Poel, 2017). This implies that one cannot fully predict the impacts of AI in society beforehand. It also means that we should be willing to accept some risks and unintended consequences. Questions about the acceptability of new technology are in this perspective best formulated in terms of the acceptability of experimenting with technologies like AI in society, rather than in terms of whether the technology as such is acceptable or not (Van de Poel, 2016). So, in addition to guaranteeing that AI systems keep under meaningful human control, we need rules and institutions that allow responsible experimenting with such systems.

9.8 Human Indeterminacy The experimental perspective implies that we should accept, whether we like it or not, some degree of indeterminacy. Nevertheless, indeterminacy might seem in principle undesirable as it opens up the possibility for unintended consequences. Designers of engineering systems also often want to reduce indeterminacy as it, in their view, typically increases the chances that a designed system will not function as intended. The traditional engineering approach to indeterminacy then seems to be to try to design it out, for example by reducing the ways in which a technology could be used, or even by (attempts at) enforcing a particular way in which humans can interact with an engineering system (cf. Fritzsche, 2010). For example, to ensure safe operation, engineers often aim to make designs fool-proof by enforcing a certain way of using a system, so that safety risk are less likely to arise (Bucciarelli, 1985; Van de Poel & Robaey, 2017). An example is the lock-out switch above the rear handle on a chain saw; unless both this lock-out switch and the rear handle are pressed, the chain will not be driven. This mechanism increases safety by enforcing a way of using the chain saw, by having to use both one’s hands, that makes it much less likely that users will inadvertently saw off their own hand.

126

I. van de Poel

While system designers thus often aim at reducing indeterminacy, the case of AI would seem to be different in important ways. As we have seen before, AI systems are self-learning and this makes them inherently more indeterminate than most traditional sociotechnical systems. This indeterminacy is in fact often seen as an inherent and desirable feature, as it allows an AI system to learn from its environment and to adapt itself.9 The flip side is, of course, that AI systems are also inherently harder to keep under control than traditional engineering systems, and more likely to lead to unintended consequences. Still there is also something positive about indeterminacy. I think that even an argument can be made that it is desirable to design systems with at least some degree of indeterminacy. To flesh out this argument, it is useful to distinguish between what might be called ‘technical indeterminacy’ and ‘human indeterminacy’. With ‘technical indeterminacy’, I mean the indeterminacy that is inherent in a sociotechnical system as technical system, i.e., independent from deliberate human interventions in the system, for example due to how a self-learning algorithm develops itself in interaction with its environment. With human indeterminacy, I mean the degree to which a social technical system is open to (deliberate) human interventions. While there might be good reasons to decrease human indeterminacy for some sociotechnical systems, as in the case of the chain saw, I would like to suggest that it is often desirable to design systems that have at least some degree of human indeterminacy. There are various reasons for that (cf. Van de Poel & Robaey, 2017). First, human indeterminacy allows to be responsive to new developments and to unintended consequences, as it leaves room to intervene in a sociotechnical system also during its operational phase. Second, human indeterminacy creates rooms for system users to make the system really their own, and to appropriate it. It could be argued that this is desirable for democratic reasons, as it, for example, allows users to have different (value) priorities than the original system designers. Similarly, it creates room for future users to use systems in their own way, and to adapt to changing values in society. Third, apart from the previous considerations, some degree of human indeterminacy would seem required to keep AI systems under meaningful human control. For reasons set out before, AI systems will anyway sometimes develop in unexpected ways and have unintended consequences: meaningful human control can in such cases only be assured by some minimal degree of human indeterminacy in order to allow humans to deliberately intervene. The above discussion then suggests that we should not just willy-nilly accept indeterminacy as an inevitable bad, but that it might actually also be something

 It is open to debate whether the (future) evolution of AI systems is really indeterminate or just (epistemically) unknown. It is, however, at least the last I would argue. If we can know, and hence predict, how an AI system will evolve in the future, we would no longer need to build it as a selflearning system. The advantage of a self-learning system after all is that while we do not now the future (or the environment), we can build something that is able to develop in response to how things evolve (or in response to its environment). In a practical sense, openness to the future then is a key characteristic of AI systems. 9

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

127

good, in particular when it comes to human indeterminacy in contrast to technical indeterminacy. A possible counterargument is that increasing human indeterminacy will, in effect, increase the probability of misuse and of unintended and undesirable consequences. I have two replies to such an argument. First, I think we should indeed carefully consider from case to case what degree of (human) indeterminacy is desirable. I would, for example, not argue against the design of chain saws with lock-out switches as the gain in safety would seem me worth the loss in human indeterminacy in this specific case. Second, even if human indeterminacy may increase the possibilities for misuse and undesirable consequences, this may, at least sometimes, be a price worth paying for the various reasons I have discussed before.

9.9 Conclusions I have argued that three characteristics – autonomy, interactivity and adaptivity – set AI systems apart from traditional sociotechnical systems. These characteristics make the evolution of AI systems more indeterminate, and therefore harder to control and more likely to lead to unintended consequences. Addressing these new challenges introduced by AI requires three things. First, it requires designing AI systems for human values and anticipating possible negative unintended effects of their employment in society. While this is now fairly widely recognized, this is a necessary but not yet a sufficient condition. Second, it requires assuring meaningful human control over the evolution of AI systems; this requires a set of meta-values, like monitorability, reversibility, adaptability and accountability that are guaranteed as immutable values in the evolution of AI systems. Third it requires, new societal modes and institutions to responsible experiment with AI in society as to gradually learn how to best embed it in society and to adjust its course where necessary. Finally, I have suggested that we should not aim for developing and employing AI systems in a way that is completely fail-safe. Not only is such a goal unattainable and in that sense illusory, it may well backfire, as it may lead to designing out the very indeterminacies in such systems that we need to keep such systems under meaningful human control. Acknowledgement  This publication is part of the project ValueChange that has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 788321. This publication also contributes to the research programme Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies, which is funded through the Gravitation programme of the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO grant number 024.004.031).

128

I. van de Poel

References Anderson, M., & Anderson, S. L. (2011). Machine ethics. Cambridge University Press. Bostrom, N. (2016). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press. Bruno, L., Astorga, D., Mendoza-Bock, E., Pardo, M., Escobar, E., & Ciria, A. (2018). Embodied cognitive robotics and the learning of sensorimotor schemes. Adaptive Behavior, 26(5), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712318780679 Bucciarelli, L.  L. (1985). Is idiot proof safe enough? The International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2(4), 49–57. Cave, S., Nyrup, R., Vold, K., & Weller, A. (2019). Motivations and risks of machine ethics. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3), 562–574. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2018.2865996 Cellan-Jones, R. (2014). Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind. BBC. Accessed April 26, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-­30290540 Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. https://doi. org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7 Collingridge, D. (1992). The management of scale. Big organizations, big decisions, big mistakes. Routledge. De Reuver, M., van Wynsberghe, A., Janssen, M., & Van de Poel, I. (2020). Digital platforms and responsible innovation: Expanding value sensitive design to overcome ontological uncertainty. Ethics and Information Technology, 22, 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-­020-­09537-­z Santoni de Sio, F., & Van den Hoven, J. (2018). Meaningful human control over autonomous systems: A philosophical account. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5(15). https://doi.org/10.3389/ frobt.2018.00015 Floridi, L., & Sanders, J. W. (2004). On the morality of artificial agents. Minds and Machines, 14(3), 349–379. Fritzsche, A. (2010). Engineering determinacy: The exclusiveness of technology and the presence of the indeterminate. In I. van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 305–312). Springer Netherlands. High-Level Expert Group on AI. (2019). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. EC. Horowitz, M., & Scharre, P. (2015). Meaningful human control in weapon systems: A primer. Center for a New American Security. Levesque, H. J. (2017). Common sense, the Turing test, and the quest for real AI. MIT Press. Müller, V. C. (2020). Ethics of artificial intelligence and robotics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2020 edition). Ottens, M., Franssen, M., Kroes, P., & Van de Poel, I. (2006). Modeling engineering systems as socio-technical systems. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 2, 133–145. Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. Basic Books. Poser, H. (2013). The ignorance of engineers and how they know it. In D.  P. Michelfelder, N. McCarthy, & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 3–14). Springer Netherlands. Robbins, S. (2019). A misdirected principle with a catch: Explicability for AI. Minds and Machines, 29(4), 495–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-­019-­09509-­3 Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: a modern approach (3rd ed.). Pearson. Umbrello, S., & Van de Poel, I. (2021). Mapping value sensitive design onto AI for social good principles. AI and Ethics,1, 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-­021-­00038-­3 UNIDIR. (2014). The weaponization of increasingly autonomous technologies: Considering how meaningful human control might move the discussion forward. UNIDIR (United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research). Van de Poel, I. (2016). An ethical framework for evaluating experimental technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 667–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-­015-­9724-­3 Van de Poel, I. (2017). Society as a laboratory to experiment with new technologies. In D. M. Bowman, E. Stokes, & A. Rip (Eds.), Embedding new technologies into society: A regulatory, ethical and societal perspective (pp. 61–87). Pan Stanford Publishing.

9  AI, Control and Unintended Consequences: The Need for Meta-Values

129

Van de Poel, I. (2020). Embedding values in artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Minds and Machines, 30(3), 385–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-­020-­09537-­4 Van de Poel, I., & Robaey, Z. (2017). Safe-by-design: From safety to responsibility. NanoEthics, 11(3), 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-­017-­0301-­x Van Wynsberghe, A., & Robbins, S. (2019). Critiquing the reasons for making artificial moral agents. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(3), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11948-­018-­0030-­8 Vanderelst, D., & Winfield, A. (2018). The dark side of ethical robots. In Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. New Orleans, LA, USA. Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2009). Moral machines: Teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford University Press. Walmsley, J. (2012). Mind and machine. Palgrave Macmillan. Winfield, A. F. (2019). Machine ethics: The design and governance of ethical AI and autonomous systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3), 509–517. Winner, L. (1977). Autonomous technology. Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. MIT Press.

Chapter 10

Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World Paul Firenze

Abstract  This chapter explores the propriety of incorporating crowdsourced public input when programming morally contentious decisions to be made by automated vehicles (AVs). The chapter argues that moral values are necessarily pluralistic and require diverse action plans based on mutual interpretability among moral agents within a particular (relative) perspective. Thus, for a machine to be understood as acting morally requires that it be interpreted as acting morally from within that perspective. This calls for programming context-dependent AV behaviors, rather than a uniform, ‘global’ standard. Using as a test case crowdsourced responses to the MIT Media Lab’s Moral Machine Experiment (MME), the chapter locates some potentially diverse and morally contentious AV behaviors, evaluates the relevance and feasibility of such crowdsourced responses, and explores some potential ways to incorporate these responses into public deliberations on moral AV behavior, including Value Sensitive Design and Participatory Technology Assessment. The diverse results of the MME, including identifiable pluralism among countries and regions, can serve as a useful preliminary input into these more comprehensive methods for understanding relevant moral contexts of AV behaviors. Keywords  Crowdsourcing · Automated vehicles · Moral relativism · Value pluralism If, as the philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah (2008: 91) says, the published commentaries on the trolley problem “are massive enough to stop any runaway trolley in its tracks,” then certainly the Internet commentaries on the MIT Media Lab’s trolley problem variation, the Moral Machine, have used enough electricity to power many trollies to run over many people. Nevertheless, this chapter will add to these P. Firenze (*) School of Sciences and Humanities, Wentworth Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_10

131

132

P. Firenze

commentaries, focusing on what the published results of the Moral Machine Experiment (MME) might tell us about variations in societal values, and how these variations could be appropriately incorporated into the behavior of autonomous vehicles or AVs. After some brief background on the MME in section one, section two argues that the necessarily pluralistic nature of moral values, and the diverse action plans derived from these values, calls for programming context-dependent AV behaviors, rather than a uniform, “global” standard. Then, using as a test case the crowdsourced responses to the MME (Awad et al., 2018), the essay locates some of these potentially diverse and morally contentious AV behaviors, evaluates the relevance and feasibility of such crowdsourced responses, and explores some potential ways to incorporate these responses into public deliberations on moral AV behavior, including Value Sensitive Design and Participatory Technology Assessment.

10.1 The Moral Machine Experiment Developed by MIT graduate students Edmond Awad, Sohan Dsouza, and Paiju Chang in 2016, the Moral Machine Experiment is a massive online experiment to gather user input on prospective decisions made by machine intelligence, in this case AVs, in situations of unavoidable fatalities. In his MIT master’s thesis on the experiment, Awad (2017: 19) describes one of its rationales as answering questions about “How to incorporate societal values in AVs (or other AI systems).” The primary mode of the MME presents the user with a choice of two paths an AV can take, each path resulting in at least one fatality, and asks the user to choose the “lesser of two evils.” While based on the philosophical thought experiment “the trolley problem,” the MME seeks to go beyond it by complicating user choices by increasing the number and variety of dimensionalities in the problem by including, among other factors, the number, age, gender, physical fitness, and social status of potential victims. So, for example, whereas in traditional trolley problems we are asked to decide between killing one or five workers on a track, the MME may ask us to choose between a group of three children and a group of three adults in a crosswalk, or between two women in an AV and two men in a crosswalk. These more individualized characteristics of the potential scenarios are meant to complicate our choices, and, ultimately, over the massive number of inputs from users who participate in the online experiment (a number now totaling more than 40 million decisions worldwide (Awad et al., 2018)), these characteristics are meant to provide an aggregation of some of the societal values users want to see incorporated into the behavior of AVs. Some of these results were published in the journal Nature in November 2018, sparking controversy (especially regarding some of the so-called social value criteria), and leading to the glut of internet commentaries mentioned above. Among the more interesting results for the purposes of this chapter were the discernment of clusters of “countries or territories with homogeneous vectors of moral preferences”

10  Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World

133

(Awad et al., 2018: 60). These vectors can then be further grouped into three major cultural clusters with sometimes quite distinct preferences regarding the different dimensionalities. The designers of the MME argue that the kind of descriptive ethics provided by this experiment (revealing people’s actual, considered choices) is a necessary first step toward creating a “machine ethics” (a type of applied ethics). To this extent, one might consider the MME to be built on good impulses toward a greater democratization of design and away from technocracy (see, for example, Verbeek, 2011; Rahwan, 2018). Even if engineers and ethicists could agree on normative principles for machine intelligences, argue the designers of the MME, this agreement could be rendered “useless if citizens were to disagree with their solution….Any attempt” they say, “to devise artificial intelligence ethics must be at least cognizant of [so-called] public morality” (Awad et al., 2018: 59). I want to argue here that, to the extent that elements of a public morality could be properly discerned from massive online sources like the MME, then these elements should have a place in programming some AV behaviors. Whether and/or how public morality can be discerned via these kinds of experiments will be explored later in this chapter. But first, it is important to explore why elements of public morality, if convincingly discerned, should be considered in programming the decisions of AVs. The foundation for this argument relies on the existence of a genuine moral relativism, that is, a relativism in which there are plural moralities which are actually binding upon populations. I will make this case with the help of the philosopher J. David Velleman’s recent work on moral relativism.

10.2 An Argument for Moral Pluralism In his book Foundations for Moral Relativism, Velleman (2015: 75) explores if there could be “multiple moralities, each of merely local validity.” This view would not only reject the idea of a universal morality, but would also reject moral nihilism, the idea that there can be no morally binding social norms. Morality is fundamentally action-guiding, and the commands of morality derive their power to guide our actions from being “rationally binding” on us, that is, morality provides “compelling reasons…to act, or to hold practical attitudes such as desires or intentions” (79). But unlike some universalistic views of morality which posit that the compelling nature of reasons reside in their formal structure, divorced from particular circumstances, for Velleman, reasons compel to the extent they can successfully unite particular understandings of agency with particular circumstances (35). Velleman illustrates this unification process between conceptions of agency and circumstances with the analogy of having a perspective from which and through which we can direct our own behavior, as well as understand the behavior of others with whom we seek to share the perspective. The case of “giving directions” is evocative here. If I were to direct you to place A by telling you it is “north” of place B, the statement lacks practical guidance unless you already know (that is, you have the relevant perspective on) the location

134

P. Firenze

of place B, and you know which direction is north. Similarly, for Velleman, moral statements like “A is impermissible” or “B is obligatory” can only be action-guiding from within a relevant perspective. The claim that “A is impermissible” contains an implicit indexical (impermissible-for-us), and with it a normative valence, while a claim “A is impermissible for X” (where the speaker is not a part of the set X—not within that perspective), this claim is not action-guiding, but is rather an “ethnographic report,” a factual statement, not a normative one (77). Occupying the relevant perspective means locating oneself in an environment wherein we are responsive to rational pressures to recognize certain things (like actions, attitudes, intentions) as desirable or undesirable. These pressures are the forces of norms, or normativity. Velleman uses the image of rational pressures as weight: “Just as gravity determines what’s down, by causing material objects to accelerate in that direction, so normativity would determine what is to be adopted, by guiding subjects in the direction of adopting actions and attitudes. Like a rock, then, a reason would exert its weight within a frame of reference established by some weight-conferring force” (82; emphasis in original). But what plays the role of earth in this analogy? That is, what is the center of moral gravity that draws agents toward it? For Velleman, an answer begins with the human drive toward sociability, that is, to live not only in proximity to other human beings, but to live in personal interaction with them. Sociability requires mutual interpretability, which, in turn, requires a degree of convergence on what to believe and what to desire among those who will interact with one another. This convergence requires ways of “being ordinary,” by the lights of those with whom one will interact. Says Velleman: “People who need to interact with one another need to converge on ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that will suggest plausible first-pass interpretations of one another in their swiftly developing interactions. Their social mores are ways of thinking, feeling, and acting on which they converge” (85–86). This convergence provides an image of an agent, an entity recognizable, interpretable, as a potentially moral actor. Velleman’s defense of moral relativism is relevant to the discussion of moral machines because for any machine intelligence to be a moral machine it must be interpretable as moral from within a particular shared perspective. For now, and perhaps for the foreseeable future, for a machine to act in a moral way will not mean the machine is acting morally from its own perspective. Machines will not have a perspective that could be moral in the way we are talking about, which requires mutual interpretability. To act in a moral way, a machine must act in a way that is viewed as moral by human persons, moral agents, who share a moral perspective. That is, a moral machine will be one that can pass a kind of Turing Test for moral behavior. And this test of moral behavior will necessarily be from within an interpretive (relative) context. To see what this might look like, imagine a self-driving car with catastrophic brake failure hurtling toward a man in a crosswalk, and then, seemingly to avoid hitting the man, the car suddenly swerves into five children also in the crosswalk. While there are many factors to consider here, it would not be surprising if many of us viewed the behavior of the AV as immoral, especially if contrasted with a

10  Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World

135

situation in which a self-driving car appeared to swerve to miss five children in the crosswalk and struck one man. But viewing the situation this way requires an interpretive context in which the number killed in comparison to the number spared and the age(s) of those killed in comparison to the age(s) of those spared could constitute compelling reasons for acting in one way rather than another. That is, the AV is acting morally or immorally, as a moral or immoral agent would act, from the perspective of an inhabitant of a particular interpretive context. The premise behind the MME is that when users select their preferred choice behavior of the AV, the AV is imagined as a kind of agent, a super-agent, though, one which can act with the deliberation we expect from a moral agent, but in split-­ second time. The hope is that the descriptive machine ethics will provide the best of both worlds. The machine, in this case an AV, will be programmed with our actual, considered moral choices provided to some degree by the crowdsourced results of the MME, but the machine will act with a speed that a human driver could not match.

10.3 Apparent Moral Pluralism in the Moral Machine Experiment This imagined moral behavior of AVs provided in the results of the MME appears to support the moral pluralism described by Velleman. The researchers used geolocation to identify the country of residence of the online respondents to the MME, enabling the researchers to discern differences between countries and regions in terms of their behavioral preferences. At first, we might wonder how representative these results of the MME could be regarding the different nations/regions. It might seem that many of the participants taking part in the online MME are more ‘WEIRD’ than their fellow nationals. By WEIRD is meant people from “western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic” nations who tend to be the subjects of university research (see Heinrich et al., 2010). It is easy to imagine those participating in the online MME could be more closely aligned with these WEIRD (more tech-­ savvy) values. But this could also mean that some of these cultural responses would be even more divergent if more of the less-WEIRD members of a population participated and their responses were included. The results of the MME claim to show a number of statistically relevant variations in the desired behavior of AVs under certain conditions. These variations are detected between groups of respondents from different nations, and these differing national responses enabled the researchers to identify “three distinct ‘moral clusters’ of countries,” which they divided into Western, Eastern, and Southern clusters.1 Among the more provocative variations are stronger preferences for saving  The Western cluster includes North America and much of Europe. The Eastern cluster includes much of the “far east,” as well as the Islamic countries of Asia. The Southern cluster includes the Latin American countries of Central and South America, as well as France and French-influenced nations in North Africa (Awad et al., 2018). 1

136

P. Firenze

more people and for saving younger people in the Western and Southern clusters than in the Eastern cluster, while respondents in the Southern cluster preferred to save so-called “higher status” people (doctors, lawyers, and business executives) at higher rates than respondents from the Eastern and Western clusters. Other interesting differences included a greater preference for saving humans to animals in the Eastern and Western clusters as compared to the Southern cluster, and a greater preference for saving females in the Southern cluster than in the Eastern and Western clusters. Simply accepting the “fact” of these cultural differences as revealed by the MME would not necessitate the propriety of incorporating these differences into the behavior of AVs. First, there are the formidable technical issues of how to teach an AV to identify a man, woman, or child, let alone a doctor, a criminal, a homeless person, or a business executive, all ‘social value’ criteria tracked by the MME. Next, even if this hurdle were somehow cleared, the very existence of these types of characters in the MME seems like they could be part of a different research project in descriptive ethics, one that seeks to create a more general hierarchy of ‘social value’ among types of people, a descriptive ethics project different from the more practical matter of visualizing and discriminating between objects in the path of an AV. One problem is that many of the variables by which the MME asks us to judge, if then programed into an AV, could lead directly (or indirectly) to the kinds of biases that so many are trying to remove from AI algorithms. How can we incorporate the need for moral pluralism into AV decisions without also incorporating harmful biases that are so often carried within societal values? Clearly, taking crowdsourced preferences at face value and incorporating them wholesale into AV behavior is not a satisfactory solution to this problem, even leaving aside the practicalities of how these preferences might be translated into AV behavior. So, what place might there be, if any, for such crowdsourced values obtained through these trolley problem scenarios?

10.4 Relevance of Moral Machine Experiment Data While I will argue there are some possible uses for these crowdsourced responses, it will require putting both the trolley problem and crowdsourcing into an appropriate context. For example, Johannes Himmelreich (2018) has argued against the relevance of trolley cases like the MME to the moral decisions of AVs. And I believe Himmelreich is correct that the most important moral questions for the behavior of AVs will come in more “mundane situations” involving things like traffic efficiency, environmental impact, and urban design, not in the rare, moral emergency, so-called “edge cases” we see in the MME. But I do take some issue with one of Himmelreich’s arguments that is directly relevant to the earlier discussion of moral relativism. Himmelreich argues that while adjudicating trolley cases calls for a moral answer, the behavior of AVs calls for a political answer. Himmelreich (2018: 676) says that “whereas morality is a reflection on individual conduct, political philosophy is a

10  Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World

137

reflection on social arrangements before the backdrop of substantive agreement.” Therefore, says Himmelreich, to think about the behavior of AVs, we need to think with political philosophy, not moral philosophy, because trolley cases like those presented in the MME “make no room for such [social] value pluralism by aiming to elicit an individual decision. A trolley case prompts us to make an individual choice when what we in fact face is a social choice” (676). And in support of this more social choice, Himmelreich invokes Jan Gogoll and Julian Müller’s (2017) arguments against individualized ethics settings for AVs in favor of mandatory ethics settings. And indeed, Gogoll and Müller argue persuasively against allowing so-called “personal ethics settings” for AVs, instead favoring universal, mandatory ethics settings, and arguing, on contractarian grounds, that these settings are actually more in the interest of all drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. I agree that cars driving on the same roads should not have personal settings of this kind. But if by universal is meant global, this raises the problem of what the Nature article co-author Azim Shariff calls “insensitivity to cultural differences,” where perspectives diverge regarding what would be moral behavior for an AV (quoted in Lester, 2019). So, the mandatory ethics setting would need to be universal within certain communities but could legitimately vary between them. This could create the apparently regrettable situation raised by another of the Nature article’s co-authors, Jean-François Bonnefon, in which “you have to learn about the new ethical setting of your car every time you cross a border” (quoted in Nature Video, 2018). Bonnefon hopes for an eventual global convergence on AV behaviors. And the apparent relativism revealed by the MME may only be provisional. After all, Velleman (2015: 93–95) argues that while the moral frames of reference are relative, the goal of the frames, providing pro-social, mutual interpretability, is universal. As AVs become more prevalent, there may be more occasions for a consensus to arise about the frames of reference revealed in the MME’s results. A plurality of frames may remain, or a more global frame may emerge. But I would argue that moral philosophy has a role to play here, due to the difficulties in teasing apart the individual’s moral choice from its necessarily social perspective. Moral choices are only ever within the context of social choices, established by the diverse frames of reference in which they take place. Thus, Himmelreich’s worry about the “individual” nature of moral choices (even in trolley problems) unnecessarily minimizes the inherently social nature of these choices—a sociality reflected in the clustered results of the MME. In addition, the practical consequences of embracing a genuine moral relativism can be seen in the conversation around the desirability of “explicability” for machine intelligence, and the related issue of so-called top-down versus bottom-up design of AI. It would seem the moral requirement for mutual interpretability on the part of the actors within the frame of reference would necessitate explicability on the part of the machine intelligence acting on public roads. But, as Scott Robbins (2019: 509) has pointed out, the desire for explicability in AI, in particular so-called bottom-­up machine learning, presents a “catch 22,” wherein “if [machine learning] is being used for a decision requiring an explanation, then it must be explicable AI and

138

P. Firenze

a human must be able to check that the considerations used are acceptable. But if we already know which considerations should be used for a decision, then we do not need [machine learning].” One of Himmelreich’s arguments against the relevance of trolley cases to designing AV behavior is that trolley cases assume a top-down approach to the automated decision making of AVs, whereas “the current prominence of the bottom-up approach in artificial intelligence in the form of neural networks…risk[s] a discontinuity of approaches between ethics and engineering” (2018: 675). And it seems quite likely the more mundane behaviors of AVs that Himmelreich describes would benefit from more bottom-up machine learning, where the machines would not be bound by traditional human driving behaviors. This might create the need for a two-tiered AI system: a top-down system to deal with moral emergencies of the trolley problem variety, to guard against machine learning spinning off into uncharted and potentially dangerous territory; and a bottom-up machine learning system for more mundane AV behaviors. Where, exactly, mundane behaviors of AVs cross over into morally problematic, emergency behaviors will naturally and rightfully be contested. But in some of these moral emergency situations gaged by the MME, to leave AVs to manifest their own behaviors as a result of bottom-up machine learning risks unleashing morally unrecognizable agents onto an unprepared public.

10.5 Potential Methods for Incorporating Moral Pluralism So, if there is a need for social input into AV decisions, how can this best be achieved? Using unadulterated, crowdsourced data of the kind produced by the MME could serve as an early stage in a longer process of identifying relevant cultural differences, and gaging their relevance for AV behavior. At best, the results of the MME would serve as a first step toward potentially incorporating social values into the behavior of the AVs. The initial results of the MME indicate that differences seem to exist, differences that programmers of AVs would need to account for if the machine they build is to be recognized as a moral one. Many of the co-authors of the Nature article have argued elsewhere that the findings of the MME can serve as an important part of the process of determining AV behaviors (Rahwan, 2018; Awad et al., 2020). Again, this is based on the idea that designers of technologies and the policy makers who approve their use should at least be aware of public sentiment surrounding the implementation of such public technologies. Taking the example of Germany, which in 2016 became the first country to draft guidelines for automated and connected driving, the co-authors note that while the MME results indicate an almost universal preference for sparing children over adults (especially in countries in the Western cluster), the German Ethics Commission on Automated and Connected Driving argued that “any distinction based on personal features (age, gender, physical, or mental constitution) is strictly prohibited” (Luetge, 2017: 552; emphasis in original). The Commission’s

10  Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World

139

recommendation may very well stand as the best approach to AV behaviors, but it also seems appropriate to take into account more broad-based perspectives before settling on such an important, potentially far-reaching public policy. The Nature article co-author Iyad Rahwan (2018) argues for approaches that put “society in the loop” of decisions to be made by AI and other algorithmic systems. Analogous to the human-in-the-loop system, in which a human operator forms an important part of an automated control process, Rahwan believes AI systems with broader social implications deserve inputs from the society that will feel these impacts. Societies should be consulted regarding which values AI systems should uphold, as well as which stakeholders should bear which costs and reap which rewards from AI behaviors. Rahwan sees the need for keeping society in the loop of these decisions as based on a contractarian understanding of how competing interests and values are adjudicated in complex, pluralistic society, describing the “society-­in-the-loop” process as an “attempt to embed the general will into an algorithmic social contract” (2018: 8; emphasis in original). Without going too far into a discussion of this Rousseauian view of the “general will” and its possible drawbacks, it is enough to say here that to the extent the general will is part of a process of deliberation (and not merely a decision made by a sovereign in the name of the governed), this version of “society-in-the-loop” can claim a degree of legitimacy (see Kain, 1990). One method for putting society in the loop of AV decisions Rahwan mentions could be through Value Sensitive Design (VSD), especially its focus on consulting stakeholders about the values they wish to see reflected in various technologies. (For example, see Chap. 13 by Umbrello and Gambelin in this volume.) In particular, the elements of VSD that favor iterative identification of relevant stakeholders and their values would seem most useful for the results of the MME. VSD makes room for the kind of bottom-up identification of stakeholder values that can then be programmed into the top-down moral emergency behaviors being argued for here in the case of AVs (Umbrello & van de Poel, 2021). Stephen Umbrello and Roman Yampolskiy (2022) show how using VSD can help designers of AVs go beyond the usual conflict between the values of safety and efficiency to consider other values that are important to stakeholders, especially in the types of moral emergency situations that will be relevant to incorporating the results of the MME. We might also wonder to what extent participants in the MME could be considered stakeholders in the sense normally desired in VSD. After all, online games, even so-called “serious games” like the MME, are ripe for mischief-making among participants. And while data poisoning is an important worry, it seems to be more problematic in bottom-up machine learning cases, as opposed to the more top-down approaches we have been arguing are more fitting for the emergency cases presented in the MME.  At the very least, there is the question of how seriously the respondents are taking their decisions in the game. The Nature article co-authors seem to be relying on the sheer size of the data set to provide a more coherent picture of respondents’ preferences, making mischievous responses even more apparent as outliers. But perhaps it will be the broadness of the social implications of AVs described by Rahwan that reduces the degree to which MME participants and their

140

P. Firenze

values can be seen as divorced from the context of the game. It is likely that many MME participants will be drivers, passengers, and/or pedestrians at some point in their lives, making their decisions not simply theoretical exercises, but situated in a considered moral context. In addition, the geolocation used in interpreting the MME results enables more focused input by respondents from the society whose norms are being gaged. So, this will not be a case of the values of one nation or region being counted as the values of another. Another way to gage the propriety of these crowdsourced decisions could be by including MME results in a process of “participatory technology assessment” (pTA), a set of methods which seek input from a representative group of nonexperts into the processes of technological development. Often carried out through “citizen forums,” lay participants are guided through a process of problem framing, deliberation, and the iterative integration of results into avenues for further exploration (Durán & Pirtle, 2020: 1710–1711). The advantages of including the crowdsourced results of the MME in a pTA would be two-fold. First, because pTA ideally requires participants who are representative of all the society in question, this could mitigate the possibly over-WEIRD tendency of participants in the MME mentioned above. Perhaps the results of the MME specific to a particular nation or region could be presented to people from that place who are engaged in pTA as a means of gaging the veracity of the results, and to provide explanations for cultural variations that can only be guessed at by researchers. For example, one notable difference between cultural clusters identified by the MME (as well as other trolley problem variations) is the preference for inaction over action in AV behavior—that is, whether the AV should alter its current course (action) or remain on the same path (inaction). Participants from the Western cluster tend to favor action at a much higher rate than those in the Eastern cluster. Some have speculated results like these are a function of a tendency toward fatalism in east Asian cultures, wherein “one should allow events to run their natural course without interference” (Gold et al., 2014: 66). It is possible pTA could help to confirm or problematize this type of explanation. A second advantage of incorporating pTA is that unlike the more “raw” data acquired from the MME, pTA requires that participants be “tutored” in methods of public engagement, as well as relevant background of the technology on which they are asked to deliberate. This contextual tutoring is meant to “give a map to citizens about how the values that they hold may become relevant” to the technological issue under consideration (Durán & Pirtle, 2020: 1718). Because pTA focuses on “public debate,” being tutored in this way means helping participants communicate their own personal preferences regarding AV behavior. This type of communication is important to the mutual interpretability that is a part of being a member of a moral community. When included as part of a more comprehensive process of identifying societal values to be programmed into autonomous vehicles, both Value Sensitive Design and Participatory Technology Assessment can further contextualize the results obtained by the Moral Machine Experiment. The diverse results of the MME, including identifiable pluralism among countries and regions, can serve as a

10  Crowdsourcing a Moral Machine in a Pluralistic World

141

preliminary input into these more comprehensive methods for understanding relevant moral contexts of AV behaviors. For the types of situations in which the behavior of AVs needs to be interpretable as moral or immoral from within a particular perspective, top-down programming of AVs based on more bottom-up, crowdsourced input, which is then processed through a more thorough method of technology assessment, will be more likely to produce an AV that is recognizable as a moral machine.

References Appiah, K. A. (2008). Experiments in ethics. Harvard University Press. Awad, E. (2017). Moral machine: Perception of moral judgment made by machines [M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., Bonnefon, J.-F., & Rahwan, I. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563, 59–64. Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Bonnefon, J.-F., Shariff, A., & Rahwan, I. (2020). Crowdsourcing moral machines. Communications of the ACM, 63(3), 48–55. Durán, J., & Pirtle, Z. (2020). Epistemic standards for participatory technology assessment: Suggestions based upon well-ordered science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1709–1741. Gogoll, J., & Müller, J. F. (2017). Autonomous cars: In favor of a mandatory ethics setting. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(3), 681–700. Gold, N., Colman, A., & Pulford, B. D. (2014). Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems. Judgment and Decision making, 9(1), 65–76. Heinrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–135. Himmelreich, J. (2018). Never mind the trolley: The ethics of autonomous vehicles in mundane situations. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 21(3), 669–684. Kain, P.  J. (1990). Rousseau, the general will, and individual liberty. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 7, 315–334. Lester, C. (2019, January 24). A study on driverless-car ethics offers a troubling look into our values. The New Yorker. Luetge, C. (2017). The German ethics code for automated and connected driving. Philosophy and Technology, 30(4), 547–558. Nature Video. (2018). Moral machines: How culture changes values. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=jPo6bby-­Fcg Rahwan, I. (2018). Society-in-the-loop: Programming the algorithmic social contract. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 5–14. Robbins, S. (2019). A misdirected principle with a catch: Explicability for AI. Minds and Machines, 29(4), 495–514. Umbrello, S., & van de Poel, I. (2021). Mapping value sensitive design onto AI for social good principles. AI and Ethics, 1(3), 283–296. Umbrello, S., & Yampolskiy, R. V. (2022). Designing AI for explainability and verifiability: A value sensitive design approach to avoid artificial stupidity in autonomous vehicles. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14(2), 313–322. Velleman, J. D. (2015). Foundations for moral relativism (2nd expanded ed.). Open Book. Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. University of Chicago Press.

Chapter 11

The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical Reflection and Alternative Imaginaries Anouk Geenen, Julieta Matos Castaño, and Mascha van der Voort

Abstract  In this chapter, we argue that socio-technical controversies are conflicts to embrace and utilize, rather than to smoothen out or avoid. Building on theoretical insights from Science and Technology Studies and Philosophy of Engineering, and contextualizing these in the smart city, we highlight a threefold potential of smart city controversies to work towards more responsible development of our future cities. We argue that socio-technical controversies are promising entry points for civic engagement, ethical reflection and alternative imaginaries on the introduction of technology in cities. We support this framework by examples from global smart city projects, and suggest a ‘Designing for Controversies’ approach to embrace conflict in a constructive manner. Keywords  Socio-technical controversies · Smart city · Civic engagement · Ethical reflection · Alternative imaginaries

11.1 Introduction The development of smart city projects and their accompanying discourse have led to responses of both optimism and opposition. In this chapter, we understand the smart city as a general paradigm of innovation activities that aim to improve urban A. Geenen ∙ M. van der Voort University of Twente, Department of Design, Production and Management, Enschede, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] J. Matos Castaño University of Twente, Department of Design, Production and Management, Enschede, The Netherlands DesignLab, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_11

143

144

A. Geenen et al.

life through means of data and technology. Many different projects are pursued under this umbrella, ranging from measuring air quality, to optimizing parking. Smart city projects are gaining foothold worldwide as they intend to optimize city processes and improve city life. Through apps, algorithms, and artificial intelligence we can prevent crime, resolve waste-issues, relieve congestion and improve public services (e.g., Komninos, 2008; Su et al., 2011; Caragliu et al., 2011). At least, that is the promise of the smart city. Many criticize this narrative however for being illdefined and too tech-driven (e.g., Kitchin, 2014; Söderström et  al., 2014; Valdez et  al., 2018). As such, smart city projects generate socio-technical controversies: social conflicts that emerge from the coexistence of conflicting viewpoints due to the introduction and use of technology in society (Callon et al., 2009). Smart city controversies exist in relation to the general smart city paradigm and the desirability of a data-driven urban pace, which is for example voiced in the concern on tech-­ drivenness (Kitchin, 2014). However, controversies also occur regarding specific smart city projects and technologies. A recent example of controversies linked to a specific technology is the debate around the covid-19 tracking app: rather than the often-portrayed binary framing which contrasts privacy concerns with usefulness concerns, this debate has involved a broader scope of societal values such as public health, autonomy, privacy and freedom (Lucivero et al., 2021). The impact of (urban) technology is often a contested subject: benefits, risks and uncertainties are put on the table, experts are asked to shed their light on it and the concerned citizenry voices their opinions. Socio-technical controversies represent the complexity of concerns, formulated by various stakeholders  – ranging from engineers to policy makers to citizens. Actors involved in smart city projects, however, often ignore areas of conflict by seeking for consensus, avoiding disagreement or introducing a technological solution to solve issues at hand. Approaches like actor-network-theory (Latour, 2005) demonstrate that social and technical components of socio-technical controversies cannot be separated. Declaring an issue as purely technical effectively removes it from the influence of public debate, which is exactly what happens in some ‘techno-fix’ smart city projects. With the case of the covid19 tracking app, merely introducing a more privacy-friendly tracking technique such as Bluetooth, does not resolve the concerns at hand. On the contrary, it intensifies potential pain points that originate from the tension among different societal values, as the tensions remain unacknowledged and unaddressed. To work towards responsible technology use in cities, we need to understand how these controversies can be sources of added value, instead of avoiding them. Controversies are right at the core of our democracy: it is through contestation and interaction between perspectives that we learn what are the ‘matters-of-­concern’ (Latour, 2005) that deserve (political) attention. Following the works of Latour (2005) and Marres (2007), we understand controversies as instances where politics ‘happens’: a diversity of actors and plurality of perspectives come together, leading to self-organized participation and value-assessment (Cuppen, 2018). As a result, actors negotiate values, evaluate pathways for action, and new social practices emerge.

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

145

This chapter elaborates on smart city controversies as promising concepts for further study: controversies highlight friction between values and perspectives and as such reveal what is at stake. They allow space to move beyond univocal, corporate-­ driven visions of the smart city and include multiple perspectives on the smart city and its impact on urban life. As a result, we propose that controversies create opportunities for civic engagement, ethical reflection, and alternative imaginaries on the introduction of technology in the urban sphere. By nurturing these instances of conflict and harvesting the insights they contain, we can work towards more responsible practices of engineering and design for the smart city. The insights presented in this chapter follow from the research project ‘Designing for Controversies in Responsible Smart Cities’,1 in which controversies are a point of departure to work towards more responsible development of smart city projects. The ‘designing for controversies’ approach entails creating responsible smarter cities that strike an optimal chord between civic engagement and technological innovations, while supporting the needs of a diverse group of stakeholders. This chapter outlines the motivations for taking controversies as meaningful points of departure. To understand the potential of socio-technical controversies, we start our inquiry by reflecting on the contested nature of the smart city. Following this, we place the plea to utilize the potential of socio-technical controversies in a broader tradition within Philosophy of Engineering and Science and Technology Studies literature. These insights support our suggestion to embrace controversies as profound opportunities for further exploration, and bring us to presenting the threefold potential of controversies as sources for civic engagement, ethical reflection and alternative imaginaries. Finally, we suggest several design approaches that provide promising avenues to actualize the identified threefold potential.

11.2 The Contested Smart City The ‘smart city’ is a continuously evolving concept; envisioned, emphasized, and executed differently throughout the world (Albino et  al., 2015). From seemingly innocent parking apps that direct cars more easily to empty parking places, to more intrusive applications such as facial recognition in public squares to quickly identify offenders of law  – in some cases directed towards hard criminals and in others towards jaywalking citizens, the implementation of smart city technology takes many forms. Central in all these instances of the smart city concept is the employment of urban data and technology to enable optimized and improved city processes such as (amongst others) mobility, sustainability, energy and safety (Vanolo, 2014). Building on what is known as the cybernetic loop – a continuous feedback-loop where data is being collected, analyzed an applied – the city can benefit from real-time insight

 For more information, please visit www.responsiblecities.nl

1

146

A. Geenen et al.

and intervention to enhance the urban experience. This idea of ‘techno-fix’ to complex social, economic and environmental issues is debated and criticized for its technological solutionism and reductionist approach to urban life, and its focus on efficiency as ultimate goal (Kitchin, 2014; Söderström et al., 2014; Valdez et al., 2018). Moreover, it perpetuates the idea that technology is neutral, whereas in reality we see many instances of data-driven policies and uses of technologies that deepen social inequalities or negatively affect already marginalized groups. As with any other socio-technological development, smart city technology has the potential to empower or disempower, include or exclude different perspectives and support or suffocate certain voices, leading to friction (Kitchin, 2014; Valdez et  al., 2018). These points of friction appear due to differing ideologies and ideas on what the urban space means, for whom or what it should be designed and the role of technology in this context. Recent examples are the hand sanitizers as a response to the global Covid pandemic. These are placed in the public space, but sometimes fail to recognize hands of non-white people, thereby catering only a fragment of users of public space. In the Dutch context specifically there has been a major controversy on data-driven policy aimed to detect fraud in tax allowances, but the system was biased towards citizens with a foreign or double nationality (Henley, 2021). These instances highlight that technology is not neutral but heavily value-laden and deeply political, and highlight the contested nature of smart city technology. Moreover, the impact of technology is not univocal: it can be framed from multiple perspectives. For example, a surveillance camera can represent safety to one, but exemplify Big Brother government and the invasion of citizens’ privacy to the other. When these perspectives conflict, controversies arise. Controversies are ‘situations where actors disagree (or better, agree on their disagreement)’ (Venturini, 2010), being issues at stake sufficiently important not to be ignored. The next section explores the existing literature on socio-technical controversies, to get a better understanding of what they are, and what their role in smart city projects can be.

11.3 Understanding Socio-Technical Controversies Socio-technical controversies are public disputes that arise through the introduction of disrupting technologies in society (Callon et al., 2009), that find their origin in a range of economic, political and ethical concerns (Nelkin, 1995). Socio-technical controversies ‘represent a reaction against technocracy in the search for a more human-centered world’ (Touraine, in Nelkin, 1995). They are public issues, both mediated and mediatized, and characterized by incomplete knowledge, uncertainties and disagreements (Marres, 2007). Controversies are complex phenomena; they do not reduce or resolve to clear-cut either/or cases. Instead of opposing ends of a binary, such as for example the privacy vs. safety debate is often depicted when discussing surveillance technology, controversies should rather be seen as polyhedrons, in which each plane represents a

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

147

different frame to the issue. Going back to the example of the introduction of the covid-19 tracking app, there was more to the debate than (data) privacy and concerns on public safety in terms of public health (Lucivero et al., 2021). Lucivero et al.’s qualitative study showed that concerns on autonomy and freedom, as well as social stigmatization and digital literacy, were a central part of the public debate as well. Controversies are relevant in the smart city context because they concern situations where something is at stake: actors gather because something is important to them ranging from, for example, air quality to social justice. Sustained, visible controversy over technologies may reflect serious debate over political and social goals (Jasper, 1988). These sources of tension function as expressions of conflict and negotiation, where ‘actors are unremittingly engaged in tying and untying relations, arguing categories and identities, revealing the fabric of collective existence’ (Venturini, 2012: 796). Venturini (2010: 264) compares controversies to the social at is magmatic state: they exemplify the melting and forging of collective life, continuously transforming between solid and liquid state. Controversies are no static, but rather dynamic markers of social process: new action groups emerge, and issues are highlighted differently over time (Cuppen et al., 2020). As such, controversies are seen as the best settings to observe the construction of social life (Latour, 2005; Venturini, 2010). Already in 1986, Rip acknowledged controversies as sources of informal technology assessment: through controversies, the impacts of actual or proposed projects are articulated and consolidated (Rip, 1986). Due to their public nature, controversies are relevant for gaining insight on stakeholders’ perceptions and evaluations of new technology. By fostering these conflicts as early warning signals for unexpected risks or unintended social impacts, the societal and economic costs of developing technology through trial and error can go down considerably. Following this, Todt (1997) argued that including actively managed controversies in the design process can lead to more socially acceptable solutions. This idea has been carefully applied in, for example, energy innovation, where social opposition is quite common (Kolloch & Dellerman, 2018; Cuppen, 2018). Opposition to specific innovations and emerging technologies stems from a diversity of values and goals within society that are conflicting with some of the values expressed in the innovation design. These opposing interests can be a source for creative synthesis and shaper of innovation (Kolloch & Dellerman, 2018). Consciously embracing controversies allows the design process to open up and bring a diversity of actors and viewpoints into the design of a new technical system such as the smart city. Equipped with an understanding of smart cities and socio-technical controversies, we are now able to propose the power of working with controversies, as presented in the next section.

148

A. Geenen et al.

11.4 The Threefold Potential Acknowledging and embracing smart city controversies is essential to engage stakeholders to act on complex collective problems, and on shared issues of concern (de Waal et al., 2017). Socio-technical controversies serve to point out problems, clarify definitions and generate alternatives with regards to the technology that is being implemented and its societal impact. They surface various perspectives, values and visions, thereby opening a wider view of the possibilities and limits of a technology. Conflicting views on (the impact of) technology are inevitable in a pluralistic society, and can be seen as part of the democratic process (Todt, 1997). These public controversies form the tangents of social life where reflections and dilemmas regarding ethical and political issues can become both debatable and actionable. Controversies can foster debates about issues that used to be taken for granted; they help to identify what the issues are, and articulate avenues to act on them. Against this theoretical background, and within the context of responsible smart city making, we propose a threefold productive potential of socio-technical controversies to enrich the design and implementation of smart city projects. When embraced constructively, controversies enable: (a) Civic engagement – to involve those affected by smart city projects (b) Ethical reflection – to discuss the societal impact, direction and desirability of smart city projects (c) Alternative imaginaries – to allow room for different views and visions on the future of the city Within the previously described context of smart cities and their criticized tech-­ driven, univocal and top-down nature, these three opportunities arise as the most prominent and most valuable to address the lack of societal debate on smart cities and their impact.

11.4.1 Civic Engagement One of the major points of critique of the smart city is that it perpetuates a top-down, corporate driven vision of urban space, and neglects citizen’s experience and perspective of the city (Vanolo, 2016). In response to this critique, some projects make efforts to shift towards a more bottom-up and people-centric approach (Trencher, 2019). The challenge, however, is how to truly engage and include citizens, and work towards a process of collaboration and co-creation, rather than relying on mere citizen consultation. We suggest that smart city controversies are natural spaces for civic engagement and should be fostered as means to democratize the smart city. Relating this to Latour’s notion of ding-politik (2005), a controversy functions as a ‘public thing’: an occasion where various actors can meet and debate different issues that are of

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

149

importance to the community. The issue at stake (the controversy) involves both facts about the world and concerns about their implications. People’s engagement with the issues at stake are the basis for coming together (becoming a ‘public’) to develop accounts of what is the case and why this is important. Such a hybrid forum (Callon et al., 2009) offers space for negotiation on conflicting interests, expectations or values; whether it be ethical concerns or technical details. A key aspect of democratization of the smart city is to open up pathways for participation in issue formation (Marres, 2007). This allows citizens to have a more active role in the politicization of technology. Controversies consist of both matters-­ of-­fact and matters-of-concern, and are thereby not mere rational conflicts but also affective. They highlight what is at stake, what brings about strong feelings and what is of public value. Their intertwinement with public values (which we will elaborate on in the next paragraph), is a core part of how and why controversies drive civic engagement. An example where contestation and controversy drove civic engagement in the smart city is that of Toronto’s Sidewalk Labs. The project promised to turn Toronto’s Waterfront area into an ultra-connected and smart city, containing autonomous cars, heated streets, and smart waste collectors. However, strong criticism arose from citizens and privacy campaigners against the ill-defined plans for data-collection and privacy, especially with Google being one of the project leads. Longstanding contestation led to delays, alterations and eventually even ending the planned project, with new plans being made that support non-digital means to support sustainability and the development of a citizen-centric city.

11.4.2 Ethical Reflection Smart city controversies reveal what is at stake when discussing the nexus of urban technology. They highlight what issues and values are of concern and urge us to evaluate our actions and negotiate ways on how to move forward. Socio-technical controversies require us to not see urban challenges as solely technical problems that need a ‘fix’, but force us to understand the social, political and ethical questions that they raise. As such, controversies create opportunities for an ethical dialogue on the desired direction of technological developments. They help us to make sure critical questions about the societal and ethical desirability of technology are incorporated in the development of smart city projects. Therefore, we propose controversies as entry points for ethical inquiry and debate. The need for such an ethical dialogue on technology is widely recognized, amongst philosophers and engineers alike. Controversies also show the need to move ethical debate beyond much raised issues on privacy and cybersecurity. Albeit key concerns to address, society has been confronted with multiple and diverse unintended effects of the widespread application of data and algorithms, such as racial discrimination in facial recognition software or gender-discrepancies in voice recognition tools. Both examples highlight the value of inclusion as key in the

150

A. Geenen et al.

design, development and programming or new technologies, additional to privacy and security concerns. We thus understand controversies as a means to elicit ethical inquiry and access the values that are of public concern. These values are relevant input for engineers, so that they can translate them to actual norms and design requirements (van de Poel, 2013). The value tensions that are part of a controversy reveal the underlying needs and wishes of the publics involved. As such, controversies are a means to do bottom-up ethics, where we understand values as lived experiences that need to be understood in context, instead of elements of a top-down list of values that rely on discursive and abstract definitions only. Prior means to engage engineers and ethics more closely such as Value Sensitive Design (Friedman et al., 2013), offer such a fixed set of values as a means of ‘checklist’ when designing and implementing new technologies. Albeit a helpful and highly applied approach, it is much criticized for its use of a predefined list of values, thereby privileging certain values from the start, rather than being open to encounter values through a process of discovery within the local context (Le Dantec et al., 2009). This reduces the ethical and political conversation to a design requirement that must be checked off the list, and neglects that values are situated, contextual and mediated by technology (Boenink & Kudina, 2020), entailing that their relevance and meaning can change over time and space. Controversies offer a means for value discovery (Le Dantec et al., 2009), and their contextual character helps to directly engage with the local expressions of values, and prompts a commitment to respond to local context of design. Moreover, through value discovery and the surfacing of values that are of concern, opportunity opens for aspirational ethics amongst engineers. Much of ethics in engineering focuses on preventive ethics: checking the mandatory rules that promote a safe society and prevent harm. Aspirational ethics however focuses on promoting human well-being and social good, and thus takes a more holistic approach to what a ‘safe society’ might mean. Whereas preventive ethics is a more negative interpretation of ethics (telling us what we should prevent), aspirational ethics allows for a more positive interpretation (telling us what we should foster and promote) (Harris, 2013). This approach to ethics fits well with, and follows more naturally from, a process of value discovery, as it is through understanding values in context that engineers can better grasp what values entail and how to promote them through their technological design (Harris, 2013). The Responsible Sensing Lab in Amsterdam2 is an example of how controversial issues and the values they raise, can inspire new ways of design and engineering. Following the ongoing debate around surveillance cameras and their intrusion on citizens’ privacy, they have developed the ‘shuttercam’: an experimental camera that can be covered by a cap, thus giving transparency on when it is recording and when not. By incorporating the values and concerns that are raised, and finding innovative ways to integrate abstract values such as privacy into the design, this lab embeds public values in their practices, and is working towards more responsible sensors to support the smart city.  https://responsiblesensinglab.org/

2

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

151

11.4.3 Alternative Imaginaries By bringing together various perspectives and revealing the values of concern, controversies open pathways for alternative socio-technical imaginaries of the smart city. It is through these critical questions about societal impact and desirability, that we learn and understand what we wish and do not wish for urban futures. By understanding which values we would like to protect or pursue, we can create new imaginaries of the future that incorporate these values. These imaginaries can move well beyond the corporate-fed ideal of an efficient and optimized city, and can include new visions on, for example, healthy urban living or a smart city focused on supporting social interactions. When we think about the kind of values we want to nurture, we are engaging our imagination, helping us to shape new ideals, or come up with standards to make our futures more relatable and enjoyable. Smart city controversies thus serve as much-needed opportunities for opening democratic discussions about, and reconfiguring, our urban futures. We might feel that controversies separate us, but when embraced, they can help us identify and shape more inclusive futures. They allow us to involve a diversity of perspectives and work towards a collective, alternative imagination on the smart city. This allows us to re-appropriate smart city futures and move beyond the merely corporate view urban space. The current discourse is dominated by the utopian narrative of technological salvation as a response to the many global and urban crises we face (Sadowski & Bendor, 2019). This reductionist, technocratic and top-down view on urban technology restricts stakeholders’ imagination and limits the creation of new pathways to address the existing and future urban challenges (Vanolo, 2014; Valdez et al., 2018). It crowds out alternative visions on corresponding arguments on smart urbanism (Sawdowksi & Bendor, 2019). Current imaginaries of the urban future mostly reflect and reinforce the existing socio-political system, rather than opening space of alternative perspectives and futures. We need means to move beyond one comprehensive, corporate view and allow different ideas and initiatives on smart urbanism to exist side by side. Rather than abiding by these uni-directional visions on what the smart city entails, controversies enable us to create counter-narratives: new stories about futures that incorporate different values and perspectives than the dominant discourse of technological utopia. It allows to build new imaginaries from a collective perspective, incorporating multiple needs and visions. These types of alternative visions can be created through contestation and debate. Exploring multiple perspectives and meanings associated with technological artefacts allows for dialogue and understanding different application contexts. Similar to the approach of object theater (Fritzsche, 2021), the aim is not to integrate different visions on a technology, but to represent alternative imaginaries by combining different narratives and voices. At the moment, such debate is lacking and this gap, which offers ample space for reinforces closing of the road to alternative imaginaries. Through embracing controversy and fostering this space of contestation and debate, we can open this

152

A. Geenen et al.

road again, and cultivate space for alternative values, visions and futures. Controversies show us that there are many futures ahead, and help us to reflect on the anticipated outcome of our choices. They are thus breeding grounds for alternative imaginaries of our urban life. Several examples of alternative visions to what a smart city could entail exist. The city of Barcelona is a great and rare example of a city that fostered new urban imaginaries by introducing a ‘city data commons’ and various platforms for civic participation in the smart city, thereby taking a different direction from the initial plans of corporate tech-giant Cisco. The city of Paris is a frontrunner of adapting the ‘15-min city premise’ (Moreno et  al., 2021), that moves away from car-centric urban planning to emphasize values of accessibility, sustainability and local communities. This alternative imaginary (‘communities should have access to their needs within a 15-min reach’ and commuting is not necessary) impacts how the city can evolve and the role that technology can play in that process. Other efforts include innovative ideas of urban social justice, such as digitizing and mapping slums, or efforts on mental health and urban stress (McFarlane & Söderström, 2017).

11.5 Design Approaches to Realize the Potential of Controversies Although the potential of controversies has been recognized decades ago, ways to effectively exploit this potential are scarce. Carrying the theoretical input from STS, we now turn to the innately more practically oriented fields of engineering and design to realize the identified opportunities that controversies bring. Following the theorized threefold potential, we suggest that a ‘Designing for Controversies’ approach requires engaging in techniques that bring together the diversity of perspectives that are core to controversies, and should emphasize the following: (1) Empathy building and perspective taking. To grasp the complexity and nuance that builds up a controversy, it is important to be aware of the diversity of perspectives that coexist in the socio-technical context of engineering projects – ranging from the technical to the civic perspective. Moreover, different stakeholders in society may have different goals and aspirations, that go beyond the pure use of the technology at hand. Greater empathy with the envisioned user will support engineering practices to view the ‘user’ as a more holistic ‘human’, and also incorporate ‘society’ in their practices. (2) Modes of critical and creative thinking. The process of value discovery and ethical reflection that happens through controversies, requires a critical mindset towards the design and impact of technology: what affects does it bring about and how does that influence our daily lives? At the same time, a creative attitude comes into play: how could we mitigate unintended or undesired affects? What other futures could we envision? Key here is that these modes of thinking come jointly when addressing controversies constructively: merely resting on criticality won’t allow us to harvest the potential to bring about new and better tech-

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

153

nologies that do include the values of concern. At the same time, merely relying on creativity will not allow us to truly understand the issues at stake, potentially running the risk of neglecting values of societal relevance. Engaging with both these modes of thinking in a simultaneous manner is challenging, and requires further research into methods that stimulate both criticality and creativity. To further develop this ‘Designing for Controversies’ approach, we must understand how we can develop and support empathy among stakeholders with diverse, and potentially conflicting perspectives, and how we can foster modes of both creative and critical thinking. In the field of design research, we find some inspiring examples of how to go about this. Systemic Design (van der Bijl-Brouwer & Malcolm, 2020) integrates systems-thinking with human-centered design and provides promising means to address the complexity that controversies carry, because of the multiple perspectives and values that collate. Speculative and Critical Design (Dunne & Raby, 2013) uses design as a medium to explore the societal implications of future technologies, and invites imagination and critique by being explicitly provocative. Below we highlight two compelling approaches that specifically centralize friction: The Scandinavian participatory design approach (e.g., Ehn et al., 2014) is highly aligned with our exploration, as it combines theoretical insights from Latour and Mouffe into their design practices. Within this school of thought, controversies are taken as starting point of the participatory design processes. By employing ‘agonistic public spaces’, rather than consensual decision making, they foster the incongruent concerns and take them as a point of departure. ‘Infrastructuring’ is a move away from short-lived design project, towards a more open-ended space and long-­ term process where stakeholder can come together and co-create innovations. Another source of inspiration is dilemma-driven design (Ozkaramanli, 2017), that shows how dilemmas and conflicts can serve as the breeding ground for design solutions, by highlighting the actual needs of the user. Dilemma-driven design helps to generate empathy for people’s goals and values, and uses the creative potential of conflict to stimulate innovation. A similar attitude can be taken on when discussing smarty city controversies: these socio-technical controversies highlight the value tensions that new urban technologies bring about, and as such surface ‘user’ needs and potential pathways for addressing them – the user being a variety of stakeholders in the urban sphere here. Dilemma-driven design offers a tested method on how to turn conflicts operational and applicable, and it is worth investigating further how this dilemma-driven design can be extended towards controversy-centered design.

11.6 Conclusion Smart city technologies tend to be sources of friction and debate, as multiple perspectives and expectations on urban futures come together and collide. In this chapter, we have argued that acknowledging and embracing these socio-technical

154

A. Geenen et al.

controversies can be of added value to the design and development of smart city projects. We understand controversies as instances where politics ‘happens’: a diversity of actors and plurality of perspectives come together, values are negotiated, pathways for action are evaluated and alternative urban imaginaries emerge. We have described the productive potential of controversies to enhance and enrich the smart city debate, and theorized a threefold potential: to stimulate civic engagement, encourage ethical reflection and envision alternative imaginaries. Next steps in urban policy and engineering practices should focus on harvesting the inherent value contained in smart city controversies by bringing these theoretical insights to practice. We suggest to build on existing design approaches that embrace conflict and value tensions, in order to enhance the engineering practice and work towards more responsible smart city projects.

References Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3–21. Boenink, M., & Kudina, O. (2020). Values in responsible research and innovation: From entities to practices. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 450–470. Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2009). Acting in an uncertain world: An essay on technical democracy. The MIT Press. Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Smart cities in Europe. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 65–82. Cuppen, E. (2018). The value of social conflicts. Critiquing invited participation in energy projects. Energy Research & Social Science, 38, 28–32. Cuppen, E., Ejderyan, O., Pesch, U., Spruit, S., van de Grift, E., Correljé, A., & Taebi, B. (2020). When controversies cascade: Analysing the dynamics of public engagement and conflict in the Netherlands and Switzerland through “controversy spillover”. Energy Research & Social Science, 68, 101593. De Waal, M., De Lange, M., & Bouw, M. (2017). The hackable city: Citymaking in a platform society. Architectural Design, 87(1), 50–57. Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT press. Ehn, P., Nilsson, E. M., & Topgaard, R. (2014). Making futures: Marginal notes on innovation, design and democracy. The MIT Press. Friedman, B., Kahn, P.  H., Borning, A., & Huldtgren, A. (2013). Value sensitive design and information systems. In Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory (pp. 55–95). Springer. Fritzsche, A. (2021). The artefact on stage  – Object theatre and philosophy of engineering and technology. In Z.  Pirtle, D.  Tomblin, & G.  Madhavan (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy (Philosophy of engineering and technology) (Vol. 37). Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­030-­70099-­7_16 Harris, C. E. (2013). Engineering ethics: From preventive ethics to aspirational ethics. In Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 177–187). Springer. Henley, J. (2021). Dutch government resigns over child benefits scandal. The Guardian. Retrieved on June 6, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/15/ dutch-­government-­resigns-­over-­child-­benefits-­scandal Jasper, J. M. (1988). The political life cycle of technological controversies. Social Forces, 67(2), 357–377.

11  The Potential of Smart City Controversies to Foster Civic Engagement, Ethical…

155

Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1–14. Kolloch, M., & Dellermann, D. (2018). Digital innovation in the energy industry: The impact of controversies on the evolution of innovation ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 254–264. Komninos, N. (2008). Intelligent cities and globalisation of innovation networks. Routledge. Latour, B. (2005). From realpolitik to dingpolitik. Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy (p. 1444). MIT Press. Le Dantec, C. A., Poole, E. S., & Wyche, S. P. (2009, April). Values as lived experience: Evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1141–1150). Lucivero, F., Marelli, L., Hangel, N., Zimmermann, B. M., Prainsack, B., Galasso, I., et al. (2021). Normative positions towards COVID-19 contact-tracing apps: Findings from a large-scale qualitative study in nine European countries (pp. 1–14). Critical Public Health. Marres, N. (2007). The issues deserve more credit: Pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy. Social Studies of Science, 37(5), 759–780. McFarlane, C., & Söderström, O. (2017). On alternative smart cities: From a technology-intensive to a knowledge-intensive smart urbanism. City, 21(3–4), 312–328. Moreno, C., Allam, Z., Chabaud, D., Gall, C., & Pratlong, F. (2021). Introducing the “15-Minute City”: Sustainability, resilience and place identity in future post-pandemic cities. Smart Cities, 4(1), 93–111. Nelkin, D. (1995). Science controversies: The dynamics of public disputes in the United States. In Handbook of science and technology studies (Vol. 444, p. 456). Ozkaramanli, D. (2017). Me against myself: Addressing personal dilemmas through design. https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:5b36ba74-­d629-­4ee2-­9f08-­edeb33d5ca59 Rip, A. (1986). Controversies as informal technology assessment. Knowledge, 8(2), 349–371. Sadowski, J., & Bendor, R. (2019). Selling smartness: Corporate narratives and the smart city as a sociotechnical imaginary. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 44(3), 540–563. Söderström, O., Paasche, T., & Klauser, F. (2014). Smart cities as corporate storytelling. City, 18(3), 307–320. Su, K., Li, J., & Fu, H. (2011, September). Smart city and the applications. In 2011 international conference on electronics, communications and control (ICECC) (pp. 1028–1031). IEEE. Todt, O. (1997). The role of controversy in engineering design. Futures, 29(2), 177–190. Trencher, G. (2019). Towards the smart city 2.0: Empirical evidence of using smartness as a tool for tackling social challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 117–128. Valdez, A. M., Cook, M., & Potter, S. (2018). Roadmaps to utopia: Tales of the smart city. Urban Studies, 55(15), 3385–3403. Van de Poel, I. (2013). Translating values into design requirements. In Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 253–266). Springer. van der Bijl-Brouwer, M., & Malcolm, B. (2020). Systemic design principles in social innovation: A study of expert practices and design rationales. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(3), 386–407. Vanolo, A. (2014). Smartmentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy. Urban Studies, 51(5), 883–898. Vanolo, A. (2016). Is there anybody out there? The place and role of citizens in tomorrow’s smart cities. Futures, 82, 26–36. Venturini, T. (2010). Diving in magma: How to explore controversies with actor-network theory. Public Understanding of Science, 19(3), 258–273. Venturini, T. (2012). Building on faults: How to represent controversies with digital methods. Public Understanding of Science, 21(7), 796–812.

Chapter 12

The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations Matías Quer

Abstract  Democracy as we know it is currently in crisis and this has generated a critical reexamination of many of its characteristics. Although democracies are mainly representative democracies, lately there has been a tendency to propose more mechanism of direct democracy with the help of digital technology, known as Digital Direct Democracy (DDD). While DDD is one of many manifestations of the penetration of technology in democracy, which is described by the broader name of E-Democracy, it is an especially problematic one. Through this chapter I will: (i) explain the relevance of E-Democracy and the place that DDD has within it; (ii) make a critical assessment of the main philosophical arguments used by DDD promoters to justify its implementations, mainly the ancient Athenian model and Jean-­ Jacques Rousseau. Finally, I will give a balanced assessment of the desirability of digital technological penetration in the different levels of citizen participation in democracy. For this, I will distinguish three levels of participation: (i) being informed; (ii) giving opinions and feedback to political representatives; (iii) voting and making political decisions. Considering that DDD is being proposed as applicable to all these levels, I will propose to abandon any attempts of DDD and instead use technology mainly in the first level, less in the second and in very limited situations of the third. Keywords  Democracy · Digital direct democracy · E-democracy · Political representation · Political deliberation · Technology

M. Quer (*) Universidad de los Andes (Chile), Santigo, Chile e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_12

157

158

M. Quer

12.1 Introduction That democracy as we know it today in the Western world is threatened and questioned is evident. Different authors have been referring to the crisis of democracy, the end of it, the internal tensions that it has or the challenges that it faces (cf. Manent, 2018; Deneen, 2018; Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018). But democracy is not a monochromatic political regime, but rather has several ways of taking shape in a political body. Even though democracy can occur in many forms, today we usually think of it as the Western representative liberal democracy. On this occasion, I want to refer to a specific risk that democracy must face today: the attempt to replace, through new technologies, two of its fundamental characteristics, (i) political representation and (ii) political deliberation. These risks do not mean that all technology is a threat or a problem for the democratic regime, on the contrary, in many cases digital tools can allow new forms of participation and involvement of civil society. In fact, the transformation of representation and of the public sphere has been constant for many centuries (Habermas, 1989, 5–11), creating new forms of political organization and participation, of which E-Democracy is one of its newest. In general terms, the concept of E-Democracy encompasses the entry of new electronic and digital technologies into democratic mechanisms. Within E-Democracy we may find many different initiatives, and one of them is called digital direct democracy (also known as DDD or liquid democracy). This chapter focuses specifically on DDD. My main thesis is that digital direct democracy is a serious threat to democracy, especially to its characteristics of being representative and deliberative. To demonstrate the relevance of this threat, we first need to understand the phenomenon of E-Democracy in general, its importance in today’s society, and, within it, the place that digital direct democracy occupies. After we have settled the main characteristics of DDD I will present a critical review of the philosophical foundations commonly used by its promoters.

12.2 The Importance of E-Democracy and the Problem of DDD New electronic and digital technologies have brought with them a profound transformation of society at all levels, including the political sphere and its democratic mechanisms. At the same time, democracy has been weakened and questioned in many countries by populist movements and authoritarian nationalist outbreaks (Wolin, 2008). It is within this landscape that E-Democracy begins to emerge. It consists of the irruption of new electronic and digital technologies in the field of democracy and government mechanisms (Kaun & Guyard, 2012, 541). By this, E-Democracy is presented in the first place as a way to improve our democracies, by giving more information and participation to citizens in the process of political

12  The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

159

decision making, especially in elections and decisions in local communities. In this sense, E-Democracy could mean, for example, that citizens would have access to the meetings and lobby that their legislative representatives have, or the type of financing that presidential campaigns obtain, the way in which congressmen vote and even the ability to communicate with their authorities and being able to express them what they think or want. This would be, of course, a great input for our democracies, because information is a vital aspect for the strengthening of societies and democracies through new technologies (Older & Pirtle, 2021). So far, E-Democracy does not seem more than an almost inevitable phenomenon of penetration of technology in all layers and areas of social life. However, at the same time as an opportunity to boost democracy, new technologies can constitute a threat or a danger when they are applied without a critical view regarding their use and consequences. Let’s start with a little story: in 1996, the European Union published the so-called Green Paper. In this document, the EU presented a series of ideas about new information technologies and their social impact. The Green Paper, of course, devoted a few paragraphs to democracy, stating that it requires an informed population: “for true, inclusive, democracy to exist, the whole population must have equal access to information to make choices effectively and equitably” (European Commission, 1996, 101). This doesn’t seem new to us, since information has always been a vital aspect in the exercise of democracy. The striking thing comes shortly after, when the Green Paper affirms that, “the vitality of political debate could be reinvigorated through more use of direct democracy” (European Commission, 1996, 102). Of course, the proposal of a “greater use of direct democracy” doesn’t necessarily mean advancing to a digital direct democracy, but that risk should not be discounted. The EU wasn’t proposing moving to a DDD system, least of all in 1996 when these ideas were just beginning. But the reality is that, since then, it has become more and more common for some promoters of E-Democracy to be tempted to propose models of direct democracy by becoming enthusiastic about the possibilities for citizen participation (Bartlett, 2018, 52). For example, some European political parties such as Podemos (Spain), Piratenpartei (Germany) and Movimento 5 Stelle (Italy) have used different digital tools to make political decisions directly (Korthagen et al., 2019, 237). The crisis of representative democracy, precisely in its fundamental aspect of political representation, has been constantly referred to as a reason to promote DDD, with statements such as that, “the traditional representative approaches in local democracy are now increasingly supplemented with (if not substituted by) forms of direct democracy, participation and/or deliberation, such as e-petitions” (Edelmann & Cruickshank, 2012, 341). In this sense, usually DDD has begun by proposing direct democracies in smaller and local spaces, such as municipalities (cf. Parlak & Sobaci, 2010, 78). This proposal could make sense because local spaces are less complex and therefore need less representation. But, at the same time, it is counterproductive because DDD proposals discourage the assembly of civil society in common spaces were people meet, share and deliberate, something that, for Tocqueville, for example, seems fundamental for democratic life (Tocqueville,

160

M. Quer

2002, Democracy in America, I, 1, 5). Promoters of DDD also think that the difficulty of gathering citizens in huge modern cities – due to their large population – in the Athenian style, would be solved in the so-called Smart Cities (Kumar, 2017, 29). The “technical obstacle” posed by a population so large that it is impossible to physically gather in an assembly would thus be solved through digital technology (Malina, 1999, 32). Before reviewing some of the philosophical foundations of the DDD proposals, I must highlight two phenomena that have occurred in recent years within Western liberal democracies. The first, well studied and known, is the emergence of surveys and polling as a permanent and increasingly binding thermometer – at least indirectly – regarding the political situation in each country and the direction that its political authorities should take. In other words, although polls are not formally binding, in practice they are becoming more and more decisive for politicians’ choices. The second, by its own nature less recurrent, but not less important, is the growing tendency to use referendums for certain political decisions, instead of making them through the usual democratic mechanisms, especially those of the Congress. Precisely what certain practices of E-Democracy, especially digital direct democracy, can do is amplify the magnitude of this phenomena described above, producing even more profound effects on democratic institutions and on the political participation of citizens and authorities. For this reason, having described E-Democracy and DDD, it is appropriate to review the philosophical foundations that the promoters of the DDD use to justify their proposals.

12.3 The Philosophical Foundations of DDD When we look at different conferences and texts published in Europe, Asia and the United States regarding the emergence of E-Democracy, it’s possible to observe that there are some references that are repeated when arguing for direct democracy mediated by digital technology. First, there are allusions to Ancient Greece and its forms of direct democracy, the second source is Rousseau and his concept of general will in the framework of the contractualism of The Social Contract.

12.3.1 Athens and Direct Democracy in the Ekklesia Ancient Greece – and Athens in particular – is usually the first reference point to exemplify direct democracy. This is not by chance, because by looking back at the ancient Greek polis we are in some way returning to the origins of democracy, which is often interpreted as a return to true democracy, that is, to the way in which its creators would have conceived it. This interpretation may carry a certain idea – explicit or not – that any other form of democracy is in a certain sense a falsification

12  The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

161

or deterioration of it. However, it is important to note that direct democracy has been a rather limited phenomenon in world history and that by no means is it the most common form of democracy. This may have different explanations, but it is common to accept that only in very particular moments in our history we have had true direct democracies (Arenilla, 2010, 20). The social conditions in which democracy developed in Ancient Greece were very special and difficult (or impossible) to reproduce in today’s world. The promoters of direct digital democracy are no strangers to this reality, but their proposal is based precisely on this fact. In other words, the DDD project does not consist of an attempt to return to Athens, but rather seeks to use technology to repeat – as similarly as possible – the Athenian experience in cities and countries with millions of inhabitants. Thus, DDD is not a return to direct democracy, but a new form of it: it is the route of direct democracy from the polis to the Smart City. In addition, that there is an important difference between Greek direct democracy and DDD: in Athens democracy relied on the possibility of dialogue between all citizens, who were equal among them, so there was a genuine political deliberation, and it was not simply that everyone could vote on all issues. More important than universality of the vote was “universal” participation (in reality, we know, limited to a group of citizens of the total population) in the public space, with dialogue, deliberation and voting in equality. In that sense, Aristotle is clear when explaining democracy: The first kind of democracy therefore is the one which receives the name chiefly in respect of equality. For the law of this sort of democracy ascribes equality to the state of things in which the poor have no more prominence than the rich, and neither class is sovereign, but both are alike; for assuming that freedom is chiefly found in a democracy, as some persons suppose, and also equality, this would be so most fully when to the fullest extent all alike share equally in the government. And since the people are in the majority, and a resolution passed by a majority is paramount, this must necessarily be a democracy (Aristotle, 1944: Aristot. Pol. IV. 1291b).

Let’s now look at the E-ekklesia proposal, which is an example of a DDD project. The idea of its promoters is to recreate the Greek ekklesia: “In ekklesia every citizen had the right to express his views freely and to report any law or act, he believed to be unfair.” (Mpoitsis & Koutsoupias, 2013, 52). The ekklesia, they consider, not only allowed the expression of citizens, in addition, “all citizens were considered to be capable of serving their city as a public officer” (Ibid., 52). This gives the ekklesia a more direct and more participatory character, since citizens would be involved not only in giving their opinion, but also in deciding. So far, the E-ekklesia account doesn’t present a great innovation. However, the next step is to introduce the use of the Internet and the diffusion of electronic technology to propose a form of E-Democracy, which they christen as E-ekklesia, and which they describe as follows: E-ekklesia […] which we believe that could be feasible and also could bypass the classiest argument against direct democracy, which refers to the huge population of the existing states and the inability to concentrate all citizens in a particular place. In our model of E-ekklesia all the citizens will have the opportunity to be involved in the politics by using a

162

M. Quer

personal code […]. Following the model of ancient Athens, all citizens could be informed about the state’s issues and could be able to watch the various suggestions on these issues. (Ibid., 54–55).

It is immediately possible to observe that the E-ekklesia proposal is clearly an attempt to move towards DDD, because in it “the concept of representation will lose its meaning, as each citizen will directly represent himself” (Ibid., 62). The first thing that is affirmed is that it will allow us to overcome the great obstacle that direct democracy currently has: the large population, which cannot gather in one place. But the most interesting aspect is that the participation of citizens is proposed through a web portal. There is a clear sequence in the project: (i) first it is said that citizens could be more informed, (ii) then it is mentioned that they could make suggestions (it is understood that they make them to the representatives, that is, there is still representative democracy), (iii) and finally it speaks directly of the possibility of voting the proposals. In this way, the attempt to establish an increasingly direct democracy through digital technology can be summarized. Deep down, there is a longing that, “new information technologies will transform the nature of political activity by infusing American representative democracy with the direct democratic ideals of the Ancient Greek city state” (Hale et al., 1999, 98). In other words, their promoters want to rescue Greek direct democracy and apply it digitally (that is the novelty) in the context of the multitudinous nation states. It is particularly revealing to observe the sequence proposed in E-ekklesia, since it clearly shows the levels at which the political participation of citizens occurs, and it does so by pointing to a progression in which technology penetrates each of these levels. The three levels of political participation are: (i) getting informed about what is happening; (ii) giving an opinion and feedback to the representatives regarding their decision-making; (iii) voting and making binding political decisions. Towards the end I will give a finished opinion on the impact of digital technologies in these three levels, for now it is important to note that a complete DDD must reach all levels, especially the third, that is, it must allow citizens to have the decision-­making power that is generally reserved to the Legislative Power.

12.3.2 Rousseau and the General Will The other major support that promoters of digital direct democracy turn to is Jean Jacques Rousseau. The fundamental idea is to use his concept of general will to promote a form of assembly whose current digital manifestation would be DDD.  This assembly lacks discussion: “Rousseau famously recommends that assemblies proceed directly to a vote without any preceding discussion” (Goodin & Spiekermann, 2018, 138). This means that the deliberative aspect of representative democratic functioning is lost when representation is lost. To justify this way of making democracy work directly and without representation, they constantly refer

12  The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

163

to The Social Contract, especially the first chapters of Book II, where Rousseau characterizes sovereignty as inalienable and indivisible. By inalienable, Rousseau understands that, “sovereignty, being only the exercise of the general will, can never be transferred, and that the sovereign, which cannot be other than a collective entity, cannot be represented except by itself; power can be delegated, but the will cannot.” (Rousseau, 1999, The Social Contract, II, 1). This means that the people cannot promise that they will simply obey, since they would lose their quality of being a people. From this brief chapter, a series of conclusions will be derived regarding the impossibility of people transferring their will to a representative, which basically implies canceling the representative aspect of democracy. This idea is reinforced later in The Social Contract: “It is at once clear, from this principle, that we must no longer ask who has the right to make the laws, since they are acts of the general will” (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., II, 6). If this point has long been restricted to small and local spaces, such as assemblies of university students or forms of direct democracy in local governments, today some believe that progress can be made on this path through digital technology (Gerbaudo, 2019). Rousseau considers that, “sovereignty is indivisible for the same reason that it is untransferable: a will is either general, or it is not; it is the will of the body of the people, or of a part only” (Rousseau, 1999, The Social Contract, II, 2). This means that the will, to be general – and, therefore, sovereign – must be of the entire body politic, since individuals naturally seek their own particular interest, and the people as a whole is the entity which seeks the common interest (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., I, 7). If we add the inalienable character to the indivisible feature that sovereignty possesses in Rousseau’s thought, we find a theoretical framework to promote direct democracy and, if we add the new digital technologies, then it is possible to overcome the so-called “technical problem” that involves gathering thousands or millions of people in one place. Let us return briefly to the general will that Rousseau proposes. The problem that arises is the following: “Find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole of its joint strength, the person and property of each associate, and under which each of them, uniting himself to all, will obey himself alone, and remain as free as before” (Rousseau, 1999,  Ibid., I, 6). The solution  – the social contract – can be summarized as: “the complete transfer of each associate, with all his rights, to the whole community” (Rousseau, 1999,  Ibid., I, 6). Although it is common to affirm that the general will is not the same as unanimity, Rousseau does not fail to mention that it will be necessary at least one decision – the first, that is, the contract itself – that is accepted by all (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., I, 5).It’s interesting to observe what happens with political deliberation under the Rousseauian proposal. First, Rousseau warns us that, “it follows from what precedes that the general will is always right, and always tends to the public welfare, but it does not follow that decisions made by the people have equal rightness” (Ibid., II, 3). This is because the people can be deceived. Now, once this obstacle has been overcome, a specific form of deliberation can occur, which seems to be the ideal for Rousseau: “If, when properly informed, the people were to come to its decisions without any communication between its members, the general will would always emerge from that large

164

M. Quer

number of small differences, and the decision would always be good” (Rousseau, 1999,  Ibid., II, 3). It seems that this little passage reveals a particular aspect of Rousseau’s political deliberation, in which the ideal would seem to be the absence of communication between citizens. In fact, Rousseau’s mechanism doesn’t even accept factions or political parties, it does not recognize the ability of people to associate around an ideology or worldview: “It is therefore important, if the general will is to be properly ascertained, that there should be no partial society within the state, and each citizen should decide according to his own opinion” (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., II, 3). This takes away even more capacity for dialogue from Rousseau’s deliberation, since parties are usually a means of reaching agreements and bringing together common ideas to contrast them and try to make them compatible with those of other groups, instead of each one listing their individual needs, which would produce infinite and incompatible differences between all of them. Individual interests are thus the enemy of the common interest that the general will supposes (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., I, 7; II, 4), since Rousseau thinks that this ensures that the interest of the general will is not contrary to that of any citizen. This allows us to understand the Rousseauian idea of forcing ourselves to be free (Rousseau, 1999, Ibid., I, 7). However, there is an anthropological aspect that the promoters of DDD do not usually incorporate to their analysis: the corporality of the human being, that is, the physical or material dimension of people. We know that in Athens citizens were capable of meeting to deliberate, in Rousseau’s time, on the other hand, it is not clear that this possibility exists: since the will cannot be delegated, there is no possibility of representation. This leads to the formation of great assemblies that lack dialogue and deliberation, but still seem to be still linked in some way to a physical encounter. New technologies, on the other hand, would allow us to find ourselves in a virtual assembly, but they would not solve the lack of political deliberation that is needed to make complex decision. These proposals are not attentive to the specificity of the political. Both in the classic thought of the polis and for the general will, they continue to think of a citizen meeting in the public square, this would be lost in a virtual mass that is not known, cannot dialogue or have the time to reflect on what is enough. It seems, therefore, that political deliberation supposes – among other requirements – a physical encounter, a meeting space in which people know each other integrally (which is more than virtually) and from that state of being together, the people deliberate. In this sense, the theory of embodied cognition gives us new information on how people get to know the word through their whole body and not just by their minds (Crawford, 2015).

12.4 Conclusion Politics has a dimension that is inherent and specific to it, what we may call its specificity. It consists of the capacity that people who share a political community must process their differences peacefully and reach agreements despite the

12  The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

165

differences that exist within them. To achieve this objective, it is necessary for political deliberation to take place, and such deliberation, in the context of great contemporary nations and cities, needs political representation. The advantage of political representation over assembly is that, “representative assemblies are not only more select, and hence potentially competent, decision-­ making bodies; they are also smaller, and hence potentially more conversational. Those two factors, taken together, may well make representative democracy epistemically superior to direct democracy” (Goodin & Spiekermann, 2018, 244). These advantages are considerable and far outweigh the supposed epistemic superiority that could exist in consulting a greater number of people – as does the DDD – in relation to the small number of representatives (Ibid., 245). One danger that critics – and also some advocates – of DDD are often on the lookout for is populism. We have already seen that Rousseau admits the feasibility of deceiving the sovereign people when they are going to manifest their general will. Along the same lines, we can admit that full direct democracy assumes that each person must decide on many issues, some of which can affect them, and in that case both easy prejudices and populist leaders can manipulate those voters (Ibid., 247). Another problem would be the absence of responsibility over our decisions, since it would be diluted in the anonymous mass in the purest Fuenteovejuna style (Moore, 1999, 57). Another critical aspect is the real ability of citizens to access verified information before their political decision-making, since it has been noted that in decisions such as Brexit, voters had little information about what they were deciding (Garrison, 2017, 75). Based on the review of the philosophical-political corpus that accompanies the discussion around E-Democracy, and specifically digital direct democracy, it is possible to issue a balanced judgment regarding the role of new digital technologies in democracy. In first place, as we have seen, there are three levels of citizen participation in political processes: (i) learning about what is happening; (ii) giving an opinion on what is being discussed and giving feedback to the representatives on the decisions they make and the laws they propose; (iii) casting votes and making decisions that are legally binding, including voting on bills (Mpoitsis & Koutsoupias, 2013, 57). Following these levels of participation, new technologies should fulfill different roles according to each level. The level of information can and should be improved through new technologies, which allow citizens to stay informed, although there are also new problems in this regard, such as fake news and echo chambers. At the second level, digital technologies should only participate partially, allowing representatives to know what their constituents think and to receive feedback from time to time regarding what they do, but not to be enslaved to the constant opinion of citizens through surveys and the results of social network analysis. Regarding the third level, in which citizens vote and can make relevant political decisions from their home or work, digital technology should be very limited, and used only to favor the vote of people who, for physical, medical or other reasons cannot access the polling places. This point is of the greatest relevance if we want to avoid the problems that

166

M. Quer

digital direct democracy can produce in our institutions, in democratic mechanisms and in citizens themselves. Thus, the two main characteristics of our democracy, political deliberation and representation, can be preserved.

References Arenilla, M. (2010). Concepts in democratic theory. In D. Ríos & S. French (Eds.), E-democracy: A group decision and negotiation perspective (pp. 15–30). Springer. Aristotle. (1944). Aristotle in 23 volumes (Vol. 21) [Pol.], (H.  Rackham, Trans.). Harvard University Press. Bartlett, J. (2018). The people vs tech. Ebury Press. Crawford, M. (2015). The world beyond your head. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Tocqueville, A. (2002). Democracy in America. University of Chicago Press. Deneen, P. (2018). Why liberalism failed. Yale University Press. Edelmann, N., & Cruickshank, P. (2012). Introducing psychological factors into E-participation research. In A. Manoharan & M. Holzer (Eds.), E-governance and civic engagement: Factors and determinants of E-democracy (pp. 338–361). Information Science Reference. European Commission. (1996). Green paper  – Living and working in the information society: People first. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-­detail/-­/publication/8bcd9942-­f9ef-­4fe7-­96 37-­936af5c0fd85 Garrison, T. (2017). Politicizing digital space: Theory, the internet, and renewing democracy. University of Westminster Press. Gerbaudo, P. (2019). The digital party: Political organization and online democracy. Pluto Press. Goodin, R., & Spiekermann, K. (2018). An epistemic theory of democracy. Oxford University Press. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. An inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society (T. Burger, Trans.). MIT Press. Hale, M., et al. (1999). Developing digital democracy: Evidence from Californian municipal web pages. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 97–116). Routledge. Kaun, A., & Guyard, C. (2012). The Obama effect: The perception of campaigning 2.0 in Swedish National Election 2010. In A.  Manoharan & M.  Holzer (Eds.), E-governance and civic engagement: Factors and determinants of E-democracy (pp. 524–542). Information Science Reference. Korthagen, I., et al. (2019). Non-binding decision-making. In L. Hennen et al. (Eds.), European E-democracy in practice (pp. 237–272). Springer. Kumar, V. (2017). State of the art of E-democracy for smart cities. In V. Kumar (Ed.), E-democracy for smart cities (pp. 1–50). Springer. Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. Crown. Malina, A. (1999). Perspectives on citizen democratization and alienation in the virtual public sphere. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 23–38). Routledge. Manent, P. (2018). Tocqueville y la naturaleza de la democracia. IES. Moore, R. (1999). Democracy and cyberspace. In B. Hague & B. Loader (Eds.), Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age (pp. 39–62). Routledge. Mpoitsis, I., & Koutsoupias, N. (2013). E-ekklesia: The challenge of direct democracy and the ancient athenian model. In A. Sideridis et al. (Eds.), E-democracy, security, privacy and trust in a digital world, 5th international conference, E-democracy 2013, Athens, Greece, December 5–6, 2013 revised selected papers (pp. 52–64). Springer.

12  The Problem of Digital Direct Democracy and its Philosophical Foundations

167

Older, M., & Pirtle, Z. (2021). Imagined systems: How the speculative novel infomocracy offers a simulation of the relationship between democracy, technology, and society. In Z. Pirtle et al. (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy reimagining technology and social progress. Springer. Parlak, B., & Sobaci, Z. (2010). A comparative analysis of local agenda 21 websites in Turkey in terms of E-participation. In C.  Reddick (Ed.), Politics, democracy, and E-government: Participation and service delivery (pp. 75–93). Information Science Reference. Rousseau, J.-J. (1999). The social contract. Oxford University Press. Wolin, S. (2008). Democracy incorporated. Managed democracy and the specter of inverted totalitarianism. Princeton University Press.

Chapter 13

Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit Steven Umbrello and Olivia Gambelin

Abstract  The ethics of technology has primarily focused on what values are and how they can be embedded in technologies through design. In this context, some work has been done to show the efficacy of several design approaches. However, existing studies have not clearly pointed out the ways which design team managers can use design-for-values approaches to organise and use technologies in practice properly. This chapter attempts to fill this gap by discussing the value sensitive design (VSD) approach as a valuable means of co-designing technologies as a toolkit for existing workflow management, in this case, Agile. It will be demonstrated that VSD shows promise as a way of democratically designing technologies as well as fostering democratic technology policy innovation. Keywords  Value sensitive design · VSD · Agile · Systems thinking

13.1 Introduction Since at least the 1950s, the philosophy and ethics of technology have been contending that technology and society influence each other (Winner, 1980). Although this view has changed over time, there nonetheless persists views of analysing the technical and non-technical aspects of society (i.e., that artefacts are inseparable from society) (Ropohl, 1999). In recent years, nation-states have been paying attention to the effects of this phenomenon. In addition, there is regional attention to responsible S. Umbrello (*) Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), Wellington, CT, USA e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] O. Gambelin Ethical Intelligence Associates, Limited, Brussels, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_13

169

170

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

innovation, like the EU Horizon 2020 projects (Veugelers et al., 2015), and international ones, such as with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (United Nations, 2018). What underlies this global orientation towards responsible innovation of new technologies is the notion that they are fundamentally systemic: they interact with social forces. They hence cannot be reduced to mere neutral instruments, instead, they are best understood as important carriers of values. The value sensitive design (VSD) approach was developed in the early 1990s as essentially a means to reflect human values in technology design, rather than arbitrarily referring to them ex post facto or ignoring them altogether; both of which can do more harm than good (c.f., Winner, 1980). For over two decades, VSD has been demonstrated to be uniquely capable of being adopted across a wide range of design domains such as online browsers (Millett et al., 2001), urban simulation (Davis et al., 2006), care robotics (Umbrello et  al., 2021; van Wynsberghe, 2013), artificial intelligence (Umbrello, 2019), energy systems (Mouter et al., 2018), and manufacturing technologies (Longo et al., 2020). Despite the extensive scholarship on the topic, as well as the systemic nature of VSD, existing studies have not addressed the issue of how and why VSD should be implemented/adopted at managerial levels within design domains, and not only by dispersed groups of interested engineers. Of course, engineers and engineering teams are often hierarchical and part of larger organisational structures, which introduce policies that usually govern the working principles of the design team. If VSD seamlessly integrates into the design domain – a fundamental conceptual precept of the approach – it also needs to be applied to the field of management.1 This chapter aims to address this critical gap by exploring how VSD is a design approach capable of being applied not only to the design of technologies themselves (i.e., the artefacts) but also to the seamless integration of the context of use in which it is adopted (i.e., the design domain/workflow). Our discussion is divided into the following sections. Section 13.1 looks at systems thinking and systems engineering, which globally forms the ontological foundation of much of the current trend in technology. Section 13.2 briefly outlines the VSD approach as an implementation of systems engineering and shows how it can satisfy many of the conceptual requirements of systems engineering. Section 13.3 shows how VSD is attractive not only to designers and engineers themselves but also to engineering management, a direct stakeholder and a subject of change. The change in engineering management affects the whole team. Finally, we will illustrate the applicability of VSD to the entirety of sociotechnical systems design (i.e., the design of the artefact(s) and its adoptability by the design domain) by showing how it fits within the Agile methodology, an example of a widely adopted methodology for project management. Section 13.4 discusses how engineering management can begin to think about implementing a VSD toolkit in their Agile process as well as how to increase its symbioses through an explicit orientation towards systems thinking. Finally, Sect. 13.5 presents our conclusions.  It is worth noting that innovation management has already its own approach to values (see, for example, Breuer and Lüdeke-Freund (2016)). Although, this approach to values in management has not been explored as intensively as that of the VSD approach to technology design. 1

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

171

13.2 Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering There are multiple reasons why systems thinking and systems engineering needs to be introduced in this discussion. Firstly, systems thinking in and of itself characterises the various levels of systems. Thus, it not only looks at the system per se (the artefact) but also the system in which it forms a part (i.e., the organisation). Secondly, VSD is fundamentally a systems engineering approach. Because VSD is fundamentally predicated on the interactional stance of technology that we mentioned in the introduction, it examines systems rather than artefacts in isolation or the organisation with only ancillary relation to design. As such, the focal points of VSD, like systems thinking, are the plurality of actors, institutions, technologies, and their design histories. Hence, for responsible innovation to occur, these various connected elements need to be given explicit and primary attention in thinking about design. Broadly, systems thinking is the interdisciplinary study of organised and complex systems (Whitchurch & Constantine, 2009). The nodes, or parts that form a system, are both covariant and co-constitutive of each other and are thus dynamic in their relationship and complexity (Gorokhov, 1998). A system’s environment and context of use both support and constrain its function, the latter of which is teleological in the sense that its intended use is determined by its operation (Adams et al., 2014). This complexity allows systems to be described as greater than the sum of their parts. Furthermore, the covariance of elements creates behaviours that any of the individual components may not produce. This synergy of constituent parts and the emergent behaviour that it generates specify a goal of systems thinking: the behaviour mapping of patterns to help predict such behaviours in different environments of use (Haken, 2013). Systems engineering then takes this more ontological understanding of systems as the theoretical basis for its application in engineering and design (Albers et al., 2010, 2016). It takes a similarly interdisciplinary approach to the understanding, design, management, and deployment of engineered systems to ensure optimised equifinality over their lifecycles (Thomé, 1993). To achieve such equifinality, a system is mapped to determine how the parts that co-constitute it work synergistically and thus provide predictable emergent behaviours in different environments of use (Aslaksen, 2012). One can already begin to see how such a framing of engineering can be helpful when we talk about technologies like artificial intelligence based on machine learning, which learns and adapts based on many (different) environmental inputs. This interdisciplinary approach to engineering employs many related human-­ centred areas of research, such as risk analysis, organisational studies, and project management, alongside technical studies such as mechanical, electrical, software, and industrial engineering, among others (Strijbos, 1998). Doing this takes the discipline of engineering itself as a system to be managed, leading to the conception of the design of the technical artefacts as systems-within-systems. This approach aims

172

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

to map and design the way managerial and organisational structures in which these systems are developed both support and constrain certain design decisions.

13.3 Value Sensitive Design (VSD) For almost three decades, value sensitive design has been a popular approach to designing technologies for human values. Rather than relegating them to ex post facto or ad hoc additions to systems, VSD is espoused as a principled approach to technology design that makes human values the goals of the design. Pioneered by Batya Friedman and her colleagues at the University of Washington in the early 1990s, VSD has since become one of the leading design approaches in the field of engineering ethics and responsible research and innovation (Winkler & Spiekermann, 2021). Although its various applications are outside the scope of this chapter, it does merit discussing some of the theoretical underpinnings of the approach. In addition, it will help us later in describing how it is effectively de facto an approach that functions at all levels of a design domain, as is required by systems thinking and engineering. As mentioned, one of the fundamental theoretical precepts on which VSD is founded is that technology is not purely deterministic, instrumental, and/or socially constructed, but rather is interactional: it both supports and constrains social structures and vice versa. Consequently, technologies, and thus the social structures they form and how they are formed, can be described as sociotechnical systems (Ropohl, 1999). In the design of sociotechnical systems then, VSD is often described as a tripartite methodology constituted of (1) conceptual investigations, (2) empirical investigations, and (3) technical investigations (see Fig. 13.1). They are often undertaken consecutively, in parallel, or iteratively. Respectively, they involve (1) conceptual investigations into values and possible value tensions, (2) empirical investigations of the relevant stakeholders that enables one to define the way one understands their values and priorities and determine their values, and (3) determination and evaluation of what the technical limitations of the technology are and of the way they support and/or constrain identified values and design requirements. Although many VSD applications begin with conceptual investigations, it does not inflexibly specify which one to start with. Instead, the approach is highly flexible and dependent on the contextual particulars of any given domain. VSD projects can then being in one of three considerations: (1) the context of use, (2) a technology itself, and/or (3) a value(s) (Fig. 13.2). Friedman and Hendry (2019) propose 17 more specific methods that can be used in VSD: (1) stakeholder analysis; (2) stakeholder tokens; (3) value source analysis; (4) coevolution of technology and social structure; (5) value scenarios; (6) value sketches; (7) value-oriented semi-structured interview; (8) scalable assessments of information dimensions; (9) value-oriented coding manual; (10) value-oriented mock-ups, prototypes, and field deployments; (11) ethnography focused on values and technology; (12) model for informed consent online; (13) value dams and flows;

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

173

Conceptual Investigations Values from both the relevant philosophical literature and those explicitly elicited from stakeholders are determined and investigated.

Technical Investigations The technical limitations of the technology itself are evaluated for how they support or constrain identified values and design requirements

Empirical Investigations Stakeholder values are empirically evaluated through socio-cultural norms and translated into potential design requirements

Fig. 13.1  The recursive VSD tripartite framework. (Source: Umbrello, 2020)

Context for Use

Technology

Value

Fig. 13.2  Starting considerations for VSD. Typically, one of the three is most pertinent to any given design. (Source: Umbrello, 2021)

174

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

(14) value sensitive action-reflection model; (15) multi-lifespan timeline; (16) multi-lifespan co-design; and (17) envisioning cards. Each of the different methods used over the three decades to address different points within the VSD investigations is not mutually exclusive. Nor can they be exhaustive given that novel approaches from the social sciences and other disciplines emerge as useful means of carrying out the three investigations. In its goal towards designing technologies for human values, the methods aim to identify the direct and indirect stakeholders and stakeholder legitimation, expand design spaces and identify value sources, elicit and represent values, and analyse values concerning social structure as multi-generational envisioning and design thinking. Different VSD methods are better suited depending on the chosen starting point and the system in question. However, we have to keep in mind that stakeholders are not only those outside the design domain, like public users, but also the designers themselves, management, and other members of design organisations. For this reason, VSD should be envisioned not only as a bottom-up approach adopted by designers but also as an approach supporting and constraining top-down structures in a design space, forming those structures and being informed by them. For this reason, VSD is not monolithic or confined to the design level proper but are useful across the various levels of technology design. Consequently, describing VSD as having multiple levels of abstraction is essential for the ethical design of systems and ensuring that equifinality is obtained. Furthermore, the entire sociotechnical structure from which innovations are created is similarly constrained by the approach. The following section describes how VSD can be conceptualised across these levels of abstraction towards the goal of equifinality in both design and design spaces.

13.4 VSD to Design for Equifinality Via Agile As already mentioned, VSD takes the sociotechnicity of technologies as a fundamental precept in its approach. However, if VSD aims to obtain true equifinality, a symbiosis in which a particular system or technology forms a part, then divorcing the approach from different levels of the broader structure like managerial domains and confining it primarily to the level of designers does a disservice. Up until this point, VSD has been applied and explored by designers themselves who have sought to explore its applicability and strengths. Its successes and methodological aptitude in designing for human values entitle it for larger-scale adoption. However, to promote it, we need to look at an instance that couples the various levels of abstraction, specifically the designer levels and the managerial levels, and illustrate how VSD works in both directions (bottom-up and top-down). We can look at Agile as a

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

175

vehicle for this integration of VSD (Sacolick, 2022).2 Agile methods call for collaborative, cross-functional, and self-organising teams, relying on managerial levels to choose which work to be prioritised while designer levels organise around the tasks.3 This enables co-construction of the overall project, bringing in both bottom­up and top-down application of a central project vision. The result is a technology developed by all levels (i.e., systems-within-systems). Furthermore, agile creates an internal organisational environment that is otherwise lacking in VSD and provides a landscape on which VSD can be modulated. The tripartite methodology of VSD, which comprises conceptual, empirical, and technical investigations, naturally fits into the iterative cycle of planning, executing, and evaluating that is characteristic of an agile team (see Fig.  13.3). Conceptual investigations begin during planning, as values are explored and provisionally designed into a system, and ends during evaluation. In contrast, teams reflect on potential value tensions and consider how to account for them in the next iteration. In between planning and evaluation, the execution phase creates space for technical investigations, as a team envisages the building and implementation of the design. Finally, due to Agile’s focus on stakeholder feedback at the end of each iteration, empirical investigations into stakeholder values and priorities obtain the necessary insight in the evaluation phase. This maps on nicely to existing methods in Agile like Scrum where sprints are preceded by inception, product roadmap, release planning, sprint planning and other rituals, and are succeeded by sprint review and sprint retrospective (Mahalakshmi & Sundararajan, 2013). Communication and adaptation is the core of Agile. Teams work within tight feedback cycles and strive for continuous improvement towards the central project vision. Agile has been criticised as a potential cause of poor decision-making, resulting in an unethical technology due to its rapid pace and occasional lack of high-level impact assessment. However, that does not mean it is not a helpful vehicle for value consideration, as Agile does create the structure by which VSD can be integrated into a project cross-functionally and multi-laterally throughout its Fig. 13.3  The mapping of the VSD conceptual, empirical, and technical investigations onto the Agile cycle

 Although an argument can be made that the level of abstraction themselves can be designed by VSD, in fact, I have elsewhere shown this (Umbrello, 2021), the aim of this paper is to show that the VSD methodology can be easily adopted by Agile domains given that Agile’s methodological structure allows for VSD’s seamless integration. 3  Agile can be considered an approach, a philosophy, or a set of frameworks that are used by design teams (such as Scrum, XP, SAFe, Lean Startup and the others). 2

176

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

lifecycle. In fact, the longer-term view and planning from VSD, if adequately embraced in a team, has the potential to solve these concerns of the short-termism caused by Agile practices.

13.5 Implementing VSD in Engineering Teams: An Agile Approach In order to further explore the prospect of utilising Agile as a means for implementing VSD, let us examine the application of one of the 17 different VSD methods – the Value Dams and Flows – to the Agile cycle. The Value Dams and Flows method focuses on avoiding system features that even a small number of stakeholders view as problematic (Friedman & Hendry, 2019). This involves identifying values as stakeholders want and seeking a design that best reflects them while continually addressing values-oriented trade-offs (Miller et  al., 2007). A Value Dam refers to a technical feature or organisational policy a minority subgroup of stakeholders strongly opposes, which requires serious consideration of its negative impact. On the other hand, Value Flows are the values a large majority of the stakeholders would like to see embodied in the system, regardless of whether the resulting technical feature or organisational policy is necessary to the successful operational function of the system. The key is that once these dams and flows have been identified, designers must find a way to balance the two to address any values-oriented design trade-offs and/or moral overload (van den Hoven et al., 2012). At the end of every iteration of the Agile cycle, a new system or feature is deployed to stakeholders for feedback. This feedback is then used throughout the next planning phase to determine what elements will be built in the following iteration. This stakeholder feedback mechanism within the Agile cycle is an ideal vehicle for the Value Dams and Flows toolkit. It first creates the engagement with stakeholders necessary for identifying the various dams and flows and then prioritises the insight gained from this feedback in designing the new features of a system. Like most Agile workflows, they are broken down into ‘sprints’ or iterations, similar to how VSD iteratively designs innovations towards ever-greater equifinality. These pre-determined sprints allow for critical redesigning to take place as new information emerges across the workflow. Likewise, as Fig. 13.5 shows, redesigning as a function of mock-ups and prototypes is a crucial VSD method, just as it is inextricable from Agile. Doing so permits Agile teams to continue their current workflow patterns while simultaneously integrating a method of accomplishing it in a way that is explicitly oriented to designing for human values (Fig. 13.4). The above figure is by no means an exhaustive representation of the potential of VSD tools, which can be employed at any given stage of the Agile cycle. Multiple tools should be used across the Agile process, given that the various stages of any given cycle parallels a tool in VSD that focuses on designing for human values and

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

177

Fig. 13.4  Value Dams and Flows Toolkit in the Agile cycle

Fig. 13.5  Agile workflow with the addition of VSD stakeholder identification tools

can be mapped onto the cycle.4 For example, ‘deploy to stakeholders’ requires knowledge of who the relevant direct and indirect stakeholders are as well as what constitutes safe yet salient deployment to those stakeholders. The former can be addressed by using two VSD tools: (1) stakeholder analysis for the identification and legitimation of the different relevant stakeholders (e.g., Czeskis et al., 2010) and (2) stakeholder tokens to facilitate the identification and articulate the interaction between stakeholders (Yoo, 2021). The latter regarding safe deployment can be

 This mapping is just that, and should not be construed as a ‘redesigned’ version of Agile per se. Inherent to VSD is its ability to be modulated to any design domain, thus increasing the potential for its uptake. Here we can see that Agile is already designed in such a way that allows for the seamless mapping of VSD methods. 4

178

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

resolved through value-oriented mock-ups, prototypes, or field deployments to determine if the technology safely embodies the designed values and to evaluate the system for potential recalcitrance, albeit in an incremental and controlled environment. By observing for any previously unforeseen (or unforeseeable) unwanted values, this can trigger another design iteration (i.e., redesign) (see Fig. 13.5). In ‘evaluating value trade-offs’ or ‘moral overload’ as referred to in VSD scholarship, there are existing tools to help designers manage this stage of development (van den Hoven et al., 2012). The language of ‘trade-offs’, which is often framed in cost-benefit analysis language, is exchanged in VSD, and this paper, for a more inclusive approach to value tensions by co-creating value representations with stakeholders to determine points of overload and how to design systems to support and constrain such tensions via compromise. Value scenarios, value sketches, and the value sensitive action-reflection model are all potential tools that Agile team members can employ to establish a connection with the value understandings, and consequently, the technical design requirements for the values at play, all without replacing their already familiar day-to-day Agile practices. Figure 13.6 illustrates in greater detail the process for how Agile can use VSD.  It’s important to note the symbiotic relationship that VSD and Agile have when paired together; VSD is not overlaid on top of Agile, and neither does Agile become overly complicated with the addition of VSD. Agile already possesses many underlying ontological tools that allow an approach like VSD to integrate seamlessly into its workflow. Umbrello and van de Poel (2021) argue that the VSD tool of ‘value hierarchies’ can be employed for artificial intelligence systems to help designers to translate different values (i.e., higher-order values, AI-specific values, and stakeholder/contextual values) through norms and then into design requirements (and vice versa). Similar heuristics can be used to streamline the evaluation of these apparent ‘trade

Fig. 13.6  Agile workflow with the addition of VSD value representation tools

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

179

off’ scenarios by Agile design teams (e.g., Umbrello, 2018; van de Kaa et al., 2020; van de Poel, 2013, 2014, 2017; van den Hoven et al., 2012). Nonetheless, we have illustrated here that implementing a design-for-values approach, like VSD, is achievable not via wholesale overhauls of design domains and programmes but by invoking one of the fundamental tenets of VSD, i.e., that VSD can and should be integrated into existing practices and workflows. We chose to use Agile because it is a popular, globally-adopted workflow used by design teams. However, given that Agile is not fundamentally devised towards designing for human values, and given the growing importance of this in the modern world, we offer VSD as a toolkit that can be seamlessly integrated into current Agile workflows. A key benefit of the adoptability of VSD is the degree to which its use can be augmented as needed to any given situation while still promoting the benefits of designing for human values. Finally, Umbrello and Gambelin (2021) provide the actual field manual for putting VSD into action for Agile, bringing this more theoretical framework into actual practice.

13.6 Conclusions Value sensitive design (VSD) is a principled approach to design that is increasingly being adopted for a wide range of technologies, and across many domains of use, given its potential for designing technologies for human values. To date, however, the literature on VSD focuses almost exclusively on the technologies themselves or the nature and state of human values in the methodological framework. Because VSD is predicated on the concept that technologies are sociotechnical, social structures influence and are being influenced by technology. This merits examining the social structures that support and constrain the domains themselves, e.g., managerial levels of design domains. This chapter argues that for VSD to achieve a genuinely salient design for human values, its tenets of support and constraint must operate seamlessly across all workflow levels, from the design domain to the domain of management. We have shown how team members at the managerial levels who employ project management methodologies like Agile can adopt VSD as a toolkit and how VSD can be used to iteratively redesign the internal roles and policies of the design domain towards a greater equifinality of innovation. Acknowledgements  We would like to thank Batya Friedman, David Hendry, and other participants at the VSD Quarterly Seminar on 8 April 2021 for providing helpful comments and suggestions on the initial draft of this work. All remaining errors are the authors’ alone. The views expressed in this chapter do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies or Ethical Intelligence Associates, Limited.

180

S. Umbrello and O. Gambelin

References Adams, K. M. G., Hester, P. T., Bradley, J. M., Meyers, T. J., & Keating, C. B. (2014). Systems theory as the foundation for understanding systems. Systems Engineering, 17(1), 112–123. Albers, A., Braun, A., & Muschik, S. (2010). Uniqueness and the multiple fractal character of product engineering processes. In Modelling and management of engineering processes (pp. 15–26). Springer. Albers, A., Reiss, N., Bursac, N., & Richter, T. (2016). iPeM–integrated product engineering model in context of product generation engineering. Procedia CIRP, 50, 100–105. Aslaksen, E. W. (2012). The system concept and its application to engineering. Springer Science & Business Media. Breuer, H., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2016). Values-based innovation management: Innovating by what we care about. Macmillan International Higher Education. Czeskis, A., Dermendjieva, I., Yapit, H., Borning, A., Friedman, B., Gill, B., & Kohno, T. (2010). Parenting from the pocket: Value tensions and technical directions for secure and private parent-­teen mobile safety. In Proceedings of the sixth symposium on usable privacy and security (pp. 1–15). Davis, J., Lin, P., Borning, A., Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., & Waddell, P. A. (2006). Simulations for urban planning: Designing for human values. Computer, 39(09), 66–72. Friedman, B., & Hendry, D.  G. (2019). Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. MIT Press. Gorokhov, V. (1998). A new interpretation of technological progress. Society for Philosophy and Technology Quarterly Electronic Journal, 4(1), 16–20. Haken, H. (2013). Principles of brain functioning: A synergetic approach to brain activity, behavior and cognition (Vol. 67). Springer Science & Business Media. Longo, F., Padovano, A., & Umbrello, S. (2020). Value-oriented and ethical technology engineering in industry 5.0: A human-centric perspective for the design of the factory of the future. Applied Sciences, 10(12), 4182. Mahalakshmi, M., & Sundararajan, M. (2013). Traditional SDLC vs scrum methodology–a comparative study. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 3(6), 192–196. Miller, J. K., Friedman, B., Jancke, G., & Gill, B. (2007). Value tensions in design: the value sensitive design, development, and appropriation of a corporation’s groupware system. In Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on supporting group work (pp. 281–290). Millett, L. I., Friedman, B., & Felten, E. (2001). Cookies and web browser design: Toward realizing informed consent online. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 46–52). Mouter, N., de Geest, A., & Doorn, N. (2018). A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands. Energy Policy, 122, 639–648. Ropohl, G. (1999). Philosophy of socio-technical systems. Society for Philosophy and Technology Quarterly Electronic Journal, 4(3), 186–194. Sacolick, I. (2022). What is agile methodology? Modern software development explained. InfoWorld. https://www.infoworld.com/article/3237508/what-­is-­agile-­methodology-­modern-­ software-­development-­explained.html Strijbos, S. (1998). Ethics and the systematic character of modern technology. Society for Philosophy and Technology Quarterly Electronic Journal, 3(4), 160–169. Thomé, B. (Ed.). (1993). Systems engineering: Principles and practice of computer-based systems engineering. Wiley. Umbrello, S. (2018). The moral psychology of value sensitive design: The methodological issues of moral intuitions for responsible innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 5(2), 186–200. Umbrello, S. (2019). Beneficial artificial intelligence coordination by means of a value sensitive design approach. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 3(1), 5.

13  Agile as a Vehicle for Values: A Value Sensitive Design Toolkit

181

Umbrello, S. (2021). Conceptualizing policy in value sensitive design: A machine ethics approach. In Machine law, ethics, and morality in the age of artificial intelligence (pp.  108–125). IGI Global. Umbrello, S., & Gambelin, O. (2021). Value sensitive design: An agile toolkit. ResearchGate. Umbrello, S., & Van de Poel, I. (2021). Mapping value sensitive design onto AI for social good principles. AI and Ethics, 1(3), 283–296. Umbrello, S., Capasso, M., Balistreri, M., Pirni, A., & Merenda, F. (2021). Value sensitive design to achieve the UN SDGs with AI: A case of elderly care robots. Minds and Machines, 31(3), 395–419. Umbrello, S. (2020). Meaningful Human Control Over Smart Home Systems. HUMANA.MENTE Journal of Philosophical Studies, 13(37), 40–65. United Nations. (2018). Sustainable development goals. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/goals van de Kaa, G., Rezaei, J., Taebi, B., van de Poel, I., & Kizhakenath, A. (2020). How to weigh values in value sensitive design: A best worst method approach for the case of smart metering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(1), 475–494. van de Poel, I. (2013). Translating values into design requirements. In Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 253–266). Springer. van de Poel, I. R. (2014). Conflicting values in design for values. In Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: Sources, theory, values and application domains (pp.  1–23). Springer. van de Poel, I. (2017). Dealing with moral dilemmas through design. In Designing in ethics (pp. 57–77). Cambridge University Press. van den Hoven, J., Lokhorst, G.-J., & Van de Poel, I. (2012). Engineering and the problem of moral overload. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(1), 143–155. van Wynsberghe, A. (2013). Designing robots for care: Care centered value-sensitive design. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(2), 407–433. Veugelers, R., Cincera, M., Frietsch, R., Rammer, C., Schubert, T., Pelle, A., Renda, A., Montalvo, C., & Leijten, J. (2015). The impact of horizon 2020 on innovation in Europe. Intereconomics, 50(1), 4–30. Whitchurch, G. G., & Constantine, L. L. (2009). Systems theory. In Sourcebook of family theories and methods (pp. 325–355). Springer. Winkler, T., & Spiekermann, S. (2021). Twenty years of value sensitive design: A review of methodological practices in VSD projects. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(1), 17–21. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136. Yoo, D. (2021). Stakeholder tokens: A constructive method for value sensitive design stakeholder analysis. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(1), 63–67.

Chapter 14

Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste Kristen Psaty Watts and Robert Mast

For Robert Mast Sr. & Linda Carlisle All ideas and points of view belong to the authors, and are in no way representative of any of their employers. This paper is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice.

Abstract  Brands are set to spend over $15 billion on influencer marketing in 2022 alone. When you run a Google search for “what are influencers selling?” you will find pages of responses regarding how influencers can help brands sell their products. What is lacking is a deeper inquiry into the nature of being an influencer and the exchange involved in influencer marketing. Despite significant contributions to digital marketing growth, there has been scarce critical inquiry into the impact of influencers on society. Using a legal framework alongside insights from modern and post-modern socio-economic philosophers such Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Pierre Bourdieu, and Gernot Böhme we illustrate some contemporary ethical and philosophical dimensions of the virtual age. Digital celebrities present a unique moment in global capitalism. Beyond compensation or payment, we must question the metaphysical ramifications of the sale of relationships and a percentage of our digital, and perhaps physical, identity. Keywords  Influencer · Social media · Digital marketing · Virtual worlds · Identity · Metaphysics · Aesthetic capitalism · Consumerism · Technology

K. P. Watts (*) Santa Barbara, CA, USA R. Mast Brookline, MA, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_14

183

184

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

14.1 Introduction The rise of digital communities on online platforms has spawned a new advertising strategy – influencer marketing. What is an “influencer” in the context of influencer marketing? The answer depends on who you ask. To brands and companies, influencers are marketing tools. Influencers are seen as accessible, media-generating individuals who are available as a face for brands. They have the power to affect purchasing habits and decisions due to their knowledge, position, or relationship with an audience. Influencers frequently see themselves as tech-savvy entrepreneurs who are able to create value from their personal brand, online persona, hobbies, or interests. Spectators and audience members are oftentimes unaware of the extent to which influencer marketing is occurring. In return for activity and engagement on their social media account, the influencer brings their followers into their life. Correspondingly, to government regulators, brands, and the influencers who promote them, are market participants to be monitored and regulated. To philosophers, influencers and influencer marketing may be considered a ripe frontier for philosophical, economic, and ethical investigation. Alongside insights from modern and post-modern socio-economic philosophers, including Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Pierre Bourdieu, and Gernot Böhme, we illustrate some contemporary ethical and philosophical dimensions of the digital age. In particular, the legal and even metaphysical contradictions presented by social media culture and its consequences.

14.2 Influencers: A Contemporary Cultural and Social Phenomenon The prevalence and significance of influencers, especially in relation to younger audiences, as part of corporate marketing strategy, cannot be overstated. Brands are set to spend up to $15 billion dollars on influencer marketing in 2022 (Qudsi, 2022). This is not surprising given the effectiveness of influencer advertising. In 2018, studies concluded that the average return on investment for every dollar spent on influencer marketing was $6.50 (Dobrilova, 2022). Instagram has leaned into the monetization of the platform in recent years, opting to replace the ‘Notifications’ tab with ‘Shop-Now’. To contextualize the socio-economic impact of influencers, and the corresponding philosophical issues, the scene of influencers must first be set. Influencers come in a variety of categories and groupings – which are not necessarily mutually exclusive and can overlap. In some cases, categories are defined by the audience. For example, kidfluencers are influencers targeted at children while momfluencers are targeted at new mothers. Influencers may also be grouped around topic, activity, or subject matter. Gaming influencers create content related to video game subject matter. Companies and brands categorize influencers into a set of common core verticals corresponding to marketing demographics, or niches, including celebrity, beauty, fashion, fitness, food, lifestyle, sport, travel, and even

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

185

parenting. Perhaps most importantly, they can also be categorized by audience size, such as nano-influencers (individuals with 1000–10,000 followers) and micro-­ influencers (individuals with 10,000–100,000 followers) (Anderson, 2019; Koss, 2020). Other groupings even extend to influencer taxonomy, such as virtual (computer-­generated) influencers (Barker, 2020; Hsu, 2019). Influencers increasingly capitalize on their status and reach by creating and displaying media in exchange for commercial gain. Companies further group influencers according to relevant marketing strategy. Large-scale influencers are typically engaged when a marketing campaign seeks to expand outside of a core audience or maximize total visibility. Such campaigns are adjusted based on audience members and follower count. As one influencer marketing agency calculates, influencers can expect to receive a rate of around $10 per 1000 Instagram followers or $20 per 1000 youtube subscribers (Lua, 2018). Parallel to the pay-per-audience-member formula is an inquiry into the top paid influencers, who, unsurprisingly, have the largest followings (The Rock Ranks as Instagram’s Most Valuable Star, 2020). For example, Kylie Jenner, considered a celebrity influencer, has charged as much as $1,266,000 per post to her then 141 million followers (Hanbury, 2019). She now boasts over 300 million. American actor and retired professional wrestler Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson, has reportedly been paid more for posts made to his then 187 million followers (Bharade, 2020). He currently stands at 299 million. Other influencing strategies place a premium on the authenticity or nature of the relationship between the audience member and the influencer (Influencer Marketing, 2021). This has caused sponsored posts to appear in unlikely areas, such as on the social media feeds of individuals who aren’t otherwise compensated for their social media content. The men’s grooming industry has been one such example of this type of influencer engagement strategy, namely where nano and micro-influencers have been tapped to help promote men’s grooming products (Sandler, 2020; How to Become a Manscaped Social Media Influencer, 2018). This included successful campaigns featuring young, attractive, college-aged women who were not previously paid as models or brand spokespeople, but who promoted men’s pubic hair shaving devices. Here, the premium is likely on the “real” relationship between the target consumers, likely classmates and acquaintances, who already gravitate to the now-influencer for personal reasons.

14.2.1 The Authenticity Process Influencers are not just popular. They are frequently admired by their audience. Influencers are so ingrained in digital culture that many young people aspire to be famous on social media as a career. While formal research is scarce, consistent findings have emerged indicating “influencing” as an up-and-coming career aspiration for many children. For example, as many as 17% of 11–16 year olds in the U.K. want

186

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

to be a social media influencer when they grow up, outranking teachers and veterinarians (Skeldon, 2019). The Nickelodeon Kids Choice Awards, (known as the Kid’s Choice Awards) is a children’s awards ceremony produced by Nickelodeon for the past 33  years. Mainstay categories such as favorite TV show, favorite movie actor and actress have been staples of the awards since the first presentation in the 1980s. Since 2019, however, digital categories like “Choice Social Media Star” and “Choice YouTuber” have emerged alongside other traditional categories as important and impactful to younger generations. Influencers are more trusted as spokespeople than celebrities. For example, studies have found that 50% of Millennials trust influencers they follow on product recommendations, compared to 38% for their favorite celebrities (The Influencer Market, n.d.). Additionally, it is revealing that there is an emphasis on authenticity and connection, and influencing as a process of trust-building. Market research has indicated that, “authenticity is the most important trait for influencers while ‘having a large following’ is less so” (The Influencer Market, n.d.). For this reason, many sponsored influencer posts are tailored to look like they were organic. Many influencers would not want to risk promoting something for the sake of getting paid, thus jeopardizing their credibility. This has led to government intervention due to lack of transparency as discussed further in Sect. 14.2.3. Influencing does not rely on status alone to sell. Rather, on connection and relationships. There is a temporality both with regard to influencer-follower relationships and influencer-brand relationships that is not clear-cut. Commitments by influencers can be as little as one social media post or can be ongoing, long-term partnerships. The relationship might include actual sponsored posts as well as posts influencers have made in anticipation of or in hopes of developing a relationship with a brand. Similarly, an influencer who hopes to develop a long-term relationship with a brand may also make statements after an endorsement period has ended with the intent of creating an ongoing partnership. As a spectator tuning in, the influencer’s space on the marketing timeline is opaque.

14.2.2 Traditional Marketing Practices Versus Influencer Marketing Endorsement and sponsorship are no strangers to the corporate landscape. Companies have long had a consistent desire to associate well-known faces with their brand. Using popular celebrities or attractive models is hardly a novel concept. However, there are some significant deviations between traditional marketing practices and influencer marketing that further contextualize the influencer phenomenon and highlight the philosophical concerns as will be discussed further. Many historians point to Mucha’s Sarah Bernardt painting featuring “Lefevre-­ Utile cookies” in 1904 as the first moment of an authorized celebrity endorsement

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

187

on a poster, which included her testimonial script “I haven’t found anything better than a little LU – oh yes, two little LU!” (Lippert, 2019). It is easy for many to conjure up examples of professional sports endorsements or skincare products featuring celebrities, including longer-term relationships, such as brand spokesperson arrangements, that they may have encountered personally. Examples of traditional advertising modes, endorsements showing up in commercial spaces, such as magazines, TV, or billboards, where the expectation to receive advertisements is clear. Under these arrangements, a company would be obtaining rights of publicity to use the likeness of an individual for their commercial purposes. This right to use one’s image, physical likeness, or signature in order to promote a product is an individual intellectual property right. Influencer marketing has dismantled and re-cast the exchange structure. Arguably, a different commodity is at issue since influencer arrangements are not necessarily centered on rights of publicity, but are purchased in digital real-estate in the form of posts or tweets, and are often valued based on externalities like follower count. A less valuable aspect is the right of publicity since the post often only appears natively in the influencer’s feed. More valuable is the tangible product, namely the inclusion of space within a person’s curated identity. Influencer exchange seems to differ from a traditional labor-for-wage model. Employment in these instances may include the “labor” of captioning an image and hitting “post”, but in its essence, it is arguably an exchange for identity and self-portrayal. Influencers are further distinct from their less-techy predecessors by the means, including the hardware and associated medium, such as the platforms, where influencing is created and consumed.

14.2.3 Legal Issues Government agencies tasked with regulating commerce have taken note of these trends and brought arms on the issue in an effort to protect the public from being misled. As early as 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the United States, and the Advertising Standards Authority in the U.K., both advertising industry regulators, began issuing explicit guidance to social media influencers (FTC Staff Reminds Influencers and Brands, 2017). The purpose of those guidelines is to regulate speech that is shared on social media in order to prevent consumer confusion about posts made in exchange for commercial benefit. Simultaneously, it has opened up questions of self-identity, value, and exchange. The FTC mandates “If you endorse a product through social media, your endorsement message should make it obvious when you have a relationship (“material connection”) with the brand.” The Influencer Guidelines published by the FTC, interestingly, deal specifically with the content of speech that is mediated by technology and integrated into social media. Examples include videos uploaded to YouTube, posts made to Instagram, content on Pinterest, and live streams on Twitch, among others. The Influencer Guidelines also target “native advertising”, which

188

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

occurs when commercial speech, such as advertising, appears in a place that you wouldn’t normally expect or is communicated in a way that makes the viewer unaware that they are consuming commercial speech.

14.2.4 How Does Society Value Advertising? Legal Treatment of “Commercial Speech” In the United States, speech is regulated in accordance with the First Amendment of the Constitution as has been interpreted by the Supreme Court which extends protection to individual and collective speech “in pursuit of a wide variety of political, social, economic, educational, religious, and cultural ends.” Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 622 (1984) (Killion, 2019). Accordingly, speech is protected under the First Amendment unless it falls within narrow exceptions. Speech that incites “imminent lawless action” by contrast, for example, is stripped of protection. Along the continuum between highly protected speech, like religious or political speech, and speech inciting imminent lawless action, lies commercial speech. Commercial speech proposes a commercial transaction or relates solely to the speaker’s and the audience’s economic interests. Typically, the consequences of legal protections afforded to commercial speech have only been important to companies. However, as individuals continue to act as tools for corporate entities, the ramifications placed on individual free speech compared to commercial speech have become more concerning. The arising legal questions include an inquiry into the point at which communication made by a person, intermediated by technology, loses the protection of free speech, and becomes degraded to commercial speech. Is it granular by post, or can an entire profile be commercial speech? Is there a corresponding forfeiture of identity whereby an influencer ceases to be a creative entity and becomes a corporate mouthpiece? These are issues that courts, regulators, and lawmakers may very well need to reconsider and evaluate as influencer marketing continues to explode.

14.3 ‘Likes for Likes’: A Philosophical Inquiry In order to best understand where influencers fit into contemporary economics, it is critical to first discuss the neo-capitalist framework that makes their existence possible. Influencers are by no means revolutionary. Rather, they define a distinct landmark in the progression of global capitalism. No longer is a commodity simply a physical object or image. The rise of influencer marketing represents a shift in that the influencer, and the relationships built with their followers, are themselves commodities.

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

189

14.3.1 Culture, Class, and Preference Many of our day-to-day lives are products of our socio-economic status. It should come as no surprise to say that one’s tastes act as a predominant motivator in predicting actions, choices, and the like. What food we eat, which museums we frequent, the TV that we watch, are all the result of taste. Years of cultural sharpening lead us to – in an instant – determine the aesthetics of which others will perceive us. A lot may be learned about someone simply by looking at their favorite restaurants or movies. French Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu proposes in his 1979 work Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste that an individual’s tastes are the consequence of their class. Cultural capital (social assets such as education or relationships) shapes aesthetic judgment (Bourdieu, 2015). However, those with the most social capital (the aristocratic elite of society) gatekeep taste for others. This is to say that those of the highest social standing, the wealthiest and best-educated, resolve for society as a whole what the best preferences are. This aesthetic judgment trickles down to the lower classes who, by means of transcending their current status, attempt to assimilate these preferences. Yet, those who lack social capital may be unable to assert themselves into such artistic spheres. Bourdieu posits that less-culturally educated people expect things to fulfill a function. The commodity ought to have definite use-value in order to have worth. In sharp contrast, elites look for ornate pieces that make up in cultural value what they lack in use-value. For example, a wealthy person’s home is ordained by glittering chandeliers, while their lower-middle-class counterparts select efficient floor lamps. This decision is not simply a matter of price, but of taste and what either consumer deems more useful. The handiness of the basics or the symbolism attached to the decorative. At once it is clear which choice is more pertinent to survival against which is more important to the buyer’s cultural rank. Class distinctions in the realm of taste are starkly visible in the realm of art. The artistically educated gravitate towards complex, at times confusing, works of art. Perhaps the wealthy doctor might consider Guernica by Pablo Picasso or Salvador Dali’s The Persistence of Memory to be among their favorite paintings. Both pieces are abstract, though with the right background, profound. On the contrary, a more average palette may prefer Vermeer’s Girl with the Pearl Earring or Bob Ross’ Winter Retreat. Paintings such as these are clear depictions of reality and show easily quantifiable skill by the artist. In the past, there was little reference for the layman to transcend their own tastes for those of the ruling classes. With the rise of social media, it is possible now more than ever to step into the lives of other people and therefore other classes. One post on Instagram of a celebrity’s home quickly reveals their personal aesthetic, making copying it a viable task. With social media, we have access to the everyday lives of different classes.

190

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

With this comes the ability to falsify our own class – altering how we are perceived in digital worlds.1 Thus, we can influence each other, as if we belonged to the same community.

14.3.2 The Economy of Desire Surplus production is fundamental to capitalist economics (Marx & Engels, 2020). Even with all the data that corporate entities have on individual behavior, it is impossible to completely match supply to demand. In Critique of Aesthetic Capitalism, German philosopher Gernot Bohme notes that necessary consumption is “seldom referred to today as a luxury or extravagance, because it is no longer bound up with certain privileges or limited to certain classes, but taken for granted as a universal standard of living” (Bohme, 2017). With surplus so prevalent in contemporary capitalism, basic human needs are readily met by the majority of the population. Of course, this does not apply to every habitant of capitalist countries (many cities that best display American capitalism also encounter some of the highest rates of homelessness in the case of Los Angeles, California)2 (Scott, 2020). It is nonetheless true that the majority have their survival needs accounted for. Gone are the days of feudalism where the ruling class simply has better access to food, water, and shelter. Class distinction appears in other matters such as the aforementioned judgment of taste. Bohme describes this phenomenon as “aesthetic capitalism”3 (Bohme, 2017). At this late stage of capitalism, the economy evolves in service of desires rather than needs. This aesthetic phase symbolizes another fundamental characteristic of capitalism – the need for sustained economic progress. Just as the very nature of economics transforms, so too do the natures of the commodity and  “Flexing for the gram”, a piece of pop culture slang refers to over promoting one’s identity to seem wealthier or more connected than they actually are. Similar to flexing muscles for a photograph at the beach. Influencers and casual social media users will play their social status or wealth up. A well documented Instagram phenomenon is the less wealthy individual renting an italian sports car to take a photo driving it before returning it shortly after. On the other hand, people play their status down to reach a larger audience. In the case of musician King Princess, the artist wore shabby tank tops and jeans while posting about thrift shopping. This became her personal brand until she was exposed online as the heiress of the Macy’s department store fortune. 2  “Homelessness is up in Los Angeles County for the third time in 4 years, a result of an evergrowing number of people who cannot afford the region’s high housing costs...LA’s annual homeless count, released Friday, shows that 66,433 people now live on the streets, in shelters and in vehicles within the county. That’s up 12.7% from 2019. Within LA city limits, the number of people experiencing homelessness is 41,290, a 14.2% increase over last year.” 3  Bohme defines aesthetic capitalism as the phase of capitalism succeeding the saturation of the private sphere. He uses this term as a way to describe the movement from necessary production for life to the aesthetic production that we see in late-capitalist economics. The progression into aesthetic purchasing signifies not only the satiation of basic needs but also a phase of economic growth via goods superficial to human life. This may be regarded as the economic of necessity to the economy of joy/desire. 1

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

191

consumer. Their relationship, once based on use-value, becomes something more complex. What is of interest to us is the dichotomy between the satisfaction of needs versus desires. An economy of joy, one that fulfills aesthetic desires, services the economy much better. For constant progress, the economy needs room to grow – herein lies the crux of the issue. Needs can be completely appeased at any point. Desires can only be temporarily satisfied (Bohme, 2017). Conditionally speaking, as the economy continues to grow, the hierarchy of human needs and desires permanently changes. Influencers as we know them today did not and could not exist in an economy of need. Simply put, people know exactly what they need. They do not always know what they desire until it is placed in front of them. One of the most marketable skills of any aspiring influencer is their ability to sell things – not only that others do not need – but that they did not even know they wanted. With the structure of needs ever-transforming, the goal of humanity shifts from reproduction and survival, to the expansion of the individual. Economically relevant objectives in the digital age shift from base needs to the desire for class mobility, desire for fame, the desire to “be seen”, and the desire to be validated among other things (Bohme, 2017). Influencers just want the same thing as anyone does; to feel as if their life and their taste mean something.

14.3.3 Influencers and the Volatility of Habitus In the joy economy, subjectivity and superficial judgments outweigh natural, literal judgments of necessity. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels considered the influx of subjectivity over objectivity in The Communist Manifesto. The famous lines read: All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air… the need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.4

This is to say that in the market’s push to “establish connections everywhere,” the reality of objects and even the social structures of the economy are melted down. This gives rise to the capitalist sentiments that anyone can be anything, any-thing can become anything. Objectivity beckons subjectivity. That which is fixed – socio-­ economic class, family relations, the exchange value of commodities – constantly fluctuates.  Marx and Engels assert that capitalism forces steadfast societal structures to shift in order to chase profit and economic gain. Family and friendship relations are determined by each actor’s finances. Although they only extend this point to social structures, it is also present in natural structures as seen in the American climate change debate where natural structures are shifting or mainstream attention to the transgender movement. Structures once thought natural and unchanging continue to transform in the late-capitalist framework. 4

192

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

With social media’s insistence on bringing all walks of life together, it proves itself as one of the best bridges between social classes in modern history. The average Instagram user may see posts from wealthy athletes and money-strapped students within moments of each other. The influence of another’s habitus,5 formerly a privilege for those sharing socio-economic communities becomes free reign to anyone with the means to share online. Here, we are confronted by a paradox brought upon by the digital age. Influencers often exist among the haute-culture of society – even those marketing for budget stores are paid exorbitant sums depending on their reach (Conklin, 2020). An influencer paid to advertise cheap furniture will certainly be speaking to those in the product’s core demographic. The question then arises: why would people of lower social standing take the recommendation of someone so far outside their own community? What may be regarded as a cheap shirt to a wealthy influencer may be a luxury item to one of their followers. Despite the financial disparity, the influencer’s word in this sense marks unique economic ground. More personal than a wide-reaching television ad, but not quite the recommendation of one friend to another. Or is it? The answer lies in what influencers are actually selling. An influencer posting about a particular brand’s tee-shirts does not typically make commission on the number of shirts sold. Rather, they are paid a fixed amount per post. It stands to reason that the individual is not selling tee-shirts. They are selling something far less tangible. The paradox of social media influence reveals itself in the fact that they are neither selling a product, nor their literal reach. They are selling their relationships to their followers. Here, we see the merging habitus of all classes by way of social media.

14.3.4 Selling Relationships To comprehend the philosophical and legal eccentricities of influencer culture is to know what their product is. The clichė that one’s self becomes their personal brand is not entirely incorrect. Personal brand acts as one’s self in digital worlds. So much so, that the whole life of a human being may be distilled into a combination of several hundred lines of text paired with photographs. At least as far as how they are perceived by others online goes. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin, Tiktok, and Twitter allow individuals to represent themselves any way they choose. For influencers, this personal brand is essential to build trust and therefore a following. Without it, the word of an influencer means nothing. Even for the influencers with the broadest reach such as model turned entrepreneur, Kylie Jenner, professional soccer player, Cristiano Ronaldo, or popstar, Ariana  Bourdieu defines Habitus as socially ingrained dispositions, habits, skills. Marking the reality in which individuals are socialized and act in society, this concept is one of the sociologist’s most ambiguous yet influential terms. Habitus describes a person’s demeanor and actions as influenced by those around them. Formed through mimicry of others, one’s habitus is heavily grounded in their social, emotional, and economic communities. 5

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

193

Grande, companies do not approach them for their reach alone6 (The Most Followed Instagram Profiles, n.d.). If a corporation wanted to market a product to the largest number of people, they would pay for an advertising spot on a platform with the largest viewership (Draper, 2021). Influencer marketing far outpaces any other traditional advertising medium with most brands expected to greatly increase their influencer budgets over the next several years (Fertik, 2020). Most notably in the case of nano influencers, the reach is microscopic compared to a well-timed televised ad. It stands to reason that this is not the goal of the brand. Then what is? As the curation of social media accounts becomes more targeted, brands are not looking for the most followers. Instead, they seek those with the most follower engagement. Direct messages, likes, shares, and comments play into an account connecting with their followers. Combined with the fact that influencers are uncanny in the marketing space. People expect ads on TV, not necessarily on their Instagram feed alongside their friends and family. This begs the question: are influencers not their friends? To engage with an account means a direct connection to the content being shared. Whether they are sharing comedy sketches, characters, or just a taste of their real-­ life, the influencer’s bread and butter is the relationship they share with followers. In this way, approaching a small-scale influencer on a popular platform far outweighs the pros of a televised ad. In the first place, it is much cheaper.7 The influencer, recording on their phone and instantly posting to their platform of choice, eliminates a massive production middleman. Additionally, they provide what no traditional advertisement ever could...trust. Like a friend, following an influencer’s account shows you their daily life – at least as much as they want to show. Many nano influencers flood their accounts with much the same as anyone else. Pictures of their vacation, family photos, videos of their friends sharing a bottle of wine, playing with their dog, etc. Their base gains insight into them as people, and in return, the influencer strengthens their product. When it comes time to market one of their brand partnerships, the post bears almost no resemblance to a traditional advertisement. In the same way any of us would trust our friend’s recommendation on an extra-soft shirt, so too do we trust the recommendation of the influencer. The smaller they are, the more we feel like we know them.  In the case of Ronaldo, the athlete’s Instagram account boasts over 400 million followers. However, his most recent video on the platform (marketing his own brand, CR7 underwear) garnered just over 14 million views. While this number is no doubt sizable compared to nano influencers – let alone the average instagram user – it is small when compared to overall viewership of a mainstream television broadcast. In contrast, Super Bowl 56 was viewed by 112 million across all platforms – up 14% from the previous year. 7  A nationally broadcast television advertising costs $115,000 for a 30-second spot depending on the show or channel. This overhead includes production costs such as actors, writers, directors, producers, lighting crews, craft services, and a laundry list of other seemingly insignificant things as far as the ad consumer is concerned. On the contrary, an influencer with 10,000 followers may only make between $1000 and $5000 per post#. Great savings for any company considering the influencer takes on the jobs of all of the above – without the price tag. 6

194

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

Cristiano Ronaldo’s workout and an influencer’s family photo work in much the same way. In order to perform well for his contracted soccer club, Manchester United, Ronaldo takes to the gym just about every day – well documented on his social media. His workout solidifies the value of his product. An hour spent dribbling the ball or running on the treadmill directly impacts how well he can do his job on the field. More exercise leads to better fitness, leads to more goals scored for his team. The parallel is the influencer documenting their personal life. Consider an influencer selling a consumer good. Given that their product is their “friendships” with followers, it stands to reason that anything that increases that bond relates to their ability to sell the good. Therefore, a photo with their family on Christmas, while not directly a paid partnership with a corporation, builds a bond with those liking, commenting, or simply viewing that picture – as it would if a close friend sent you a Christmas card directly to your address (Jusdanis, 2011). The exchange, consensual or not, surrounds the corporate entity, the influencer, and the unknowing consumer. Personal information on social media sites invites personal connections which in turn invites advertising opportunities. One of the most shocking parts of influencer marketing is that, once the account has been monetized, there is no going back. From a corporate standpoint, there is little difference between a post discussing a good, and a post with their family. They both serve the same purpose.

14.4 To Influence and Be Influenced When you run a google search for “what are influencers selling?” you will find pages of responses regarding how influencers can help brands sell their products, such as “The ultimate guide to growing your business with influencers”, or “Tips on how to develop your influencer marketing strategy” or “Reasons why influencer marketing should be your go-to eCommerce strategy”. What is lacking is a deeper inquiry into the nature of being an influencer and the exchange involved in influencer marketing. Against the backdrop of the philosophical concepts presented, influencers themselves may find a new framework for considering the initial question raised in this paper, namely, “what is an influencer?” within the context of influencer marketing.

14.4.1 Influencer Identity As described in Sects. 14.1 and 14.2 when defining an influencer  – Influence is rooted in highly resonant communication under presumptively authentic conditions. This question of authenticity, particularly the centrality of authenticity to influencers is critical when considering influencing and its impact on individual identity. Obviously, commercial motivation and economic incentive are introduced in the form of influencer marketing, whereby arguably a portion of the individual’s

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

195

decisions regarding sense of self and their project is dictated by or exchanged for commercial interests.

14.4.2 Ethical Considerations for Influencers – Considering the Commodity The landmark that influencers present in the history of global capitalism cannot be overlooked. In that the service of influence has become widely accepted alongside the growth of media and celebrities ought to be alarming. In the case of lower-tier, or even one-time influencers, is it possible to undo the monetization of one’s own virtual identity? Where do we stand now that relationships with one another are another in a line of post-commodities? Is anything impervious to free-market economics? With billions of dollars at stake, legal action has been taken in some cases to ameliorate transparency when posting ads to social media sites. Most recently, Instagram has added a ‘Paid Partnership’ banner to branded posts. However, while helpful, sponsored content by influencers with smaller followings consistently remains undetected. Nonetheless, government intervention announces knowledge of the problem.

14.4.3 Future Implications Although social media personalities do not often know each follower personally, that smaller influencers have become popular through marketing to their real-world friends and family is alarming. As a social species amidst rapidly growing individualism, corporations and influencers alike ought to reflect on the role they play with their audience and whose engagement, time, and identity they are selling. In reaction to economic recession, worsening climate concerns, and a global public health crisis, many individuals and families are opting to stay at home more than ever before. Paired with employee resignations and hybrid or fully remote workplaces, it seems that the significance of our digital society will only increase over the coming years. Catalyzed by the factors above, impressive personal computers and home offices are more than a fashion trend. As more and more people take to the metaverse and Web3 technologies, it is likely that more categories of influencers will emerge, strengthening those that are already renowned for their online presence. Implications for the masses of followers and individual influencers alike will determine the future of our virtual identities. This is not to say that any specific actor is to blame for the aforementioned legal and philosophical problems. Instead, it is simply one’s job to know where they stand, and the role they play in the economy

196

K. P. Watts and R. Mast

of taste. Beyond compensation or payment  – beyond the evident financial overtone – society must question the metaphysical ramifications of selling a percentage of our digital, and perhaps physical, identity and relationships.

References Anderson, M. (2019). What are micro-influencers & why are they so effective? iMPACT, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.impactplus.com/blog/power-­of-­micro-­influencers Barker, S. (2020). What is the future of CGI influencers in the marketing world? Shane Barker, viewed February 27, 2022, https://shanebarker.com/blog/cgi-­influencers/ Bharade, A. (2020). Dwayne ‘the rock’ Johnson is the highest-paid Instagram celebrity, with 184 million followers. The Jakarta Post, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.thejakartapost. com/life/2020/07/07/dwayne-­the-­rock-­johnson-­is-­highest-­paid-­instagram-­celebrity-­with-­184-­ million-­followers.html Bohme, G. (2017). Critique of aesthetic capitalism (Vol. 1, Ser. Atmospheric Spaces). Mimesis International. Bourdieu, P. (2015). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Taylor & Francis Group. Conklin, A. (2020, March 30), How much money do social media influencers make? Fox Business, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/social-­media-­influencer-­pay Dobrilova, T. (2022). How much do firms spend on influencer marketing in 2022? Teodora. Techjury, viewed February 27, 2022, https://techjury.net/blog/influencer-­marketing-­spend/#gref Draper, K. (2021). Super bowl ratings hit a 15-year low. It still outperformed everything else. The New York Times, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/09/sports/football/super-­bowl-­television-­ratings.html Fertik, M. (2020). Why is influencer marketing such a big deal right now? Forbes, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelfertik/2020/07/02/ why-­is-­influencer-­marketing-­such-­a-­big-­deal-­right-­now/?sh=78ff63e75f30 FTC Staff Reminds Influencers and Brands to Clearly Disclose Relationship. (2017). Federal Trade Commission, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.ftc.gov/news-­events/ press-­releases/2017/04/ftc-­staff-­reminds-­influencers-­brands-­clearly-­disclose Hanbury, M. (2019). The 35 celebrities and athletes who make the most money per Instagram post, ranked, business insider. Personal Finance, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.businessinsider.com/kylie-­jenner-­ariana-­grande-­beyonce-­instagrams-­biggest-­earners-­2019-­2019-­7#1-­ kylie-­jenner-­35 How to Become a Manscaped Social Media Influencer. (2018). Manscaped via Wayback Machine. viewed February 27, 2022, https://web.archive.org/web/20201109031213/https://www.manscaped.com/blogs/news/how-­to-­become-­a-­manscaped-­social-­media-­influencer Hsu, T. (2019). These influencers aren’t flesh and blood, yet millions follow them. The New York Times, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/business/media/ miquela-­virtual-­influencer.html Influencer Marketing: Social media influencer market stats and research for 2021. (2021). Business Insider Intelligence, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.businessinsider.com/ influencer-marketing-report Jusdanis, G. (2011). Friendship as commodity. ARCADE, viewed February 27, 2022, https:// arcade.stanford.edu/blogs/friendship-­commodity Killion, V. (2019). The first amendment: Categories of speech. Congressional Research Service, viewed February 27, 2022, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/IF11072.pdf Koss, H. (2020). Nano-influencers: Marketing’s not-so-secret weapon. Built In, viewed February 27, 2022, https://builtin.com/marketing/nano-­influencer

14  Who’s Talking? Influencers & the Economy of Taste

197

Lippert, A. (2019). How Alphonse Mucha pioneered modern advertising in his art nouveau posters: From celebrity endorsements to aspirational settings. Muse by Clio, viewed February 27, 2022, https://musebycl.io/design/ how-­alphonse-­mucha-­pioneered-­modern-­advertising-­his-­art-­nouveau-­posters Lua, A. (2018). How much does social media influencer marketing cost? Buffer, viewed February 27, 2022, https://buffer.com/resources/influencer-­marketing-­cost/ Marx, K., & Engels, F. (2020). The communist manifesto (pp. 255–270). essay, Origami Books. Qudsi, I.  E. (2022, January 17). Council post: The state of influencer marketing: Top insights for 2022. Forbes, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2022/01/14/the-­state-­of-­influencer-­marketing-­top-­insights-­for-­2022/?sh=6e4a191 95c78 Sandler, E. (2020). How men’s grooming brands are tackling Instagram. Glossy, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.glossy.co/beauty/how-­mens-­grooming-­brands-­are-­tackling-­instagram/ Scott, A. (2020). Homelessness in Los Angeles county rises sharply. National Public Radio, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.npr.org/2020/06/12/875888864/ homelessness-­in-­los-­angeles-­county-­rises-­sharply Skeldon, P. (2019). Young affiliates: Nearly a fifth of British children aspire to be social media influencers. Telemedia Online, viewed February 28, 2022, https://www.telemediaonline.co.uk/young-­a ffiliates-­n early-­a -­fifth-­o f-­b ritish-­c hildren-­a spire-­t o-­b e-­s ocial-­m edia-­ influencers/#:~:text=social%20media%20influencers-­, Young%20affiliates%3A%20 nearly%20a%20fifth%20of%20British%20children,to%20be%20social%20media%20 influencers&text=New%20research%20has%20uncovered%20that,aiming%20to%20 become%20a%20YouTuber The Influencer Market. (n.d.). Morning Consult, viewed February 27, 2022, https://morningconsult.com/influencer-­report-­engaging-­gen-­z-­and-­millennials/ The Most Followed Instagram Profiles. (n.d.). Trackalytics, viewed February 27, 2022, https:// www.trackalytics.com/the-­most-­followed-­instagram-­profiles/page/1/ The Rock Ranks as Instagram’s Most Valuable Star. (2020). BBC, viewed February 27, 2022, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-­53261043

Part III

Interdisciplinary Approaches Through Literature, History and Biopolitics

Chapter 15

Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing the Future Hugo Silveira Pereira

Abstract  In 1985, Melvin Kranzberg, at the time president of SHOT – Society for the History of Technology, summarised his three-decade long work around the relevance of context and human agency for technological implementation and development in six general principles that later became known as Kranzberg’s Laws. His reflections became very important and useful for the communities of historians and philosophers of technology, in the sense that they analyse critically the nature of technological systems and artefacts, their historical influence in society, and the entangled relationship between technologists, users, and the sociocultural contexts that surrounds them. In this chapter, I use Kranzberg’s Laws to analyse the historical evolution of the Portuguese railway system, since its inception in the 1850s to the current challenges faced by Portuguese policymakers. I offer that Kranzberg’s teachings are crucial to illustrate how the construction of railways in Portugal was a very much human activity, which contributes not only to understanding the past but also to face current challenges and problems. Keywords  Seamless web · Black box · Technological decision-making · Portugal

15.1 Introduction In 1985, Melvin Kranzberg presented his presidential address to the audience of the Society for the History of Technology gathered in Dearborn, Michigan. In his lecture, he spoke of his 30-year work on the significance of human agency in the history of technology and the relevance of the contextual approach in understanding H. S. Pereira (*) CIUHCT – Interuniversity Centre for the History of Science and Technology (NOVA School of Science and Technology), Caparica, Portugal Department of History of the University of York, York, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_15

201

202

H. S. Pereira

technical developments. Throughout the years, his reflections took the form of six general principles – truisms, as he called them – that eventually became known as Kranzberg’s Laws (Kranzberg, 1986). His reflections resonate closely with Philosophy of Technology, as they also offer a critical analysis of the nature of technology, its impacts in human societies, and the interactions between technologists and the sociocultural contexts they operate in (Aslaksen, 2017, p.  119; Baskoy, 2018, p. 139). Kranzberg’s six principles or laws underscore the importance of human intervention in the technological development, the need to include context (geographical, chronological, sociocultural) in the evaluation of technological efficacy, the drive for constant innovation imposed by technology, the ramifications of technology in other subsidiary systems, and the importance of History of Technology not only to understand technological development and to teach History more compellingly, but also to address present-day technological challenges, by offering its analysis of the experience of the past. The relevance of Kranzberg’s work for the field of History and Philosophy of Technology is certified by the number of times they were used in academic debate: according with Scopus, Kranzberg’s seminal work was cited 243 times, between 1988 and 2021.1 What is more, his Laws were tested and confirmed by different authors. Thomas Parker Hughes illustrated the continuous technological adaptation and innovation in electric systems (what he called the reverse salient) and how they require other technical systems to operate efficiently (Hughes, 1983, 1998). The implications of the sociocultural context in technology have been persuasively demonstrated by Wiebe Bijker and John Law, who claim the existence of a seamless web weaved out of social and technical aspects (Bijker & Law, 1992). Another metaphor that emphasises the sociotechnical complexity of technology is that proposed by Bruno Latour, who argues that between the inputs necessary to make technology work and the outputs or results of that technology lies a black box, which needs to be opened to understand technology’s sociotechnical complexity (Latour, 1999, pp.  304–306). Greet de Block (2011) and myself (Pereira, 2020) added to Kranzberg’s Fourth Law, by underscoring the relevance of utopia in the planification of large transportation systems, in the Belgian and Portuguese contexts, respectively. Focusing on users, Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch illustrate their importance and role in the co-construction of technology (Oudshoorn & Pinch, 2005). Andreas Fickers took inspiration from Kranzberg’s First Law to maintain that technologies related with media, which are usually considered as ‘good’, may have dire consequences on society (Fickers, 2014). Paula Diogo and Ana Simões advocated the importance of History and Philosophy of Technology to face the current challenges posed by the Anthropocene, using Kranzberg’s teachings (Diogo & Simões, 2016). Finally, Kranzberg’s teachings also inspired debates on Philosophy and Ethics of Engineering, as the article of Carl Mitcham (2009) clearly illustrates.

 According to the data calculated by www.scopus.com

1

15  Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing… 203

In this essay, I analyse the historical evolution of the Portuguese railway sector using the framework provided by Kranzberg’s Laws. The inception of the Portuguese railway sector goes back to mid nineteenth century when the first contracts were signed (1845) and the first track was inaugurated (1856). In the following decades, the network grew to reach a maximum extension of 3616 km in 1982, using different technologies (e. g. narrow gauge and broad gauge), accomplishing different goals, and appeasing different technical, economic, political, and social actors. In the late 1980s, the network’s extension diminished considerably, as many low-­ traffic lines closed being replaced by motorways (Isidoro et al., 2018). Currently, Portuguese policymakers debate the reopening of lines and the construction of high-­ speed tracks that connect Portugal to the European high-speed network. I propose a twofold approach to my analysis, including what we know about the history of Portuguese railways, and how may this knowledge be used today in teaching and policymaking. The structure of the text is divided in five sections, following Kranzberg’s Laws.

15.2 Railways Are Not Bad, nor Good, nor Neutral Kranzberg’s First Law claims that technology is neither good, nor bad, nor is it neutral. With this, Kranzberg meant that the application of a given technology in a certain social ecology may have unforeseen or different consequences from those touted by its promoters, depending on the social, economic, and/or political context (Kranzberg, 1986, pp. 545–546). The implementation of railways in Europe’s core nations since the 1820s brought about economic and financial consequences that countries from the European periphery sought to emulate. In Portugal, technocrats and policymakers shared a very simplistic view of the process: build railways and economic development would follow, especially through those towards the border (Pereira, 2020). However, context in the periphery and in the centre of Europe was very different. Countries like Britain, France, Germany, or Belgium had stable trade routes that railways enhanced; they had strong banking systems and industries that supported and benefitted from railway construction; they had large cities and modern seaports. Peripheral countries like Portugal lacked many of these features. Mobility was restricted, unsafe, and expensive due to the lack of roads; the banking system was underdeveloped and heavy industry non-existent; population was scarce and centred in two cities (Porto and Lisbon), where the main ports needed substantial improvements. What is more, Spain was not interested in increasing cross-border traffic with Portugal (Alegria, 1990, pp. 31–94). Consequently, the operational results were far from what was anticipated, and the investment became an unexpected financial burden to the Portuguese treasury, increased Portugal’s dependence on foreign agents, and diverted resources from other sectors of the economy (Pinheiro, 1986). In demographic terms, railways increased the migration of the Portuguese population in the countryside to the

204

H. S. Pereira

coastline, instead of developing local and regional economies of the inner peripheral territories (Silveira et  al., 2011). Likely, something similar happened with industry that concentrated mostly in the coast. If one looks beyond the economic and financial aspects of the investment, railways had other more advantageous consequences for the nation. A steady flow of technical knowledge from the European core was created by foreign engineers who came to work in Portugal and by Portuguese engineers that enhanced their expertise while studying abroad; it placed Portugal in global fluxes of trade, commerce, and finance; it approximated the peripheral provinces from the main cities in the coast (especially the capital-city Lisbon) by replacing the old stagecoaches and oxcarts by trains; it inaugurated a faster access point to northern and central Europe, and its cities, culture, and landscape (Pereira, 2021a); eventually, it even supported an industrial surge in the first half of the twentieth century (Santos, 2011). The example of the Portuguese railway network illustrates well Kranzberg’s First Law and underscores the necessity of understanding the changing social context and evaluating both the short-range (the great expectations created by technologists) but also the long-range impacts of technology (the results of its implementation). This is valid not only for historical analysis, but also for present-day discussions about technology. As I write this text, the Portuguese government is again debating the reopening of closed lines and the construction of high-speed railways towards the European networks. It is important to include in the discussion sociocultural features that will affect the operation of high-speed trains (e.g.: how will mayors of those municipalities traversed by the lines react to the possibility of trains not stopping and not serving their constituencies? Will high-speed trains increase the gap between the coast and inner regions of Portugal? How will the Portuguese, used to flying, turn to a slower and predictably more expensive means of transportation?). What is more, it is important to emphasise that, like in the past, the short-run benefits will be a small comfort for present generations who will have to pay the investment; but a long-run perspective can illustrate the future advantages in terms of sustainability, cleaner long-distance mobility, and more efficient freight transportation.

15.3 Railways Induce and Require Innovations In this section I merge Kranzberg’s Second and Third Laws to demonstrate how the implementation of railways in Portugal was closely associated with different innovations needed to make railways work properly. In his Second Law, Kranzberg argues that invention is the mother of necessity, that technical innovations require additional advances to be fully effective; whereas his Third Law claims that any technology involves different systems and components without which it could not function suitably (Kranzberg, 1986, pp. 548–550).

15  Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing… 205

Portuguese railways provide a good stage to study the application of these laws. When the implementation of railways in Portugal, an absence of different components (or packages to use the expression of Kranzberg) was noticeable. One of those packages was roads. In the 1850s, the road network was practically non-existent. Railways were being laid down in different parts of the territory, but without roads to feed the stations with traffic, their operation was insignificant, as were the benefits to the population. In 1890, MP Pinto Moreira poetically regretted how his electors “see, every day, more than once, shouting with joy, that immense machine of progress [the locomotive hauling a train] that hails them, and at the same time they acknowledge that they are condemned to a true Tantalian punishment, for they cannot use that conquest of science and human ingenuity”.2 This was a complaint shared by railway companies, who blamed the lack of roads for their disappointing operational figures. This forced a change in the strategy set out for the road network. Instead of a grid that covered the territory evenly, roads concentrated around rail tracks, leaving some areas with  neither  railways nor roads (Alegria, 1990, pp. 121–122, 334–335) – thus promoting an uneven development of the territory, a shortcoming that was not anticipated by any policymaker. In the twentieth century, especially in its second half, the relationship between road and railway changed. As the road network grew and automobility became widespread, users preferred them to the train. Cars and lorries were more comfortable, cheaper, and more flexible than trains  – as importantly, they were the new token of progress (Sousa, 2016, pp. 29, 154, 235, 457). Some railways no longer could maintain their vitality  – to borrow an expression from Philosophy of Technology (Wang & Li, 2018, p.  117). In the late 1980s, the government implemented an extensive programme of closure of low-traffic lines (particularly narrow-gauged), replaced by motorways. This illustrates what Kranzberg (1986, p.  549) calls a technological imbalance – those situations in which an improvement in one system causes unbalance and motivates innovation to re-establish equilibrium. The following paragraphs illustrate other examples of this phenomenon. Another innovation motivated by railways was the construction of modern ports. The main goal of building railways was to turn Portugal into a relay platform between Europe and the transatlantic continents. However, most Portuguese harbours lacked basic infrastructures. Therefore, as soon as the main transnational lines were nearing the border with Spain, in the 1880s, different improvements were planned for the seaports of the main cities of Porto and Lisbon (in the former case a new infrastructure was built from scratch, while in the latter the existing harbour benefited from several enhancements). Throughout the twentieth century, other seaports were also improved or linked to the railway network (Prata, 2011). The best example of an innovation brought about by railways was arguably narrow-­gauge lines. Portuguese railways used a gauge (distance between rails) of 1.67 m, which rendered construction in the hilliest areas difficult. Considering that these were also poor areas, laying down a regular line was not justifiable. To solve

 Diario da Camara dos Deputados, May 21, 1890, p. 345.

2

206

H. S. Pereira

this problem, a few Portuguese engineers went abroad in 1870s to study narrow-­ gauge railways. This technology allowed the construction of narrower curves and steeper inclines and therefore permitted circumventing the most sizeable landforms and avoiding the building of expensive engineering works. Between the 1870s and the 1940s, the narrow-gauge network grew to an extension of 765 km (21% of the entire network) and accounted for around 15% of overall traffic. These lines required further innovation, but they benefited from very little modernization efforts, soon became obsolete, and most were terminated (Pereira, 2021b). Finally, I would like to underscore the innovations in industry and technical knowledge brought about by railways. When construction began in the 1850s, there was no expertise to manufacture railway components, therefore, every utensil, pieces of permanent way, and rolling stock had to be imported. Throughout the nineteenth century, Portuguese labourers acquired different skills to manufacture assorted utensils (splints, fishplates, treenails), wagons, and coaches, and in the twentieth century, the production of locomotives was initiated (Oliveira, 2010; Pinheiro, 1988, pp. 751–752). Kranzberg (1986, p. 549) stresses the agency of the “original invention” (in this case, railways) in the mothering of necessity and subsequent innovation, although it can be argued that each improvement was motivated by a specific need. Something similar may be said about the Portuguese railway sector. The investment in roads (and the reconfiguration of the network), in ports, and in narrow-gauge was directly driven by a previous investment in railways, even though each of them was set to respond to a specific need. This also supports Kranzberg’s (1986, p. 550) claim that a technical system cannot be studied alone; it must be analysed in its interrelations with other systems that compose or interact with it. This also includes the social, political, economic, and cultural systems or contexts.

15.4 Opening the Black Box The last reflection of the previous paragraph brings me to Kranzberg’s (1986, p. 550) Fourth Law which states that technology may be a key factor in policymaking, but often nontechnical elements take priority in decision-making about technology. This thought resonates with the sociotechnical construction approach and with the translational approach offered by Philosophy of Technology that wanders from the reflection on design, implementation, and operation of technology to the social and cultural motivated choices regarding technical systems or artefacts (Fritzsche & Oks, 2018, p. 4; Zhang, 2017). I recently analysed the application of this law to policymaking in the Portuguese railway sector in the nineteenth century (Pereira, 2020). This section builds upon that article and adds further discussion about decision-­ making in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The main argument of Kranzberg’s Fourth Law is that varied sociocultural factors are involved in what appear to be purely technical decisions (Kranzberg, 1986, p. 551). In my article in The Journal of Transport History, I illustrated the consensus

15  Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing… 207

between technologists and non-technologists regarding the utopia of using railways to turn Lisbon into a relay platform between the Old and the New Worlds. Additionally, I showed that in other questions regarding policymaking, financing, construction, and operation in the railway sector, seldom there was an accord between the engineering class, which was due not only to technical disagreements but also for personal motivations of the engineers (namely their employment status, their political allegiance, their own pecuniary interests, or the will to benefit their hometown with a rail line). When eventually they agreed upon a plan for the configuration of the network, their suggestions were overridden by the government, as policymakers seated therein and in parliament were forced to weigh in other nontechnical factors. The most important was arguably the power of private investors. As Portugal lacked financial resources to undertake construction, it had to rely on the financial influence of more or less shady investors, who had a substantial weight on the decision of which lines to build. What is more, the inaccurate perceptions about the geography and economy of the kingdom (considering the lack of trustworthy statistical and topographical data) played an important role in the laying down of the grid, as stakeholders directed railways to those areas believed to hold more agricultural or industrial production or to be flatter (hence, less expensive to build a railway). Moreover, politicians at regional or local level lobbied for railways on their constituencies or areas of influence; policymakers in the government often bargained with those local rulers to extend the power of the central state to the peripheries. Finally, concerns about the defence of the kingdom also played a part in the configuration of the network, although, for the most part, the advice of the military was dismissed. By 1900, the network included its main branches, but it was different from that proposed by engineers, evincing the effect of nontechnical inputs on its construction and the web of interactions between a diverse array of social actors and institutions (cf. Fickers, 2014, p. 31). The performance of the Portuguese railway sector in the twentieth century is not as well studied as in the previous century, but a few instances when Kranzberg’s Fourth Law may be applied are well known. For instance, the preference for the investment in motorways and automobility, starting in the 1930s, was supported by younger generations of engineers, but it was also influenced by sociocultural factors. One of them was politically motivated. The 1930s witnessed the ascension of a right-wing dictatorship in Portugal. Considering that the railway workforce was highly unionised, to invest in a rival transportation system was a form to erode the power of railwaymen. Furthermore, as I mentioned above, by that time there was a change in the understanding of the notion of progress, which no longer favoured trains, but preferred the individuality of cars and the flexibility of motorways. This notion of modernity was shared by stakeholders after the transition to democracy, which justified further investment in motorways and the closure of low-traffic lines, as I explained before. Kranzberg’s Fourth Law is also visible in the decision-making process regarding high-speed trains, which took place in the mid-2000s. There were valid technical grounds for the investment, but it was postponed for political bickering in the parliament. A few years later, the European debt crisis prevented any large-scale spending in railway building. Recently, this discussion was resumed,

208

H. S. Pereira

accompanied by a debate of reopening closed lines, or building new ones. Again, there are technical grounds in favour of these proposals, but a nontechnical concern – the development of a more environment-friendly transportation system – is perhaps more important in the debate.

15.5 Learning from History In his address to the SHOT audience, Kranzberg (1986, pp. 553–554) claimed that History of Technology was the most relevant field in History – this was his Fifth Law. He argued this importance was visible in teaching History, considering that classes that ignore the technological element leads to students failing to see the relevance of History to their present and future. Additionally, in view of the naturalisation and familiarity of technology since the eighteenth century, today’s alumni know they live in a technological age, therefore, History courses should include the technological factor to assist them to grasp how their world came into being (see also Diogo & Simões, 2016, p.  1). Philosophers of technology also advocate for non-technical education in technological degrees to enhance future technologists’ skills to engage with other areas and human communities (Moloney et al., 2018, pp. 202–203; Zhang, 2017, p. 135). For the goals of this paper, I am more interested in the capability of History of Technology to shed light on assorted parameters of past technological conundrums. The knowledge it provides about how past technical problems were overcome help to face and recast contemporary challenges. Moreover, History of Technology offers the historical feedback about an important facet of technological development, that is, the transfer of technology, which is still useful today. In the same respect, it helps to relativise and put into context periods of technophobia/technological pessimism and technophilia/technological optimism, warning about the dangers of regarding technology as something good, bad, or neutral  – which brings us full circle to Kranzberg First Law (Kranzberg, 1986, p. 556; Diogo & Simões, 2016, pp. 2 and 6). Applying these reflections on the railway sector, it is important to highlight that – as transportation experts, Colin Divall, Julian Hine, and Colin Pooley, argue – transportation technologies that we utilise today, like railways, are astonishingly constant; notwithstanding the significant technical enhancements and innovations they benefited from in the past centuries, they have essentially remained the same, offering the same services. Railways, for instance, continue performing the same job of transporting people and goods from one place to the other, as they did since the 1820s. The main difference is that they do it faster, more comfortably, and carrying more load, using different materials and fuels. Consequently, in varied instances, a better understanding of pasts decisions (and contexts where they were taken) can lead to more efficient policymaking in transport planning. This demands that policy makers know the past better and that historians portray the past in a useful way for present decisionmakers (Divall et al., 2016, pp. 1–2). This approach should have a

15  Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing… 209

transnational perspective, including the past experiences of other countries and the problems their railway sectors faced and how were they solved. Such a proposal may be very useful to tackle the main challenges faced by the Portuguese railway sector presently, mainly, the investment in high-speed trains, which has been resumed recently. History of Technology offers an overarching methodological umbrella that permits to understand the sociotechnical complexity of large technical systems, underscoring the interconnections between technical and nontechnical factors (including the agency of engineers, entrepreneurs, decisionmakers, lobbyists, users). This leads to a thorough knowledge of past challenges, including the operation and financing of the system, the decision regarding the railway routes, the competition with other transport systems, the role of the state, the negotiations with Spain regarding cross-border rail links,3 the impact on cities served by train stations, or railways impact on the establishment of global fluxes from and to Portugal. I mentioned the case of high-speed trains because it is currently the most pressing matter in railway transport planning in Portugal. But the knowledge provided by railway studies using the lens of History of Technology can be used to deal with other problems, for instance, the reutilization of abandoned infrastructures or material. History has shown how some railways contributed to the integration of the peripheries, but its original route became obsolete, or how some rolling stock was very successful amongst users. This knowledge can support the planning of new lines with a more competitive direction, or the recovery of rolling stock abandoned years ago. In the matter of railway tourism, it is known that railway enthusiasts privilege the genuineness and authenticity of recovered stations, sheds, or trains, and  – again  – History of Technology can provide an unvaluable input providing accurate and all-embracing data not only about the railway technology itself, but also the sociotechnical environment that surrounded it. These are just some possible scenarios where History of Technology may help policymakers in improving the Portuguese railway sector, and improve it to be more sustainable, resilient, inclusive, innovative, and sustainable, as recommended by one of the United Nations’ sustainable development goals for the decade.

 In the nineteenth century, transnational railways between Portugal and Spain did not carry enough traffic to justify the investment. This occurred because Spain was not interested in using railways to promote international trade, and, more importantly, it preferred to use its network to serve its harbours instead of those in Portugal (Pereira, 2017, pp. 186–189). In the 2020s, it is legitimate to wonder to what extent Madrid will not try to promote traffic towards its own ports, rather than the Portuguese border, even if considering the substantially different political and international context. History may advise diplomats and stakeholders as to not repeat past experiences with crossborder lines. 3

210

H. S. Pereira

15.6 Conclusion: The Human Agency in Portuguese Railways Kranzberg’s final Law sums up his previous Laws, stressing the predominance of human agency in the development, implementation, innovation, utilisation, and contestation of technological systems, and in the writing and telling of its history (Kranzberg, 1986, pp. 557–559). Obviously, that human prevalence is also present and clearly visible in the history of Portuguese railways since the first voyage in 1856 to present-day discussions about the construction of new lines, including those prepared for high-speed trains. This paper illustrates this, by iterating through Kranzberg’s Laws, applying them to the case of Portuguese railways in the long run (over a century and a half). I showed how the discussion, construction, and operation of the network was determined to a high degree by nontechnical factors, ranging from utopian beliefs about the impact railways would have on the Portuguese economy and society, to financial dependency, political lobbying, and personal agendas. The innovation undertaken in the railway sector and its coordination (or competition) with other associated systems can also be explained by the predominance of human factors. Originally, the road network supposedly should cover the territory evenly, but it was developed more thoroughly round railway lines, due to the lobbying of locals and of private companies. Something similar may be said about the research and implementation of narrow-gauge lines that met the demands of peripheral territories and their leaders for modern transportation systems and provided engineers with more job opportunities in the most modern and impactful transportation sector of the time. Nevertheless, the technical factor also played a relevant role, visible in the projects to build ports that served as outlets for the expected transnational traffic carried in cross-border rail links. The human factor is also very much present in the appraisal of the historical impact of technology. In Portuguese railway history, some stress the dire impact it had on the national finances or the uneven regional development they brought about, benefiting those regions that had access to railway stations at the expense of those without railways. Other researchers highlighted the positive impact in the circulation and transfer of technical and nontechnical knowledge, or the inclusion of Portugal in global flows of trade, commerce, and finance. Additionally, those histories written by railway enthusiasts are often very laudatory of the role played by the network in the development of the country. Kranzberg stresses the need to look at the whole picture and understand that one technology may consummate (or even exceed) the expectations created by its touters, but it can also bring about unexpected and undesirable consequences. In either case, technology is by no means neutral. The case of Portuguese railways in the long run illustrates this truism perfectly. By doing so, the study of its historical evolution, using the lens of History of Technology, contributes to restrict the alluring temptation of both technophobia and technophilia, by showing that it had positive and negative consequences. Furthermore, it illustrates how some past challenges (that might reoccur in the

15  Portuguese Railway History and Kranzberg’s Laws: Looking at the Past, Preparing… 211

future) were managed, and how some past mistakes or poor strategies may be averted in present policymaking. In a time, when Portugal seeks again to invest in the railway sector, the arguments provided by History of Technology are invaluable and should be included in the debate between policymakers, stakeholders, and future users.

References Alegria, M.  F. (1990). A organização dos transportes em Portugal (1850–1910): as vias e o tráfego. Centro de Estudos Geográficos. Aslaksen, E. W. (2017). Engineers and the evolution of society. In D. P. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, & Q. Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering. Exploring boundaries, expanding connections. Springer. Baskoy, T. (2018). Thorstein B.  Veblen’s philosophy of technology and modern capitalism. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases. Springer. Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (Eds.). (1992). Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. The MIT Press. da Silveira, L. E., Alves, D., Lima, N. M., Alcântara, A., & Puig, J. (2011). Population and railways in Portugal, 1801–1930. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 42(1), 29–52. https://doi. org/10.1162/JINH_a_00204 de Block, G. (2011). Designing the nation: The Belgian railway project, 1830–1837. Technology and Culture, 52(4), 703–732. de Isidoro, I.  A., Marat-Mendes, T., & Tângari, V.  R. (2018). The Portuguese railway in time and space  – Mapping phases of growth, stagnation, and decline (1845–2015). Planning Perspectives, 33(3), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2017.1348975 de Oliveira, N. R. (2010). Contributos sobre a evolução da tracção a vapor 1910–1960. In A. Antunes, C. de Freitas, G. Gomes, H. Vicente & L. Cordeiro (Eds.), 1910–2010. O Caminho de Ferro em Portugal. CP & REFER. Diogo, M. P., & Simões, A. (2016). ‘All history is relevant, but the history of technology is the most relevant’: An informal tribute to Kranzberg’s Laws. Icon, 22, 1–7. Divall, C., Hine, J., & Pooley, C. (2016). Introduction: Why does the past matter? In C. Divall & J. Hine (Eds.), Transport policy: Learning lessons from history. Routledge. dos Santos, L. A. L. (2011). Política Ferroviaria Ibérica: de principios del siglo XX a la agrupación de los ferrocarriles [PhD dissertation, Universidad Complutense de Madrid]. Fickers, A. (2014). “Neither good, nor bad; nor neutral”: The historical Dispositif of communication technologies. In M. Schreiber & C. Zimmermann (Eds.), Journalism and technological change. historical perspectives, contemporary trends. Campus. Fritzsche, A., & Oks, S. J. (2018). Translations of technology and the future of engineering. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases. Springer. Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power. Electrification in Western society, 1880–1930. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Hughes, T. P. (1998). Rescuing Prometheus. Pantheon Books. Kranzberg, M. (1986). Kranzberg’s Laws. Technology and Culture, 27(3), 544–560. https://doi. org/10.2307/3105385 Latour, L. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press. Mitcham, C. (2009). A historico-ethical perspective on engineering education: From use and convenience to policy engagement. Engineering Studies, 1(1), 35–53. https://doi. org/10.1080/19378620902725166

212

H. S. Pereira

Moloney, C., Badenhorst, C., & Rosales, J. (2018). Fostering subjectivity in engineering education: Philosophical framework and pedagogical strategies. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases. Springer. Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (2005). How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology. The MIT Press. Pereira, H. S. (2017). The technodiplomacy of Iberian transnational railways in the second half of the nineteenth century. History of Technology, 33(2), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.108 0/07341512.2017.1317847 Pereira, H. S. (2020). Expertise and policy-making: Main actors, debates and outcomes in the making of the Portuguese railway network (1850–90). Journal of Transport History. Online First, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022526620908585 Pereira, H. S. (2021a). Appropriation, integration, and nation building: Portuguese railways in the second half of the nineteenth and early years of the twentieth century. Social Science History, 45(2), 391–416. Pereira, H. S. (2021b). Past, present, and future of peripheral mobilities in Portugal: The Portuguese narrow-gauge railway system (1870s–2010s). Transfers, 11(1), 108–137. Pinheiro, M. (1986). Chemins de fer, structure financiere de l’ État et dependance éxterieure au Portugal: 1850–1890 [PhD dissertation, Université de Paris]. Pinheiro, M. (1988). A construção dos caminhos-de-ferro e a encomenda de produtos industriais em Portugal (1855–1890). Análise Social, 24(101–102), 745–767. Prata, A. (2011). Políticas Portuárias na I República. Caleidoscópio. Sousa, M. L. (2016). A mobilidade automóvel em Portugal (1920–1950). Chiado. Wang, N., & Li, B. (2018). Three stages of technical artifacts’ life cycle: Based on a four factors theory. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases. Springer. Zhang, Z. (2017). Engineering rationality and public discourses on dam construction in China. In D. P. Michelfelder, B. Newberry, & Q. Zhu (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering. Exploring boundaries, expanding connections. Springer.

Chapter 16

Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile Barbara Kirsi Silva, Cecilia Ibarra, and Mauricio Osses

Abstract  This paper seeks to question some intersections between history and engineering, through the history of solar energy in Chile. In this analysis we give importance to the humanity in every innovation as well as acknowledging the importance of practices’ temporalities. The historical research of solar energy’s practices was done in collaboration between engineers in the field and historians. By addressing the contemporary history of solar engineering in Chile, we aim to discuss the connection between different scales, as well as the intersections of transitions and coexistence between different technologies. This will lead us to reflect on the philosophical possibilities of interdisciplinary work, and on the relationship between narratives of the past and imagination of the future. Keywords  History of technology · Solar energy · Interdisciplinary practices · Engineering and temporality

16.1 Introduction Solar energy is a technology widely available in current times. Some devices in public spaces use solar energy; in some urban areas it is possible to see houses with solar technology; and in rural locations every now and then we can find solar

B. K. Silva (*) College UC / Faculty of History, Geography, and Political Science, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile C. Ibarra Faculty of Government / CR2, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile M. Osses Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa Maria (USM), Valparaíso, Chile © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_16

213

214

B. K. Silva et al.

photovoltaic fields. Certainly, solar energy has integrated discourses addressing the need for clean energies. The demand is evident: the concerning global climatic crisis. A crisis is broadly defined as a particular time in which humans (individually or collectively) experience intense difficulties or dangers. Moreover, a crisis is usually associated with a ‘new sense of time which both indicated and intensified the end of an epoch’ (Koselleck & Richter, 2006, 358). Whichever conceptualization we may chose, we understand a crisis in a specific—yet not determined, time frame. Therefore, the very concept of crisis embeds the factor of temporality. Societies and individuals are related in an inalienable way to time. Moreover, this relationship with time is intertwined with the duality of continuity and change, which intersects practices and processes. Scientific and technological products are not ‘immune’ to the binary motion of continuity and change. On the contrary, if a teleological philosophical perspective might suggest a linear development towards progress (Allen, 2016), the history of science and technology shows that its shape throughout time is far more complex. If we were to study solar energy in Chile, two definitions were crucial: the first one was solar energy development did not begin because of the current environmental crisis but has a longer history. The second one was that if we wanted to understand transformations and permanence in solar energy, and for them to have an influence in current discussions of the future, then we had to go back in time and address its temporality in depth, beyond the ‘oral tradition’ or statements repeated once and again, which might have been accurate or not. In this paper, we will address our work in reconstructing history of solar energy in Chile throughout interdisciplinary discussions. By putting the history of solar energy in perspective, we could draw its development connecting a local, national and global scale, far beyond center-periphery narratives (Kaps & Komlosy, 2013). This multi-scale standpoint allows understanding the diversity of meanings of solar technology, to different actors (Fritzsche & Oks, 2018). Furthermore, historical comprehension integrates the coexistence of different technologies and what it meant for diverse actors in solar development. These elements allow us to propose the intersection of history and engineering, produced within a collaborative and interdisciplinary method, as a contribution to philosophy of engineering. The result of these collaborative and interdisciplinary historical research transformed the narrative of the past of solar energy in Chile and may influence the imagination on the role of solar energy in sociotechnical imagined futures. Therefore, we propose to ask how time—or more broadly a temporal perspective, could contribute to reflecting on philosophy and engineering.

16.2 Time, Temporality and Solar Engineering At first sight, history is the discipline that studies the past. We ask questions to a certain past, trying to understand processes that are gone and will never come back. These questions though are constructed within our present. In other words, it is our

16  Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile

215

present what inspires which questions we are going to formulate to the past; and which approaches, interests, focuses are we going to use in designing the research to cope with those questions. Classic historians such as Bloch (2001, 18) or Benedetto Croce (quoted in Collingwood, 1996, 198), among many others, have stated the idea that history is indeed a discipline of the present. However, this does not imply we should embrace some sort of ‘presentism’. In the concept of François Hartog (2020), current societies are embedded in a ubiquitous present, as we are focused on immediate responses to immediate needs, which erode our connections to the past. This ‘regime of urgency’ then, should not replace the crucial relationship between past and present in which we situate history. Current times indicate the urgency to deal with climate change (IPCC 2018 et al., 2019) and strengthening an environmental responsibility as an inescapable and undeniable need. One of the many actions is to promote the use of clean energies, and solar energy is obviously one of them. One might think it is this urgent need which leads us to question our past regarding solar energy, even in a far away, underdeveloped country such as Chile. And this is indeed true, together with local effervescence for the topic (Rojas et al., 2019). The presence and need for solar energy today inspire the questions we can make to solar energy’s past. However, even if this is the case in working with history’s temporalities, this should not cloud our understanding that the past has an experience independent of what is happening in our present. We can find experiences of uses of solar energy in Chile from 1870s onwards. But this does not mean we can set a continuous teleological history of this development for about 150 years. The experiences of solar energy we found in history were not necessarily related to this environmental crisis or to the need of clean energy. However, that historical trajectory can contribute to understanding the complexity of time-based relations, its different silhouettes and traces. Technology—and in this regard, engineering, plays a decisive role in moving forward the horizon of what is possible. The future is challenged and shaped by engineers and scientists’ imagination when dealing with concrete world conditions (Pirtle et al., 2021). Nonetheless, imagination is also intersected by the narratives we have of the past (McKittrick, 2015) and by socio technical imaginaries, which can be understood as shared visions of desirable futures which could be achieved by technological change (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015). Understanding this statement implies leaving behind the static distinction between philosophy and engineering drawn upon ‘the life of the mind and the life of the action’ (Pitt, 2013, 92). If the future can be imagined, we should embrace the idea that ‘technology combines the physical world with the social, the objective with the subjective, the machine with the man’ (Pool, 1997, 15). In history, we understand facts and processes were not always meant to be as they were. There is no script for history, therefore, it is human decision making (individually and collectively) what shapes history. And also, humans are those who built narratives of the past. Future was not written; it was imagined by humans, including engineers, and the past can show us how this ‘blank canvas’ became a story to tell.

216

B. K. Silva et al.

When adding historical perspective, it becomes clear how human intention shaped the possibility of obtaining energy from the sun, beyond receiving sunlight. Past motivation was not environmental crisis, but industrial and domestic endeavors. Obtaining fresh water, cooking and drying food, heating water, and even generating electric power were among the technical experiments dealing with solar energy. At the same time, scientific drives such as measuring radiation and understanding its variations intersected human interest in working with solar energy. Therefore, both engineering and history deal with what is and was possible, and what actually happened or could happen, in this case, when working with solar energy. By bringing together this articulation of time and possibilities, these disciplines reflect on the human condition and on human imagination. As such, to work with history and engineering is to unveil the humanity in every innovation as well as to acknowledge the importance of practices’ temporalities. When the time came for accelerating the development of clean energies, solar energy already had a long history in the country (Osses et al., 2019). Not always known, not always conscious, but it was there. It was time that articulated its course, far more complex than a continuous linear trajectory moving for increasing progress. Similarly, in different moments and processes of its history, solar energy connected local, national and global scales. Radiation was used in particular places in the country, but solar energy knowledge moved throughout communities, universities, public policies, as well as in international academic communities and diverse experiences around the world. Beyond instrumentalism proposing that science provides tools to navigate the world more than uncovering its ‘fundamental truths’ (Stanford, 2016), the experience of solar energy showed that providing such tools is a complex exercise of intertwining science, society, and temporality.

16.3 The Historical Path of Solar Energy in Chile Chile’s Atacama Desert has been shown to have the highest long-term solar irradiance of any place on Earth, offering unique conditions for solar energy development. This has attracted worldwide attention since the 1900s, fostering technological development in the region through a variety of applications and experimentation, such as desalination, solar ponds, water heating, radiation measurements, cooking stoves, photovoltaic cells, and solar energy storage systems. These projects used both local capacities together with an early and active international collaboration. The first recorded references of solar energy technological development in Chile appeared in 1872, in the Atacama Desert. Engineer Charles Wilson built the first distilling plant known as Las Salinas, with a production capacity of 20 thousand liters of water per day, being operative until 1910. This productivity was explained both by the solar radiation harvested, and by the Atacama Desert cold wind, which managed to maintain the glass’ outside temperature sufficiently cold. The existence

16  Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile

217

of Las Salinas was known in the northern hemisphere, at least, since 1883, 11 years after it was built, thanks to publications in London, New  York, Oklahoma and Madrid. Dr. Maria Telkes in the United States recovered this experience in the 1950s (Telkes, 1955) and gave information about its existence to engineer Julio Hirschmann, from the Technical University Federico Santa María at Valparaíso, Chile (UTFSM, by its acronym in Spanish). From that moment on, Las Salinas became an icon for those initiated in solar energy technologies. Two other desalination plants followed, Sierra Gorda and Domeyko, which operated supplying drinking water in the area for several decades. Juan Oliveira owned Sierra Gorda desalination plant, located 50 kilometers east of Las Salinas. This second solar industry was active between 1886 and 1894. The distiller of Sierra Gorda apparently had a supply of 40 thousand deciliters for every 24 hours (Hirschmann, 1964). This would have made it twice as productive as Las Salinas. All desalination plants built between 1872 and 1907 disappeared without written register of their design process or the cessation of operations, which, due to their size, should have involved administrative procedures. Engineers drove these developments motivated by providing water to the community and the flourishing nitrate industry, in the middle of the driest desert in the world and a region known for its intense seismic activity. Technically they correspond to passive solar systems; the concept ‘solar energy’ was not yet used, but rather ‘evaporation’ and ‘atmospheric agents’. Later, in 1918 the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, led by Samuel Langley, installed a solar station in Calama, northern Chile. The Calama-Monte Montezuma station was the longest operating facility of the Smithsonian program, measuring radiation continuously between 1923 and 1947, that is, over a period of 25 years, under the direction of researcher Dr. C. G. Abbot. The main objective of this observatory was to rigorously measure changes in the solar constant, with the least possible disturbances of particles, clouds or water vapor in the atmosphere (Hoyt, 1979). As far as our research could tell, these initiatives were not linked to each other. However, the work of these pioneers, with large-scale industrial applications, and the Smithsonian Institute, with experimental measurements, was taken up again by the universities in the 1950s: Universidad del Norte with Carlos Espinosa, Universidad de Chile with German Frick and UTFSM with Julio Hirschmann. In a collaborative work, they reactivated the development of passive applications, such as solar evaporation ponds and desalination. Hirschmann founded the Solar Energy Laboratory in 1961, where in 1970 the National Solarimetric Archive was inaugurated in the presence of delegates of the Regional Associations of the World Meteorological Organization of the United Nations (Hirschmann, 1973). Records of up to 80 stations were received here, spread along Chile, from Parinacota to Antarctica, including Mataveri station on Easter Island. In this way, local solar stations connected to the international community that was researching the field. Examples of historical development in solar engineering (Fig. 16.1).

218

B. K. Silva et al.

Fig. 16.1  From left to right: Solar distillation plant at Domeyko, c.1908 (Telkes, 1955); Evaporation pond at Coya, 1959 (Hirschmann, 1961); Experimental distillation plant at Quillagua, 1974 (Hirschmann, 1975)

16.4 Networks of Solar Development in Chile When Chilean engineers took their first steps into solar energy science and technology in the late 1950s, they looked back at Wilson desalination plants, despite it had not been operative for decades, and it even had been practically forgotten. Julio Hirschmann wrote about Domeyko and Sierra Gorda and contributed into making Wilson’s work an inspiration for solar work in technology and innovation in Chile (Hirschmann, 1964). Hirschmann gave a central place to water desalination in his solar laboratory, giving continuity to this technology. Providing access to clean water to the population in the north of the country was a problem then, as it is today. The late 1950s were the years of organization of networks of scientists and engineers around solar energy in Chile and abroad. The Chilean Solar Committee was founded in 1957 with participation of government officials and academics from different universities; its main objectives were related to the solution of the problems of water and energy provision for the country. Chile lacks fossil fuels reserves and energy security was a concern. The 1960s saw the development of a network of collaboration around measuring solar radiation and experimenting with technology. Work was concentrated in universities, with teams connected to peers in the country and abroad. Chilean engineers joined the international association from its beginnings and took part in the United Nations conferences for the development of renewable energies. The solar community was one of the first groups alerting on the phenomena of climate change. At the beginning of the 1970s the conditions for solar development changed dramatically. The price of fossil fuels rose, and Chile entered in a process of installment of neoliberal structure, with an open market economy and a subsidiary role for the State. Under market rules, solar energy achieved some growth in competitive areas such as passive solar applications (for example, water heating for residential use). The association continued to gather the solar community, conformed mainly by engineers from universities and the emergent private sector. The State rolled back as collaborator and funding agency for solar endeavors. There were few exceptions, such as the initiative of the public copper mining company, CODELCO, which implemented a solar technology plan aimed at reducing its energy costs (Román & Ibarra, 2019).

16  Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile

219

The emergent local market for solar technology shrunk in 1990s, with low prices for fossil fuels. Solar activity diminished; academics could maintain some activity supported by the international cooperation. By the mid 1990s the local association disappeared. The hard times of solar energy in Chile had one exception: the development of the so-called ‘Socially adapted solar technologies’, a Latin American movement for technological innovation of low cost and simple design, implementing ingenious applications to solve the needs of vulnerable population, and aided by international collaboration (e.g. Serrano, 1988). The global solar association made its case for influencing energy policy based on environmental concerns and some countries undertook policies, which allowed investing in solar energy, taking a very different path from Chile (Mills, 2005). At the beginning of the new century, the Chilean State has had a role in fostering solar science and technology with energy policy favoring renewable energy and funding in the area. The surviving engineers from the solar community had a role in pushing policy makers and rebuilding local capacity. In this great resurgence of renewable energies worldwide and in Chile, it is interesting to contrast recent emblematic projects with the first facilities. For example, the largest solar thermal concentration plant in Latin America, Cerro Dominador, is located only 80 km away from the location where Las Salinas desalination plant was built 150 years ago.

16.5 The Process of Reconstructing Solar Energy’s History The historical path presented in the previous section was neither obvious nor mandatory. Reconstructing it while understanding what was going on needed a dialogue between different disciplines, using a public history approach (Silva, 2018). The project included historical research, dialogue and collaborative work between solar scientists, engineers, technicians, historians, and science and technology researchers. Engineers working on history, social scientists and historians working on engineering was a new and challenging task for all of us. But very soon we realized knowledge and its applications need this dialogue, as solar energy did—and still does. The project aimed at reconstructing the history of solar energy in Chile. Initially the goal was the collaborative production of a peer-reviewed book (Osses et  al., 2019), and later it included also the production of a documentary based on the interviews held during the research phase, a photographic archive, a webpage and an interactive timeline1 presented at the World Solar Congress (WSC) held in Santiago, Chile, in November 2019. It was the first time WSC took place in South America since it launched in 1957. In one way or another, it was the book that brought

 Documentary, photographic archive and time line available at the Project website (https://historiaytecnologia.cl/sol/) 1

220

B. K. Silva et al.

together all these different initiatives to reconstruct and communicate solar energy’s history in the country. Twelve people participated in the book writing, three editors and nine co-authors, they belong to four universities and have different ‘solar trajectories’. They were invited by the editors in a process that began at the end of 2017. The editors embarked in this book motivated by curiosity and admiration of the fragments they already knew on Chilean solar engineering. These stories were mostly unknown and not available for new entrants in the field. Engineering students choosing to do their final project on solar energy did not have a reference to learn from the local history; they could only refer to recent information on the media and on the websites of universities and enterprises currently working in the field. We believe earlier contributions to local science and technology must be made visible, valued by the new generation and recognized by engineering students. Acknowledging previous experiences is not only ‘anecdotal’ but sets technology within a wider time frame. This allows future experts to understand the relevance of individual convictions as well as understanding oneself within a local and global society. History shows so clearly this is not a relationship that began in the so-called ‘Information era’ but is at the core of science and technology development, even decades ago, even in a far away, small country such as Chile. To form the team was the first task of this project. The Chilean solar community of scientists and professionals who had worked or work today in solar energy is small enough for them to have heard of each other. Since history of solar science and technology in Chile was undocumented, the team decided to include as sources long interviews with actors related to the subject. We conducted 22 extensive interviews to engineers and technicians with long careers in solar energy in Chile, starting at least in the 1970s. The project team made the selection—based on their knowledge of the solar community and archival sources. All the interviews are complete and with very little editing on the project website. Other sources were the scarce academic literature on the history of the sector; academic literature on solar science and technology produced in Chile; private archives with minutes and reports of the national Solar Association and their conferences; and academic writings and reports related to specific solar projects. If engineers and historians were reconstructing the history of solar energy in Chile, and writing a collaborative book, soon it seemed this remarkable history needed a broader communication process. The material gathered during the research for the book gave us the idea of showing the results in different formats, for example, a 25-minute documentary based on the interviews and the interactive timeline displayed at the WSC. Following the theoretical approach of the research and the book, the final design of the timeline includes a parallel between world events and what was happening in Chile at the time, as well as a third line where the attendees could contribute with milestones that were not considered at first. The timeline format made visible and explicit that this process had many gaps, even oblivion. It also showed there was not a perfect coherence regarding a supposed progress making solar engineering increasingly extensive, reaching to present times.

16  Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile

221

A new stage in the development of solar energy in Chile can be observed in the last decade. The rapid growth of solar energy for electricity generation gathers general interest, policy attention and international notoriety. Competences develop in certain directions; there is always more than one path. Areas of expertise get stronger depending, for example, on funding and incentives. Also, their advancement depends on visions of the future and values, as carbon neutrality currently demands. During the 2 years of research, using public history methodologies, we observed tacit values in the local solar energy community which could be a compass for the future. The shared values we identified were: passion, persistence, collaboration, and consciousness. We recognized passion for learning, inventing, discovering, and solving problems, and observed persistence in keeping in the field, working hard even when governments and markets seemed unsupportive, as it happened once and again in this history. Collaboration and solidarity with the local and international community were features displayed along the decades. And consciousness points towards the environment; the world solar community has been aware of climate change and environmental degradation for a long time. It has been also conscious of social needs, policy and governance issues. This collective and historical exercise recognized the intentions of engineers and, at the same time, prompted them to be reflective and enrolled them into conversations about the role of solar energy in the past and the future. The current time of crisis calls for deeper changes which require dialogue and re-imagining the future. Conceptual shifts may come from the sort of conversations fostered in the process of revisiting the past. This process problematized sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015) by showing a diversity of visions of desirable futures supported by solar technology in place at the same time. The research agenda proposed by Pirtle et al. (2021) calls for a reimagined engineering in service of society, based on critical reflection from interdisciplinary approaches. Historical research can contribute to this purpose by providing a temporal perspective on values surrounding a given technology and options for technological development, which could remove, or at least question, ideas of linear technological progress.

16.6 Final Remarks. Time and Interdiscipline in Solar Energy When reconstructing the history of solar energy between engineers and historians, we followed the collaborative practice at the core of the history of solar energy development. This disciplinary dialogue was crucial to put the past of solar energy in perspective; the horizon of understanding in which we analyzed solar engineering was deeper and wider. We could integrate culture, society, global scope, even ethical and epistemological considerations into the development of solar energy.

222

B. K. Silva et al.

When working in historical perspective, philosophical considerations go beyond ethics and epistemology: it puts time and temporality as prisms to reflect on the articulation—or possible imbrication, between philosophy and engineering. Working on history of engineering with an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach allowed us to open possibilities when thinking of time. For engineering, reflecting on time and temporality might be insightful, as this reflection could question not only the linearity of time, but the teleology of engineering itself. This questioning of time became evident when we analyzed the historical path of solar engineering in Chile, its networks and the process itself of reconstructing solar engineering’s history, as described above. Chronological time by which we organize society, measure projects, and plan developments is not the only temporality in which we coexist. Historical work can contribute to thinking of a multiple time, which embraces connections through epochs and places. Global networks do not only refer to relationships with people in different places of the world, but also connections through time. This does not shape a perfect line that is moving hygienically forwards, step after step, but messy, multiple and kaleidoscopic. Being aware of this condition of time might open possibilities for engineering to question what the future is and how it relates to innovation, progress or newness. Consciousness about the past’s fragmentary nature might help in opening possibilities for imagining the future. By historizing actors and contexts in the past of solar energy, we could understand how social and cultural conditions, as well as individual ambitions and interests intertwined to give shape to solar energy. Thus, it is not only engineering which could imagine the future. Historical research allows us to build comprehensive narratives of the past, and by transforming our narratives of the past, we can also change our possibilities of imagining the future. Acknowledgments  Barbara Silva acknowledges the support of FONDECYT 11200168; Cecilia Ibarra acknowledges the support of the Center for Climate and Resilience Research (CR)2 (ANID/ FONDAP/15110009); Mauricio Osses acknowledges the support of CCTVAL ANID PIA/APOYO AFB180002.

References Allen, A. (2016). The end of progress: Decolonizing the normative foundations of critical theory. Columbia University Press. Bloch, M. (2001 [1949]). Apologia para la Historia o el oficio de historiador. FCE. Collingwood, R. G. (1996). Idea de la historia. FCE. Fritzsche, A., & Oks, S. J. (2018). Translations of technology and the future of engineering. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering. Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp. 1–12). Springer. Hartog, F. (2020). Chronos: L’Occident aux prises avec le Temps. Gallimard. Hirschmann, J. (1961). A solar energy pilot plant for northern Chile. Solar Energy, 2, 37–43.

16  Interdisciplinary Practices for the History of Solar Engineering in Chile

223

Hirschmann, J. (1964). Evaporateurs et destillateurs solaires au Chili. In United Nations, new sources of energy. Proceedings of the conference. Rome, 21–31 August 1961. Volume 6: Solar energy (pp. 224–238). United Nations. Hirschmann, J. (1973). Records on solar radiation in Chile. Solar Energy, 14(129–138), 129–138. Hirschmann, J. (1975). Solar distillation in Chile. Desalination, 17(17–30), 31–67. Hoyt, D. V. (1979). The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory solar constant program. Review of Geophysics and Space Physics, 17(3), 427–458. IPCC 2018, Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M.  I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., & Waterfield, T. (Eds.). (2019). Global warming of 1.5C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https:// www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_Low_Res.pdf Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S. (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity. Sociotechnical imaginaries and the imaginaries and the fabrication of power. The University of Chicago Press. Kaps, K., & Komlosy, A. (2013). Centers and peripheries revisited. Polycentric connections or entangled hierarchies? Review – Fernand Braudel Center, 36(3–4), 237–264. Koselleck, R., & Richter, M. (2006). Crisis. Journal of the History of Ideas, 67(2), 357–400. McKittrick, K. (2015). Sylvia Wynter: On being human as praxis. Duke University Press. Mills, D. (2005). The International Solar Energy Society – The second 25 years, 1980–2005. In K. W. Boer (Ed.), The fifty-year history of the International Solar Energy Society. American Solar Energy Society, Inc. Osses, M., Ibarra, C., & Silva, B. (2019). El Sol al Servicio de la Humanidad. Historia de la Energía Solar en Chile. RIL Editores/USM/SERC. Pirtle, Z., Tomblin, D., & Madhavan, G. (2021). Remaining conceptions of technological and societal Progress. In Z. Pirtle, D. Tomblin, & G. Madhavan (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy. Remaining technology and social progress (pp. 1–21). Springer. Pitt, J. (2013). Fitting engineering into philosophy. In D.  Michelfelder, N.  McCarthy, & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 91–102). Springer. Pool, R. (1997). Beyond engineering. How society shapes technology. Oxford University Press. Rojas, M., Aldunce, P., Farías, L., González, H., Marquet, P.  A., Muñoz, J.  C., Palma-Behnke, R., Stehr, A., & Vicuña, S. (Eds.). (2019). Evidencia científica y cambio climático en Chile: Resumen para tomadores de decisiones. Comité Científico COP25 – Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación. Román, R., & Ibarra, C. (2019). El desarrollo de la energía solar en Chile, una visión integradora. In M. Osses, C. Ibarra, & B. Silva (Eds.), El Sol al Servicio de la Humanidad. Historia de la Energía Solar en Chile. RIL Editores/USM/SERC. Serrano, P. (1988). Artefactos solares simples. In Construcción con tecnología. Apropiada. Cetal. Silva, B. (2018). History, narrative and the public: Towards a social dimension of history as a discipline. International Journal of Research on History Didactics, History Education and History Culture, 2018(39), 13–30. Stanford, K. (2016). Instrumentalism: Global, local and scientific. In P.  Humphreys (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of science. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780199368815.001.0001 Telkes, M. (1955). Solar still. In Proceedings of world symposium on applied solar energy (pp. 73–79). Phoenix.

Chapter 17

Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias Juan David Reina-Rozo

Abstract  Storytelling, in particular, science fiction, has a fundamental role to play in creating other possible worlds. Consequently, science fiction can be expected to engineering through education, culture, and research. One effort to create new worlds based on science and technology is found in the literature, particularly utopian Sci Fi. Emerging aesthetical and philosophical genres within Sci Fi are questioning technology creation and use. The text aims to unravel the relationship between science fiction and engineering, specifically in the education, cultural, and applications domains. Solarpunk and Afrofuturism as Sci Fi sub-genres are interested in promoting new emergencies for collective well-being. These overcome the capitalocene and its roots in the extraction and combustion of fossil fuels and social inequality. These emerged at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century due to the dystopian pessimism of other creative endeavors. These movements are characterized by speculative worlds where social ecology, democratic technology, solar, wind, and tidal energy are crucial elements. The ethos of engineering needs to be comprehensive and plural, facing the future challenges of humans and living beings. Keywords  Engineering education · Philosophy of technology · Solarpunk · Afrofuturism · Science fiction

J. D. Reina-Rozo (*) Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_17

225

226

J. D. Reina-Rozo

17.1 Introduction Science fiction is a worlds’ creator, as has been the engineering ethos since it was created as an academic discipline. Engineering and Sci Fi have complex connections beyond technology development. Works of science fiction (books, comics, films, TV programs, among others) play a huge role in engineering praxis, as they give orientation and inspiration to research, innovation activities, and design. They have a common goal, the “building” of -possible, needed, or impossible- futures. This text aims to understand the links between engineering education and -utopianscience fiction such as Afrofuturism and Solarpunk to illustrate emerging praxis and rethink the engineering ethos in a society in crisis. In this text, we understand Science Fiction and Sci Fi as synonyms, representing a cultural movement that creates imaginaries and visions about how the world could be on the premise of radical change based on science and technology endeavors. Thus, science fiction is inspired by the scientific and engineers’ achievements and possibilities, the (basic, applied and social) science facts (Miller & Bennett, 2008). According to Roberts (2006: 1), Sci Fi is a “genre or division of literature that distinguishes its fictional worlds to one degree or another from the world in which we live: a fiction of the imagination rather than observed reality.” Broderick (1995: 155) adds the Sci Fi is that “species of storytelling native to a culture undergoing the epistemic changes implicated in the rise and suppression of technical–industrial modes of production, distribution, consumption, and disposal.” Broderick outlines Sci Fi by (i) metaphoric strategies and metonymic tactics, (ii) the foregrounding of icons, and (iii) attention to the object in preference to the subject. Sci Fi is a world itself. Sci Fi studies have grown since the second half of the XX century; journals as Sci Fiction Studies have created a space of research and outreach for enthusiasts. In this context, the main research subjects of interest are the relation between Sci Fi and race, gender, and technology (Roberts, 2006). Meanwhile, studies have discovered its history, the theory, issues, challenges (Bould et al., 2009), and its relationship with philosophy (Sanders, 2008). Sci Fi is composed of a diverse set of visions of science and technology creations and appropriation. Here, we underline the research led by Bould et al. (2009) that recognizes twelve subgenres: Alternative history, Apocalyptic Sci Fi, Sci Fi film, Blockbuster Sci Fi film, Dystopia, Eutopia, Feminist Sci Fi, Future history, Hard Sci Fi, Slipstream, Space opera, Weird Fiction. In particular, the object of interest in this text is Utopian Science fiction (Williams, 1978) and Eutopia (Murphy, 2009). In this case, following Plato’s Ideal Constitution, it has been considered as a nowhere-­ utopia (ou-topia = “no place”); in other words, it does not yet exist. However, by overcoming the conditions for them to live, it could become an ideal-utopia (eu-­ topia = “good place”), evolving it in a goal. Fernando Berri, a Latin American film director, summarises the Utopia debate as: In the end, Utopia is like the horizon, you can never reach the horizon, and I said more, I know I will never reach it if I walk two steps towards it, and it moves two steps away. I walk

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

227

ten steps towards it, and the horizon runs ten steps back. Utopia is no different. It moves further away from the closer I get, and no matter how far I walk, I will never reach it. What is Utopia for? To make us keep walking. To make us keep walking towards it. To the horizon. (Galeano, 2013)

Utopianism has been a source of reflection and imagination for decades. In this sense, Bloch (1986, 2000) has made profound contributions to the field. For Curtis (2005), some philosophers as Rawls, Berlin, and Oakeshott have criticized the idea of Utopias for three reasons: “(i) pursuing utopia justifies the use of violence to accomplish its ends; (ii) it requires one to deny the individual in favor of the community; and (iii) it utilizes a mindset of mere problem-solving when asking the question of how humans should live together fruitfully” (2005, 147). The latter implies the deny of imagining new possible worlds, whereas, in feminist science fiction, (e) utopian societies are often presented as something both achievable and desirable. There is no singular Utopia; it is a plural set of radical futures, a pluriverse. Since More’s (1516) seminal work by the same name, Utopia has become a word with political and practical meaning. Martínez (2020) supplies a catalog of “better worlds,” relating these visions in the literature to actual implementations of alternative models of society and communal life. The author underlines practices from Pirates in Madagascar as the Charles Johnson’ Libertalia in 1728; the Alexander Bogdanov’s Red Star novel in 1908; the Express, Siberian Fantasy written by Aléksei Gástev in 1916, the Vladimir Mayakovsky’s Mystery-Bouffe play in 1918, among others. Then, (e)utopia and Sci Fi have a nurturing interdependency. The latter express only a few examples of better worlds. Then, it is crucial to understand the complexity of the Utopian Sci Fi (USci Fi) framework. According to Williams (1978: 203), there are four types of USci Fi: (a) the paradise, in which a happier life is described as simply existing elsewhere; (b) the externally altered world, in which a new kind of life has been made possible by an unlooked-for natural event; (c) the willed transformation, in which human has achieved a new kind of life effort; (d) the technological transformation, in which a new kind of life has been made possible by a technical discovery. For the purposes of this text, categories c and d will be those of interest in the context of engineering education and praxis. Engineering has a vital role in thinking and co-creating the future (Johnson, 2011; Burnam-Fink, 2015). How do Engineering as a discipline and engineers as practitioners imagine the future? How will technology shape the future? What type of world can we create for the living beings inhabiting the Earth? Engineers and scientists have strongly been influenced by Sci Fi literature and films, from Engineers working at NASA (Fleischmann & Templeton, 2008; Brown & Logan, 2015) to the impacts of James Bond films’ (Fritzsche & Dürrbeck, 2020) or the effects of Star Trek on science culture (Perkowitz, 2016). Nevertheless, tensions are emerging in the relationship between fiction, engineering, and applications of the Sci Fi perspective on the development of technology, particularly in the field of nanotechnology. We must pay attention to developing

228

J. D. Reina-Rozo

more complex socio-technical systems, especially those where human and other living beings’ well-being could be affected. Applications such as biosensors in the human body, artificial intelligence, or clones, to mention some, are fostering the idea of post-human engineering (Baofu, 2009; Parrinder, 2009; Ghilardi & Accoto, 2014; Cheng & Yi, 2016). But, some tensions arise (Milburn, 2008), as Biopunk (Schmeink, 2016) and the debates on ectogenesis, genetic engineering, and genetic discrimination (Kendal, 2015).

17.2 Engineering Education Through Sci Fi Lens Engineering education is informed by technical concepts from the so-called “hard sciences,” constrained by a quantitative approach to human affairs. The latter has increased the technical specialization at micro levels such as nano-engineering and even macro levels such as geoengineering, without considering the complex socio-­ ecological implications. Researchers and corporations have raised expectations through this research in the pursuit of unlimited profit. The creation of genetically modified organisms for utilitarian purposes (Feeney, 2019), the transformation of weather conditions through geoengineering (Hamilton, 2013), which are only two examples from a long list, seems like science fiction themes and sagas. It is precisely the speculation around worlds and universes where the power of science and engineering depicted in popular storytelling has been a source of inspiration for generations of scientists and engineers in creating technological devices and the transformation of the relationship between human beings and technoscience. A seminal work has been Johannes Kepler’s (1634) novel called “Somnium” (Latin for “The Dream), which presents a detailed, imaginative description of how the Earth might look when viewed from the Moon and is considered the first profound scientific treatise on lunar astronomy. Works such as those of Arthur Clarke (2001: A Space Odyssey), Jules Verne (Around the World in 80 Days; Journey to the Centre of the Earth), Isaac Asimov (I, Robot), Ray Bradbury (Fahrenheit 415; Mars), H.G.  Wells (The Time Machine), Douglas Adams (The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy), Philip Dick (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) and George Orwell (1984; Animal Farm) have been referenced in popular culture, both in literature, comics and films being powerful culture artifacts of ideas and emotions that have created space of action for engineers both, in the Global North and South. Popular culture is a significant source for science and technology. Despite their diversity, these literature works have some things in common. First, all the authors come from countries in the global North, particularly the United States, England, and other European countries. Additionally, most of these authors are men; white anglo-saxon protestant male authors dominate the markets. They are the most known and the most commercially successful. Feminist science fiction criticized this very early on since the decade of the ’70 s (Curtis, 2005). Badami’s

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

229

(1976) feminist critique, among others, has offered elements to question the field and to create new meanings on speculative futures through science and technology. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize that Global North influence carries a set of themes, values, politics, culture, and philosophy inherent in their practices. It reproduces their own perceptions, experiences, and interests and thus also their prejudices and biases. They tend to produce dystopias, which look as if they were a critique of the current world (as a unique world), but this critique is limited because they are self-referential to the author’s mainstream culture. This heritage also transmitted stories normalizing primitivism, eugenics, scientific racism, and associated reinforcing fascist constructs (Santesso, 2014). The works still do not show alternatives and discriminate other’s possibilities. Likewise, these trends tend towards a distortion orientation to the future, either through the transformation of our world through technoscience or uchronias where historical processes continue, where domination, exclusion, and social injustice are often the norm. At the level of futures, science fiction has been used as a vehicle to foster new possibilities and scenarios; an example is around the Ocean futures, in particular the future of fisheries (Merrie et al., 2018), and to learn to tell science stories (Nature, 2018). Meanwhile, some engineering education experiences have included science fiction works like the ones mentioned above in their pedagogical and learning processes by creating narratives (Almanza-Arjona et al., 2020). In addition, they use particular cultural and philosophical references, with dystopia being a common element in the engineering-futures relationship (Segall, 2002, 2007). Notably, cases in Nanotechnology (Berne & Schummer, 2005), Chemical Engineering (Derjani-­ Bayeh & Olivera-Fuentes, 2011), and Computer Science (Bates et  al., 2012) are found in the education process of engineers, particularly in the United States. Additionally, a particular area of research that has used science fiction is the social studies of science and technology. In particular, the reflections and analysis of the social construction of technoscience have nurtured the discussion through the relationship between technology, engineering, and politics (Surmeli, 2012). Thus, referring to the critique of science fiction for its burden of a hegemonic culture leads us to problematize this form of creation. Therefore, it is critical to explore sub-­ genres beyond cyberpunk as a hegemonic movement in creative scenarios. In this case, technology has proven to be a factor of exclusion and marginalization in speculative worlds.

17.3 Solarpunk: From Everyday Dystopia to Co-created (e)Utopias Art and technology have a fundamental role in creating other possible worlds, always had, and will continue to have. Speculative fiction is a tool for sharing stories around technology, engineering, and socio-technical relationships, especially technological (e)utopias (Misseri, 2017). Thus, from an emerging vision linked to the

230

J. D. Reina-Rozo

ecological paradigm, we can escape the dichotomy between technophilia and technophobia (Benítez, 2017). Solarpunk is an aesthetic, philosophical, and activist movement that emerged at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century in Brazil in response to the dystopian pessimism of other creative endeavors. This movement creates speculative worlds where social ecology (Bookchin, 1996), democratic technology (Mumford, 1964), alternative energy are vital for well-being. Solarpunk, likewise, is defined as a revolt of hope against technology-based despair. Solarpunk, then, is a rebellion against the structural pessimism in our ultimate visions of how the future is being produced (Solarpunk Anarchist, 2016). The term was coined through a blog called Republic of the Bees1 on 27 May 2008, inspired by a new “Beluga Skysail” technology to utilize the wind to supplement the travel of cargo ships to reduce their energy expenditure. Thus, this aesthetic of optimism emerged as an alternative to the Steampunk movement, based on steam technology and Victorian aesthetics. It thus complements other science fiction themes such as Dieselpunk, Cyberpunk, and Uchronicism. Therefore, it is called upon to inspire ethical-political action through an eco-futuristic aesthetic; in Sylva’s (2015) words, counter-cultural hope. According to Reina-Rozo (2021: 58), Solarpunk is a movement characterized by “the creation of speculative worlds where social ecology, democratic technology, and solar, wind, and tidal energy are crucial elements for collective well-being that surpass the capitalocene and its roots in social inequality and the extraction and burning of fossil fuels.” We can trace one of the the beginning of Solarpunk to Sultana’s Dream, a short story published in The Indian Ladies’ Magazine, Madras (India) by Begum Rokeya, a Muslim woman in 1905. Despite not distinguishing itself as a Solarpunk work, Rokeya’s work has elements of art, technology, and sovereignty from a feminist perspective (Rokeya, 2005). At the publishing level, the first call for Solarpunk-oriented writings in a language other than English (the hegemonic language in science fiction literature) was launched in 2011. In 2013, the first collective book with nine stories entitled “Solarpunk  - Histórias ecológicas e fantásticas em um mundo sustentável” (Solarpunk  – Ecological and Fantastic Stories in a Sustainable World) was published in Portuguese (Lodi-Ribeiro, 2013). Meanwhile, in parallel, a process of definition and construction begins through the Internet, passing through references in magazines like WIRED, websites like Tumblr or The Conversation, events in cities like Portland (United States), Barcelona (Spain), or Berlin (Germany), to Universities, as in the case of Arizona State University. Adam Flynn, a researcher and artist, launched a small text around the notes towards a manifesto for Solarpunk (Flynn, 2014). The latter is considered a seminal text, which allows the movement to expand. Since then, several resources and works have been created around this genre, from a video tutorial on how to make a solarpunk story by Max E. Westfall and a few anthologies, including Wings of Renewal: A Solarpunk Dragon Anthology (Arseneault & Pierson, 2015); Viral Airwaves (Arseneault, 2015); Mars trilogy (Robinson, 2015); Sunvault: Stories of Solarpunk and Eco-Speculation (Wagner & Wieland, 2017); Glass and Gardens: Solarpunk Summers (Ulibarri, 2018) and one around feminist science fiction stories revolving around the bicycle Biketopia:

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

231

Feminist Bicycle Science Fiction Stories in Extreme Futures (Blue, 2017). In addition to these literary works, primarily anthologies, Eschrich and Miller (2018) edited the book The weight of light: A Collection of Solar Futures from the Center for Science and Imagination at Arizona State University, which brings together women writers and, additionally, academics who analyze each of the stories in the book. In addition to literary anthologies, story exchanges have emerged around Solarpunk (“Solar Punk Exchange”, 2018); comics, such as Opening into wings (Wilson, 2019); zines such as Optopia A solarpunk zine (Optopia, 2019), Solarpunk as Fck, OBSOLETE, among others; illustrations and collaborative groups through various digital platforms. Recently, Solarpunk has gained momentum in diverse scenarios of both professionals and citizens enthusiastic about technology and its possibilities. On the one hand, collectives of makers/hackers are dissecting their actions and reflections towards the materialization of practical experiences in various places, a couple of cases are: firstly, Ellery Studio in the city of Berlin (Germany), with the Solar Punk Festival (SPF) in 2018 and the Solar Punk Futures project, which brings together “scientists, researchers, and visual thinkers to investigate the energy transition from a solar punk perspective” (Holleran, 2019: 56). The second was the workshop “Solarpunk and solidarity economies//Intro.” The intersection of solidarity economies and live coding was raised as a critical perspective on blockchain and encrypted protocols (Luna, 2020). This action took place in Bogotá (Colombia) in 2020 in the middle of the Bogotrax Festival. The other setting where it is taking on an analytical boom is in academia. Although, this genre has been a matter of reflection since 2015, Kujawski’s work has been seminal in media studies and its relationship with ecology. Likewise, this author raises the concept of technological poets to refer to the people inscribed in this cultural movement (Kujawski, 2015), allowing us to think about alternative forms of engineering and technology. New social implications will have to be reviewed. Other areas of interest have been comparative literature, mainly through the analysis of four anthologies (described above) through the concept of social ecology and posthumanism (Schuller, 2019). Meanwhile, the humanities analyze the formal, semiotic, and aesthetic dimensions of existing solar technology and the kinds of fantasies and imaginaries that such technology facilitates (Williams, 2019). Finally, the Solarpunk artistic and cultural movement has sparked scholarly interest in sustainability as the pedagogical possibilities of the Utopia that the movement represents (Johnson, 2020).

232

J. D. Reina-Rozo

17.4 A Dialogue Between Solarpunk and Afrofuturism as the Decolonization of the Production of Future Alongside Solarpunk, future creations have emerged in recent years based on the challenges humanity faces, climate change; this has given rise to Climate Fiction (Cli-fi) and Anthropocentric Fiction. Some of the Cli-fi anthologies are Everything Change An Anthology of Climate Fiction I (Milkoreit et al., 2016) and II (Dell & Eschrich, 2018). Likewise, Indigenous Science Fiction emerges as a narrative process to put the voice, words, and cosmology of the diverse indigenous peoples in the world (Dillon, 2012). However, this movement also has criticisms, especially around the lack of diversity of its authors and the inclusion of elements outside the anthropocentric vision. Thus, zines such as Omenana (2017) and critiques by Rob Cameron focus on the still missing relationship between Afrofuturism and Solar Punk (Cameron, 2019a) and Social Justice as a technology of survival (Cameron, 2019b) contribute to the plurality of this movement. In this way, Afrofuturism as a counter-cultural construction originating from Africa and the African diaspora presents several elements for integrating plural and decolonizing visions of the future, particularly of being, knowing, and power from the African descendants (Thomas, 2000, 2004). Dery (1994) coined the term Afrofuturism in the anthology Flame Wars: The Discourse of Cyberculture. In it, Afrofuturism is defined as speculative fiction “that addresses African American themes and deals with African American concerns in the context of 20th-century technoculture, and more generally, African American signification that appropriates images of technology and a prosthetically enhanced future” (1994: 180). Thus, beyond a science fiction genre, Afrofuturism is constituted as a “broader aesthetic movement encompassing a diverse range of artists in different genres and media, united by their common interest in projecting black futures derived from Afrodiasporic experiences” (Yaszek, 2006: 42). In this march, other authors such as Alondra Nelson have made this movement an emerging path of critical research. In particular, using different media types beyond conventional servers and websites such as www.afroturism.net have systematized authors, academics, musicians, and artists and broadened this movement to other audiences. One of these examples is the “Crash Course in the History of Black Science Fiction” by Nisi Shawl (2016) that explores 40 black science fiction works. However, this production of the future, for the most part, tends to project the everyday prejudices of the societies that participate in its imagination and writing, as can be seen in the work of Delany (2000), entitled Racism and Science Fiction. In the development of science fiction as a literary genre after the Second World War, most of the production still presents people of African descent as silenced and relegated to the margins of technology’s political and social action (Yaszek, 2006). Thus, this aesthetic, social, political, and also technical movement not only reclaims the history of the past (in this case of the Afro-descendant diaspora) but, more precisely and more profoundly, “reclaims the history of the future” (Yaszek, 2006: 47).

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

233

Fig. 17.1  Solarpunk and Afrofuturism timelines. (Source: Author)

Afrofuturism and Solarpunk, then, are vehicles for the contra-production of future(s). Re-signifying not only science fiction as a space for the contestation of imaginaries of the future but also engineering praxis and its education in particular. These artistic movements could generate alternatives for producing, repairing, and appropriating technologies and innovations for other futures. Futures that must question the different kinds of (e)utopias and uchronias inherited from alien contexts, linked to the “industries that produce the future,” institutions whose actions have been around (i) big science, which generates data from the past to predict the future, (ii) big corporations, which finance scientific research and act in the direction of capital accumulation, and (iii) global media, which disseminate this science-­ corporate narrative around the world (Eshun, 1999). The next figure shows the main elements in the genres creation and diversification (Fig. 17.1): How to generate alternatives from design and engineering? To answer this question, Afrofuturism can dialogue with Critical Design sharing various elements and focusing some of their visions around the cultural, social, political, and ethical implications of emerging technologies (Dando et al., 2019). Therefore, design from the lenses of science fiction (Afruturist and Solarpunk) can materialize in what Paulo Freire called Critical Praxis (1974: 66), “a reflection and action directed at structures that need to be transformed.” Engineering and design are spaces of cultural, aesthetic, and philosophical contestation and dispute. Experiences such as the engineering design (Winchester et al., 2018) and prototyping exercises with Harlem youth (Dando et al., 2019) express and offer spaces for an emergent dialogue between “the world as it is and the world that could be” (Gutiérrez 2008, cited in Dando et al., 2019: 4). As a result, such practical initiatives present experiences to rewrite/rethink our shared futures in engineering and technology, which can go beyond neoliberal STEM (Weinstein, 2016).

234

J. D. Reina-Rozo

17.5 Discussion and Future Agendas Imagination, then, is a mechanism by which, through speculation, we can transform our collective present and future. Philosophical, literary, and cultural movements such as the Solarpunk and Afrofuturism offer both reflections of the past and emergencies for possible futures confronting systems of oppression. These movements allow spaces for rediscovery, redefinition, reinvention, and reclamation of the future(s). In conclusion, socio-technical systems such as technology can be “hacked and rewritten” (Jennings & Fluker, 2020). In this way, these movements provide aesthetic and epistemological frameworks for creative and critical practices (Dando et al., 2019). Some elements to complement these efforts are the concepts of conviviality (Barkin, 2019; Illich, 2015), which posits the possibility of creating cordial worlds, and communality (Esteva, 2015) as a collective process of transformation from the traditional cultural ones linked to territories. Therefore, Solarpunk and Afrofuturism have a crucial place to integrate their vision, creativity, art, and aesthetics to the alternatives to development or the significant transitions that are consolidated from diverse geographies. Thus, the pluriverse (Kothari et al., 2019) is a conceptual place that houses transformative initiatives from the world’s peoples and can nourish the Solarpunk and Afrofuturist movement from many perspectives. For Cameron (2019a), the arc of history does not naturally bend towards justice. Neither does the trajectory of science fiction. Both must be bent. One of these examples is the Maree and Imarisha’s work, titled Octavia’s Brood Science Fiction Stories from Social Justice Movements (2015), where they compiled a set of stories about justice from organizers and activists, envisioning new worlds all the time. One of these conceptual initiatives and climate justice struggles is energy sovereignty, which refers to “projects and political visions towards a just generation, distribution and control of energy sources by mobilized communities on an ecological and cultural basis” (Del Bene et al., 2019: 178). This struggle for energy sovereignty occurs in urban and rural settings aiming for just energy transitions as an alternative to private and public renewable energy macro-projects focused on supplying energy to international markets and large-scale mining operations. Krenak (2019) offers us a perspective for postponing the end of the world through decolonizing our ways of relating to the world. One of them is technology, reflecting on which activities we should continue and which we should not. One of its essential elements is energy and its influence on life to return to ourselves and our relationship with nature. The Solarpunk Manifesto can be a first step towards thinking about other possible and livable futures, which was translated based on the work of The solarpunk collective (2019). This manifesto was published at the beginning of 2020 on the Regenerative Design website. Finally, I would like to close this text with questions that open an essential space to continue on this path of thinking of other engineering and technology towards some (e)utopias from the South. They are based on Dery (1994: 180), as he questions: Can a community whose past has been deliberately

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

235

erased and whose energies have subsequently been consumed by searching for legible traces of its history imagine possible futures? Is not the future owned by the technocrats and futurologists who have designed our collective fantasies unreal? Funding  This work was developed thanks to the Art, Technology, and Ancestry 2020 Research Grant from the Instituto Distrital para las Artes, IDARTES of the Mayor’s Office of Bogotá, Colombia; and the support of TRAJECTS Senior Research Fellowship at Technische Universität Berlin in 2022.

References Almanza-Arjona, Y. C., Garcia-Rivera, B. E., & Membrillo-Hernandez, J. (2020). Writing Sci Fi stories: A pedagogic challenge. In IEEE global engineering education conference, EDUCON, 2020 – April (pp. 1728–1734). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON45650.2020.9125279 Arseneault, C. (2015). Viral airwaves. Incandescent Phoenix Books. Arseneault, C., & Pierson, B. (Eds.). (2015). Wings of renewal: A Solarpunk dragon anthology. Incandescent Phoenix Book. Badami, M. (1976). A feminist critique of science fiction. Extrapolation, 18(1), 6–19. https://doi. org/10.3828/extr.1976.18.1.6 Baofu, P. (2009). The future of Pust-human engineering. A preface to a new theory of technology. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Barkin, D. (2019). Conviviality. In A. Kothari, A. Salleh, A. Escobar, F. Demaria, & A. Acosta (Eds.), Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary (pp. 136–139). Tulika Books. Bates, R., Goldsmith, J., Berne, R., Summet, V., & Veilleux, N. (2012). Science fiction in computer science education. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 161–162). https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157184 Benítez, J. M. (2017). Steps towards an ecological technology, beyond technophilia and technophobia. In A. A. Ré & A. Berti (Eds.), Tecnología, política y cultura: Arte/literatura/diseño/ tecnologías (pp. 89–98). National University of Cordoba. https://ffyh.unc.edu.ar/editorial/wp-­ content/uploads/sites/5/2018/02/ACTAS_FILO_2017.pdf Berne, R. W., & Schummer, J. (2005). Teaching societal and ethical implications of nanotechnology to engineering students through science fiction. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 25(6), 459–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467605283048 Bloch, E. (1986). Das Prinzip Hoffnung. In The principle of hope (3 vols, pp.  1938–1947). MIT Press. Bloch, E. (2000). Geist der Utopie (1918). In The spirit of utopia. Stanford University Press. Blue, E. (Ed.). (2017). Biketopia: Feminist bicycle science fiction stories in extreme futures. Microcosm Publishing. Bookchin, M. (1996). The philosophy of social ecology. Black Rose Books. Bould, M., Butler, A., Roberts, A., & Vint, S. (Eds.). (2009). The Routledge companion to science fiction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203871317 Broderick, D. (1995). Reading by starlight: Postmodern science fiction. Routledge. Brown, A.  S., & Logan, B. (2015). How fiction puts the science in engineering. Mechanical Engineering, 137(02), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2015-­Feb-­1 Burnam-Fink, M. (2015). Creating narrative scenarios: Science fiction prototyping at emerge. Futures, 70, 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.12.005 Cameron, R. (2019a). In search of Afro-Solarpunk, part 1: Elements of Afrofuturism. En Science fiction. https://www.tor.com/2019/10/29/in-­search-­of-­afro-­solarpunk-­part-­1-­elements-­of-­afrofuturism/

236

J. D. Reina-Rozo

Cameron, R. (2019b). In search of Afro-Solarpunk, part 2: Social justice is survival technology. En Science fiction. https://www.tor.com/2019/10/30/ in-­search-­of-­afro-­solarpunk-­part-­2-­social-­justice-­is-­survival-­technology/collective Cheng, H., & Yi, N. (2016). Dissolvable tattoo sensors: From science fiction to a viable technology. Physica Scripta, 92(1), 013001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-­8949/92/1/013001 Curtis, C.  P. (2005). Rehabilitating utopia: Feminist science fiction and finding the ideal. Contemporary Justice Review, 8(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580500082507 Dando, M.  B., Holbert, N., & Correa, I. (2019). Remixing Wakanda: Envisioning critical Afrofuturist design pedagogies. Proceedings of FabLearn, 2019, 156–159. https://doi. org/10.1145/3311890.3311915 Del Bene, D., Soler, J.  P., & Roa, T. (2019). Energy sovereignty. In A.  Kothari, A.  Salleh, A. Escobar, F. Demaria, & A. Acosta (Eds.), Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary (1st ed.). Tulika Books. Delany, S. (2000). Racism and science fiction. In S.  Thomas (Ed.), Dark matter: A century of speculative fiction from the African diaspora (1st ed., pp. 383–397). Warner-Aspect. https:// archive.org/details/darkmattercentur00thom/page/n9/mode/2up Dell, A., & Eschrich, J. (Eds.). (2018). Everything change: An anthology of climate fiction (Vol. I II, 1st ed.). Arizona State University. https://climateimagination.asu.edu/everything-­change-­vol-­2/ Derjani-Bayeh, S., & Olivera-Fuentes, C. (2011). Winds are from Venus, mountains are from Mars: Science fiction in chemical engineering education. Education for Chemical Engineers, 6(4), e103–e113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2011.08.002 Dery, M. (1994). Flame wars: The discourse of Cyberculture (1st ed.). Duke University Press. Dillon, G. (2012). Walking the clouds: An anthology of indigenous science fiction. In Sun tracks: An American Indian literary series (1st ed.). The University of Arizona Press. Eschrich, J., & Miller, C. A. (Eds.). (2018). The weight of light: A collection of solar futures (1st ed.). Arizona State University. https://csi.asu.edu/books/weight/ Eshun, K. (1999). More brilliant than the sun: Adventures in sonic fiction (1st ed.). Quartet Books. https://archive.org/details/morebrillianttha00eshu/page/n5/mode/2up Esteva, G. (2015). Para sentipensar la comunalidad. Bajo el Volcán, 15(23), 171–186. Feeney, I. E. (2019). Ciencia Digna: The Latin American movement for a “Pueblo-centric” science. Science for the People Magazine, 22(1). https://magazine.scienceforthepeople.org/ vol22-­1/ciencia-­digna-­latin-­american-­movement-­pueblo-­centric-­science/ Fleischmann, K.  R., & Templeton, T.  C. (2008). Past futures and technoscientific innovation: The mutual shaping of science fiction and science fact. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 45(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ meet.2008.1450450345 Flynn, A. (2014). Solarpunk: Notes toward a manifesto. In Hieroglyph. https://hieroglyph.asu. edu/2014/09/solarpunk-­notes-­toward-­a-­manifesto/ Freire, P. (1974). Pedagogy of the oppressed (1st ed.). Seabury Press. Fritzsche, A., & Dürrbeck, K. (2020). Technology before engineering: How James Bond films mediate between fiction and reality in the portrayal of innovation. Technovation, 92–93, 102080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.05.006 Galeano, E. (2013). Para que sirve la Utopia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iqi1oaKvzs. Accessed 8 Oct 2021. Ghilardi, G., & Accoto, D. (2014). Post-human and scientific research: How engineering carried out the project. Cuadernos de Bioética, XXV(3), 379–386. https://www.redalyc.org/ pdf/875/87535786003.pdf Hamilton, C. (2013). Earthmasters: The dawn of the age of climate engineering (1st ed.). Yale University Press. Holleran, S. (2019). Putting the brakes on dystopia: Speculative design, solarpunk, and visual tools for postulating positive futures. Ecologia Política, 57, 56–61. https://www.ecologiapolitica. info/?p=12177 Illich, I. (2015). The conviviality (1st ed.). El Rebozo.

17  Science Fiction and Engineering: Between Dystopias, (E)Utopias, and Uchronias

237

Jennings, J., & Fluker, C. (2020). Forms of future/past: Black Kirby Afrofuturism and the visual technologies of resistance. Primera. Johnson, B.  D. (2011). Science fiction prototyping: Designing the future with science fiction. Synthesis Lectures on Computer Science, 3(1), 1–190. https://doi.org/10.2200/ S00336ED1V01Y201102CSL003 Johnson, I. (2020). “Solarpunk” & the pedagogical value of utopia. Journal of Sustainable Education, 23(April). http://www.susted.com/wordpress/content/ solarpunk-­the-­pedagogical-­value-­of-­utopia_2020_05/ Kendal, E. (2015). Utopian visions of “making people”: Science fiction and debates on cloning, Ectogenesis, genetic engineering, and genetic discrimination. In P. Stapleton & A. Byers (Eds.), Biopolitics and utopia: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 89–117). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137514752_5 Kepler, J. (1634). Somnium, seu opus posthumum De astronomia lunari. Frankfurt. Kothari, A., Salleh, A., Escobar, A., Demaria, F., & Acosta, A. (Eds.). (2019). Pluriverse: A post-­ development dictionary. Tulika Books. Krenak, A. (2019). Ideas to postpone the end of the world (1st ed.). Siesta Collective. Kujawski, G. (2015). Uma Breve Introdução ao Estudo da Estética Ecomidiática. MATLIT: Materialidades Da Literatura, 3(1), 39–53. https://doi.org/10.14195/2182-­8830_3-­1_3 Lodi-Ribeiro, G. (Ed.). (2013). Solarpunk  – Ecological and fantastic stories in a sustainable world. Editora Draco. https://editoradraco.com/produto/ solarpunk-­historias-­ecologicas-­e-­fantasticas-­em-­um-­mundo-­sustentavel/ Luna, O. (2020). Solarpunk and solidarity economies//Intro. In Bogotrax. http://bogotrax.xyz/ js_events/solarpunk/ Maree Brown, A., & Imarisha, W. (2015). Octavia’s brood science fiction stories from social justice movements. AK Press. Martínez, L. (2020). Utopia no Es Una Isla|Catálogo De Mundos Mejores (Primera). Episkaia. https://traficantes.net/libros/utopia-­no-­es-­una-­isla Merrie, A., Keys, P., Metian, M., & Österblom, H. (2018). Radical Ocean futures-scenario development using science fiction prototyping. Futures, 95, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. futures.2017.09.005 Milburn, C. (2008). Nanotechnology in the age of Posthuman engineering: Science as science fiction. In Nanovision (pp. 19–58). Duke University Press. Milkoreit, M., Martinez, M., & Eschrich, J. (2016). Everything change: An anthology of climate fiction (1st ed.). Arizona State University. https://climateimagination.asu.edu/everything-­change/ Miller, C. A., & Bennett, I. (2008). Thinking longer-term about technology: Is there value in science fiction-inspired approaches to constructing futures? Science and Public Policy, 35(8), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234208X370666 Misseri, L. (2017). Technology and utopia: The utopian author as political designer. In A. Berti & A. A. Ré (Eds.), Tecnología, política y cultura: Arte/literatura/diseño/tecnologías VII Coloquio de Filoosofía de la Técnica (pp. 47–56). National University of Cordoba. Mumford, L. (1964). Authoritarian and democratic technics. Technology and Culture, 5(1), 1–8. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3101118 Murphy, G. J. (2009). Eutopia. In The Routledge companion to science fiction. Routledge. Nature. (2018). Editorial. Learn to tell science stories. Nature, 555, 141–142. https://doi. org/10.1038/d41586-­018-­02740-­5 Omenana. (2017). Omenana 10. Okada Books. https://omenana.com/2017/09/17/ omenana-­issue-­10/ Optopia. (2019). Optopia – A Solarpunk Zine. https://issuu.com/optopia/docs/optopia_final_copy Parrinder, P. (2009). Robots, clones and clockwork men: The post-human perplex in early twentieth-­century literature and science. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 34(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1179/174327909X421452 Perkowitz, S. (2016). Science fiction: Boldly going for 50 years. Nature, 537(7619), 165–166. https://doi.org/10.1038/537165a

238

J. D. Reina-Rozo

Reina-Rozo, J. D. (2021). Art, energy and technology: The Solarpunk movement. International Journal of Engineering, Social Justice, and Peace, 8(1), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.24908/ijesjp. v8i1.14292 Roberts, A. (2006). Science fiction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203454657 Robinson, K. S. (2015). Mars trilogy. Harper Voyager. Rokeya, B. (2005). Sultana’s dream and Padmarag: Two feminist utopias. Translated with an introduction by Barnita Bagchi. Penguin. Sanders, S. (2008). The philosophy of science fiction film. The University Press of Kentucky. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/3577 Santesso, A. (2014). Fascism and science fiction. Science Fiction Studies, 1(41), 136–162. https:// doi.org/10.5621/sciefictstud.41.1.0136 Schmeink, L. (2016). Biopunk dystopias: Genetic engineering, society, and science fiction. Liverpool University Press. Schuller, W. (2019). “Evolution takes love:” Tracing some themes of the Solarpunk Genre (Master of Arts). Queen’s University Kingston. http://hdl.handle.net/1974/26518 Segall, A.  E. (2002). Science fiction in the engineering classroom to help teach basic concepts and promote the profession. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(4), 419–423. https://doi. org/10.1002/j.2168-­9830.2002.tb00727.x Segall, A. E. (2007). Science fiction in engineering instruction: The final frontier? 5. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.588.1147&rep=rep1&type=pdf Shawl, N. (2016). A crash course in the history of black science fiction. http://nisishawl.com/ CCHBSF.html. Accesed 22 Nov 2021. Solar Punk Exchange. (2018). In solar punk exchange. https://solarpunkstoryexchange.tumblr.com/ Solarpunk Anarchist. (2016). What is Solarpunk? At Solarpunkanarchists.com. https://solarpunkanarchists.com/2016/05/27/what-­is-­solarpunk/ Surmeli, H. (2012). Examination the effect of science fiction films on science education Students’ attitudes towards STS course. Procedia  – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1012–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.771 Sylva, R. (2015). Solarpunk: We are golden, and our future is bright. In Sci Fi Ideas. www.scifiideas.com/writing-­2/solarpunk-­we-­are-­golden-­and-­our-­future-­is-­bright/ The Solarpunk Collective. (2019). A Solarpunk Manifesto. In Regenerative design. http://www. re-­des.org/a-­solarpunk-­manifesto/ Thomas, S. (Ed.). (2000). Dark matter: A century of speculative fiction from the African diaspora (1st ed.). Aspect. Thomas, S. (Ed.). (2004). Dark matter: Reading the bones (1st ed.). Aspect. Ulibarri, S. (Ed.). (2018). Glass and gardens: Solarpunk summers. World Weaver Press. Wagner, P., & Wieland, B. C. (Eds.). (2017). Sunvault: Stories of Solarpunk and eco-speculation. Upper Rubber Boot Books. Weinstein, M. (2016). Critiquing and transcending STEM. Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 63–72. https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/jaste/article/ view/26828 Williams, R. (1978). Utopia and science fiction. Science Fiction Studies, 5(3), 203–214. Williams, R. (2019). ‘This shining confluence of magic and technology’: Solarpunk, energy imaginaries, and the infrastructures of Solarity. Open Library of Humanities, 5(1), 1–35. https://doi. org/10.16995/olh.329 Wilson, S. (2019). Opening into wings. https://mazarbor.tumblr.com/post/187129671372/ opening-­into-­wings-­2019-­a-­comic-­about Winchester, W.  W., Al-Jaroodi, J., & Carlsen, R.  W. (2018). Afrofuturism: Catalyzing a pathway to more inclusive engineering design. In 2018 CoNECD  – The collaborative network for engineering and computing diversity conference. https://peer.asee.org/ afrofuturism-­catalyzing-­a-­pathway-­to-­more-­inclusive-­engineering-­design Yaszek, L. (2006). Afrofuturism, science fiction, and the history of the future. Socialism and Democracy, 20(3), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/08854300600950236

Chapter 18

“The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World Stanley C. Kranc

Abstract  Who in the past made those choices that shape the technologically dominated world of today? No one voted to build superhighways, to market robot room vacuums, or generate nuclear power. Yet as individuals in society, we find ourselves situated with and paying for these entities, either now or later. Other innovations are always already on the way. Is “progress” simply a consequence of some technological imperative? Not surprisingly, the cultural response to the distinctly uneasy relationship we have with our technology has been to create mythic projections. This chapter explores the economic and techno-science fiction in Robert Sheckley’s Cost of Living, a very short story from 70 years ago with considerable relevance to human existence in the technologized world of today and tomorrow. Keywords  Economic science fiction · Inauthenticity · Technological mediation

18.1 Introduction: Selling the Future During the 1964 World’s Fair, Isaac Asimov (1964), wrote a piece for The New York Times entitled, “Visit to the World’s Fair of 2014”. He predicted exciting innovations that might be seen in that future event and his prescience was impressive. But consider how new technology was presented at the World’s Fair in 1964. Exhibits like the General Motors Futurama, projected a future all neatly planned and designed. In this reprise of the original Futurama, an immensely popular exhibit at the 1939 World’s Fair, visitors saw “progress through technology”. These two fairs (1939 and 1964) bookend an era of visionary designers: Lowey, Dreyfuss, Fuller, and Bel-Geddes. Advances in technology would make life easier and the future brighter. Electric appliances were in: stoves, vacuum cleaners and washing

S. C. Kranc (*) University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_18

239

240

S. C. Kranc

machines. Labor-saving was a selling point, along with social status. Asimov was not the only individual making predictions, of course. At about the same time, another science fiction writer, Robert Sheckley, no doubt also aware of technology on the horizon, put his thoughts, projections—and many questions—into his writing. Consider his short work, “Cost of Living” that appeared in his first anthology, Untouched by Human Hands (1954). The story opens with the head of a household, Mr. Carrin, preparing to meet with a representative of a large conglomerate, Avignon Electric (AE), which competes with Castile Motors in a society dedicated to production and consumption. The Carrin family loyally shops at the AE store, regularly buying the latest items to replace or upgrade previous purchases. In fact, they have not even tried out all of their newest acquisitions. Carrin will meet with a Mr. Pathis concerning personal finance, as he needs to reconfigure his indebtedness to the company, owing quite a lot more than he can possibly earn during his lifetime working at his routine, production-­line job. Yet he feels pressured to buy more goods from the company, which always promises the new and exciting (in reality, often banal and unnecessary improvements). He fervently believes that his family needs these material goods; to make their many purchases he agrees to commit a portion of his child’s future income. After all, his son, Billy, will inherit this technological treasure trove someday. Why then should his son not also be in debt for part of the cost of purchase? Thus, the father willingly consigns these future earnings for purchases that he makes today, depreciating goods that may not even survive him. By the way, in the eventuality that all of the boy’s future income were to be insufficient, Carrin learns that he can go to the next generation to commit his future grandchildren’s income. Robert Sheckley, 1928–2005, was a major science fiction author in the latter half of the last century. His story, “Cost of Living” is as timely today as it was 70 years ago. At first glance the story barely qualifies as science fiction. Set in a future that could be the present, it involves devices easily within reach of present technology— some are even currently available. Although it is difficult to say how much his background influenced this work, Sheckley was a keen observer of the social and cultural milieu in the United States. His story offers an opportunity to examine this vision, especially as it relates our own present and future. But this is not to reminisce; the association of this story with the Zeitgeist is especially important for the present discussion. Broadly interpreted as a unique human talent, technology has become an undeniable driving force of the modern social structure and arguably improves many aspects of everyday life. Making predictions about a technologically enhanced future has become a commonplace. Science fiction then creates an important avenue for an understanding of the societal attitudes towards techno-science and engineering (Older & Pirtle, 2021). Today, “Cost of Living” is frequently characterized as just an amusing satire— which it is—but it is also a story worth a closer reading. Beyond satire, Sheckley’s story can be read, not as an anti-technological rant or polemic, but as a cautionary tale. Significantly, this telling relates to the influence of technology in daily life by examining the questions: what is the cost of living in a technologized world, where each innovation comes with potential burdens and benefits manifested in the future?

18  “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World

241

Furthermore, who designs this future and who decides what progress will bring about? Addressing these questions will necessarily involve an excursion of sorts— through several important ideas from economic and social theory, consumer psychology, and especially developments from the philosophy of technology. Moreover, when explored as allegory, the story connects with current and historical events. However, what is presented here is one reading of Sheckley’s work of fiction. As the author, he is in no sense obligated to employ or even remain consistently focused on any particular theme or theory from these disciplines. To be clear, Mr. Carrin’s story is Sheckley’s to tell.

18.2 Mr. Carrin’s Predicament The World’s Fairs influenced expectations for life in the mid-century United States. The 1939 Fair was created under the direction of Robert Moses, a planner who went on to become a dominant political force in the city. However, the Bureau of International Expositions denied him approval for the 1964 Fair (Gordon, 2006). Undeterred, he pushed forward with his plans, which produced a decidedly commercial environment for the Fair. Once again, the dreams of the future were all in one place, with desires created right inside the exhibits. Sherryl Vint (2014, p. 95) points to the important similarities between the World’s Fairs as “optimistic visions of a technologized future” and the projections of technology in science fiction. The first task then is to understand Mr. Carrin’s situation. It is not difficult to envision Carrin and his family living in a version of the model cities projected at these Fairs, for instance Democracity in 1939. Or, with aspects of the 1964 Fair owing in part to Walt Disney, perhaps living in the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow (EPCOT), constructed a few years later in Florida. No matter where his family lives, the social environment creates a dilemma for Mr. Carrin. Sheckley’s Everyman is locked in an endless cycle of work and consumption. Despite his overwhelming current commitments, he desires even more material goods, always already on the way (and almost already dated). In making these purchases, he binds his family to the future he envisions for them. What forces drive consumption for the Carrin family? The answer begins with the economic principle of “supply and demand”: as price of goods and services increases so does supply, while consumer demand for goods and services decreases as the price increases (these two relationships are often presented graphically). Some elementary economic models posit a formal structure wherein the intersection of these relationships corresponds to an implied (but dynamic) market equilibrium. Simply put, economic value is determined when supply equals demand. A grasp of Mr. Carrin’s situation requires some additional concepts from the philosophy of technology. Andrew Feenberg (2003) develops structural modeling for the presence of technology in society through bivariate relationships: one dimension describing technology as autonomous or under human control. The second dimension describes technology as value-neutral or value-laden. The four

242

S. C. Kranc

socio-­technological domains that result from this analysis present important (and much debated) contrasts. Feenberg labels these as: Determinism (value-neutral, autonomous) Instrumentalism (value-neutral, human control) Substantivism (value-laden, autonomous) Critical Theory (value-laden, human control) For Mr. Carrin, any notion that technology is value-neutral seems unrealistic and furthermore his choices are neither rational nor efficient. Carrin is firmly situated in the domain of Substantivism, a system that produces his desires and generates the means to fulfill them. According to Feenberg’s Sixth Paradox of Technology, here “the means are the ends” (2010, p. 8). To further understand the economic consequences of Carrin’s situation, consider the work of Karl Polanyi (1944), comparing economic substantivism with formalism. Polanyi describes the substantivist domain as an “embedded” condition: exchanges are conducted within prevailing social context (provisioning), rather than developing a rational market equilibrium (derived from scarcity). At‌‌ ‌a‌ ‌pivotal‌ ‌moment‌ ‌in‌ ‌the‌ ‌story,‌ ‌Billy‌ ‌Carrin‌ ‌asks‌ ‌his‌ ‌father‌,‌ ‌“How‌ ‌come‌ ‌I‌ ‌have‌ ‌debts, ‌sir?”‌ ‌‌‌Feenberg‌ ‌offers‌ ‌an‌ ‌insightful‌ ‌speculation that seems appropriate here. He writes,‌ ‌“Perhaps‌ ‌technologies,‌ ‌like‌ ‌bank‌ ‌notes,‌ ‌have‌ ‌a‌ ‌special‌ ‌way‌ ‌of‌ ‌containing‌ ‌value‌ ‌in‌ themselves‌ ‌as‌ ‌social‌ ‌entities” (2003, p. 4). Following this concept, ‌technology‌, ‌like‌ ‌money, has an ‌‌exchange‌ ‌value, ‌but‌ is ‌not‌ ‌necessarily‌ ‌tied‌ ‌to‌ ‌an‌ ‌intrinsic‌ ‌‌utility‌ value (Marx, 1999). Consider the s‌ upply‌‌and‌‌demand‌relation as it applies i‌ n‌ ‌the workplace: ‌Mr.‌ ‌Carrin‌ ‌earns‌ ‌‌units‌ ‌of‌ ‌technological‌ ‌exchange‌‌ ‌by‌ ‌working‌ ‌as‌‌ much‌ ‌as‌ ‌he‌ ‌can.‌ However, ‌this corporate ‌system (AE) can‌ control ‌the‌ ‌demand‌ ‌side‌ ‌of‌ ‌the‌ ‌workplace ‌by‌ ‌setting‌ ‌the‌ ‌rate‌ ‌of‌ ‌exchange‌ according to the ‌overall‌ ‌supply‌ ‌of‌ ‌labor ‌and‌ ‌production‌ ‌planning, ‌based‌ ‌on‌ ‌corporate‌ ‌interests. ‌And‌ ‌this‌‌ ‌is‌ ‌‌part‌ ‌of‌ ‌Mr.‌ ‌Carrin’s‌ ‌predicament: beyond‌ ‌basic‌ ‌subsistence‌ ‌requirements‌ ‌he‌ also ‌has‌ ‌inherited‌ ‌debt, ‌a‌ ‌fact‌ ‌of‌ ‌life‌ ‌for‌ ‌those‌ ‌born‌ ‌into‌ ‌Sheckley’s‌ ‌technologized‌ ‌world‌ of economic science fiction. Mr. Carrin’s ‌ability‌ ‌to‌ ‌satisfy‌ ‌his‌ ‌desires‌ ‌is‌ ‌limited‌ ‌to‌ ‌what‌ ‌is‌ ‌left‌ ‌over—if‌ ‌anything—after‌ ‌his debt‌ ‌and‌ his ‌subsistence‌ ‌needs‌ ‌have been satisfied. When‌‌ ‌he‌ ‌enters‌ ‌the‌ ‌marketplace‌ ‌to‌ ‌acquire‌ some desired innovation‌, ‌the‌ ‌medium‌ ‌of‌ ‌barter ‌for‌ this provisioning activity ‌is‌ ‌once‌ ‌again‌ ‌Feenberg’s‌ ‌technological‌ ‌unit,‌ ‌and‌ ‌here‌ ‌‌again‌‌ an exchange‌ ‌value‌ ‌is‌ ‌realized‌ ‌rather‌ ‌than‌ ‌any‌ ‌utility‌ ‌value.‌ ‌In‌ ‌the‌‌ supply‌ ‌and‌ ‌demand‌ relationship applying to consumption,‌ ‌the‌ ‌system ‌‌now‌ ‌controls‌ ‌the‌ ‌supply‌ ‌side‌,‌ ‌the company charging‌‌whatever‌‌they‌‌wish and‌‌managing production to optimize profit. ‌In‌ ‌fact,‌ ‌any‌ ‌increase‌ ‌in‌ ‌demand‌ ‌from‌ ‌individual‌ ‌consumers‌ ‌likely ‌shifts‌ ‌the‌ ‌supply‌ ‌curve‌ ‌up,‌ ‌to‌ ‌generate‌ even ‌more‌ ‌revenue.‌ ‌However, ‌Carrin‌ ‌desires‌ ‌more‌ ‌technology‌ ‌units‌ ‌than‌ ‌he‌ ‌can‌ ‌possibly‌ ‌acquire‌ ‌with ‌the‌ ‌exchange‌ ‌value‌ ‌he‌ ‌has available, ‌so‌ ‌the‌ ‌company‌ ‌allows‌ ‌him‌ ‌to‌ ‌buy‌ ‌on‌ ‌credit,‌ by‌ ‌‌monetizing‌ ‌Billy’s‌ ‌future‌ ‌labor. This newly created “debt” manifests as excess production (some of which sits wastefully unattended at Carrin’s house). Carrin knows what he is doing; the corporate enterprise is not really cheating, just manipulating him. With the proviso that his desires are not constrained by his

18  “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World

243

purchasing power, Carrin is locked into a sort of debt bondage reminiscent of the method of credit formation used in the past by logging and mining companies. In fact, “money” as such is barely mentioned, having been reduced to the level of technological scrip. Neither is the role of any government apparent (except for taxes)— legal contracts exist between AE and Carrin. Incidentally, Mr. Pathis mentions that his company was in part responsible for the governing laws.

18.3 Averageness Carrin lives embedded in a pervasive, substantivist system mediated by technology and economics: he labors and consumes with values determined by irrational desires rather than utilitarian needs, but certainly in circumstances beyond his control. He aspires to see himself as average, the condition of the “they”, a term that Heidegger (2008, p. 163) uses for the societal mean, here represented in advertising and subtle hints from the AE representative. Carrin is trapped in a Heideggerian, “inauthentic” existence (2008, p. 166), in a system that dictates both the goal and the means to achieve the goal. Rather than developing any form of economic equilibrium however, the inevitable endpoint for this system will be an unsustainable condition, in part due to this dual prescription but also because this system is based on an uncertain future. And what is Carrin’s place in this world; how is his subjectivity constituted? Asle Kiran (2015) points out that subjectivity arises from embeddedness: in practical applications technological mediation both “enables and constrains”. Whether or not the Carrin family actually uses their acquisitions in any normal or intended manner matters little, since for them mere possession equates to status. In his postphenomenological philosophy of technology, Ihde (1990) identifies this ambiguity of artifact utilization as multistability. Explicating Ihde’s theory, Peter-Paul Verbeek inquires, “how artifacts mediate the way reality can be present for people” (2006), and develops his praxis-perception model that applies here. For Carrin, the value that attaches to the family’s material artifacts determines the gap between their status and that of the average (“they”). Heidegger (2008, p. 164) calls this measure distantiality. By simply looking at the sum of their possessions then, Carrin can see how far away the family is from average (the company will help in this task, if needed). To reduce this distance, he must procure more material goods than he currently has, an action which the corporate system equates to his labor, (and the future labor of his son). Existence in this “world technologized” values both human effort and objects with the same unit, leveling the distinction between them. Extending Ihde’s concept of technological mediation, Gertz (2018) describes a special kind of existence: a nihilism-technology relationship. Here a human subject like Carrin is constituted by seeing the reflection of his existence in his technological artifacts and his productive efforts, compared to average. Gertz calls this “herd networking.”

244

S. C. Kranc

18.4 Consumer Psychology If the task of attaching values to material items is completed for Carrin, then where do his desires originate? Within his social environment he is constantly exposed to persuasive (rather than informational) advertising—just like the “progress” projected at the World’s Fairs in the twentieth century, or the subtle power of familiar slogans in the media of that era: “Better things for better living through chemistry” (DuPont), “I have seen the future” (General Motors Futurama), “We bring good things to life” and “Progress is our most important product” (General Electric). The forces that bind Carrin to his existence derive from persuasive advertising (a form of technology) intended to create demand. The desires he develops are artificially implanted (e.g. a larger television will be needed to see more of what will be desired). Although Carrin thinks he is providing for his family, he lacks any rational basis for specific items. Roger Crisp (1987) analyzes this situation: Carrin’s ultimate desire is for acquisition and accumulation—and at a second level he develops desires to satisfy his material desires. Moreover, his life and that of his children have been extended through medical advances, providing even greater opportunities for consumption. It might be argued that Carrin is exploited, but he readily traded all semblance of personal autonomy to become a “cog in the machine” (Crisp describes this consumer as “automatonous”, i.e. robot-like, possibly the victim of subliminal advertising).

18.5 Societal Implications A popular cartoon character at the World’s Fair in 1964 was Reddy‌‌Kilowatt‌‌, originally ‌ created to‌ ‌sell‌ ‌consumers‌ ‌on‌ ‌electric‌ ‌appliances (and to teach use thereof).‌ ‌But‌‌all‌‌this ‌technology‌‌takes‌‌power—quite a lot of power. The wide-spread adoption of electrical power resulted from social decisions, guided by engineering research to some extent, but ‌that power ‌is‌ ‌not‌ “‌too‌ ‌cheap‌ ‌to‌ ‌meter‌”, as‌ originally‌ ‌promised (Wellock, 2016). Although it ‌could ‌be‌ ‌argued‌ ‌that‌ ‌power‌ ‌utilized‌ ‌today‌ ‌ultimately‌‌ benefits‌ ‌the‌ ‌future—‌perhaps‌ ‌even‌ ‌more‌ ‌than‌ ‌the‌ ‌present—no matter how it is generated, waste products are created and must be stored (in one form or another), into the future. However,‌ ‌should‌ ‌future‌ ‌generations‌ ‌then‌ ‌be‌ ‌burdened‌ ‌with‌ ‌hazardous‌ ‌waste,‌ ‌resulting‌ ‌from‌ ‌power‌ ‌consumption‌‌ today?‌ Carrin’s family simply accumulates and “stores” stuff (so the corporate entity does not have to). Who really needs a towel that also shaves? Who needs an automatic bartender or a robot vacuum cleaner? And who needs waste in their backyard? In many ways, Carrin’s story resembles that of Jack and the Beanstalk: In an exchange conducted before he gets to market, Jack trades the family cow for magic beans, persuaded by the promise of gains: more valuable material possessions in the future. This action is not without consequences however. Although everything eventually works out for Jack, the beanstalk now lies rotting—waste

18  “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World

245

in his backyard. Like the tale of Jack and his magic beans, Sheckley’s story can be read as a cautionary allegory with broad social implications. Such warnings are given often enough; Sheckley just puts this rather well—asking the reader to weigh the true costs and benefits of innovation‌. Here‌is t‌ he‌‌tension‌‌between‌‌a‌‌better‌ ‌life‌ ‌and‌ ‌frivolous‌ ‌consumption: questioning ‌the‌ ‌true‌ ‌costs‌ ‌and‌ ‌benefits‌ ‌of‌ ‌‌technological‌ ‌innovation‌—‌where‌‌ ‌‌innovation‌ ‌means‌ ‌something‌ ‌new,‌ ‌not‌ ‌necessarily‌ ‌something‌ ‌useful. Understanding these social implications requires a more nuanced reading of Sheckley’s story. Another allegory to examine: Carrin projects his present into the future by borrowing from it. Ultimately, what does Carrin actually own? Here, “Cost of Living” reads as an economic version of Faust. Only the bargain is with the future generation—having already sold his own value, Carrin simply initiates an intergenerational monetization. In effect, he has exchanged the only thing he has left, his ability to produce future workers. ‌He ‌projects‌‌his‌‌‌presence‌‌‌‌into‌‌ ‌the‌ ‌future‌‌ by‌ ‌borrowing‌ ‌from‌ ‌it. As Althusser and Brewster (2001, p. 121) say: “individuals are always-already interpellated subjects”. Billy has been called: he has been thrown into the system. But it is not that people simply become machines. Rather, a new Faustian bargain: why sell just your soul when you can also sell the souls of your children? This is not simply a social decision for the present but instead a preordained trajectory for the future—where no equilibrium can be achieved. In this social nightmare, where the father’s debt shifts into the future and burdens everyone—even unborn progeny—the justification of a better life in the future “degenerates” into an economic nullity. A turn from individual to broad social concerns regarding technological and corresponding economic mediation changes the nature of the underlying questions. Implicit in Sheckley’s story: who actually organizes the world of the worker-­ consumer? Is this a technocracy: a society where engineers and scientists make rational (“efficient”) decisions, from the background? Consider that the rise of the automobile culture corresponding to the Federal Interstate Highway System in the United States began close to the time Sheckley was writing. Superhighways meant getting from here to there fast. General Motor’s Futurama (and the later Powerama) were now realized. But who made the decisions regarding network construction— how many lanes would be available and where access would be located? These decisions, made in the past, greatly affect today in the sense that our travel is not only facilitated but also constrained by the design of the system. Even the automobile itself was shaped by the system; think of the “need” for tailfins, so obviously required for the proper image of the system function. Roads and cities are not built spontaneously, especially when self-driving cars are anticipated.

246

S. C. Kranc

18.6 Who Decides for Us? Although‌ ‌engineers‌ ‌and‌ ‌techno-scientists‌ ‌may‌ ‌suggest‌ ‌and‌ ‌justify‌ ‌their‌ ‌solutions‌ ‌to various‌ social ‌challenges, there seems ‌little‌ ‌to‌ ‌indicate‌ ‌that‌ ‌decisions‌ ‌to‌ ‌proceed‌ ‌occur‌ ‌in‌ ‌this‌ ‌arena. Bernard Stiegler (1998, p.  12) refers to these participants as “technicians in the service of power.” ‌Politics‌ ‌at‌ ‌the‌ ‌corporate‌ ‌or‌ ‌national‌ ‌level‌ ‌drive‌ ‌such‌ ‌decisions‌ ‌and‌‌ ‌not‌ ‌necessarily‌ ‌with‌ ‌regard‌ ‌to‌ ‌utility value.‌‌ ‌In‌ ‌corporate‌ ‌enterprise,‌ ‌the‌ ‌system‌ ‌evolves‌ ‌in‌ ‌a‌ ‌manner‌ ‌to‌ ‌optimize‌ ‌gain‌ ‌rather‌ ‌than‌ ‌efficiency.‌ ‌‌Designing,‌ ‌planning‌ ‌for‌, ‌and ‌‌enabling‌ ‌a‌ ‌particular‌ ‌future‌ ‌is‌ ‌not‌ ‌the‌ ‌same‌ ‌as‌ ‌bringing‌ ‌it‌ ‌into‌ ‌existence‌ ‌by‌ ‌fiat. If not technocrats, ‌who then‌‌‌organizes‌ ‌Sheckley’s‌ ‌world‌ ‌of‌ ‌the‌ ‌worker-­consumer? Expanding on this question a bit, who establishes the society in which all Mr. Carrins can become “automatonized” by forces that simultaneously create their desires and then make for them what should be rational decisions.‌In‌‌the‌‌past, ‌industrialists‌ ‌such‌ ‌as‌ ‌Henry‌ ‌Ford—who might even be considered a ‌practitioner‌ ‌of‌ ‌technocratic‌‌principles—took things much further. In particular, one of Ford’s endeavors resonates with Sheckley’s story: Fordlandia (Grandin, 2009). This was to be an enterprise located in the Amazon region to produce rubber, needed for car tires. Here, workers would labor within the confines of a prefabricated industrial installation, while constrained by strict rules controlling their lives, including identical houses. Instead of technocracy, Ford put forth his hegemonic vision. Beyond parallels to Jack and the Beanstalk or Faust, Sheckley’s story reveals an obvious kinship to Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), itself an indictment of Fordism: a world where laborers, managers, and even engineers working on future technologies, all exist as “cogs in the machine”; earning a living to consume what they produce. ‌‌Workers‌ ‌in‌ ‌the‌ ‌Ford‌ ‌automotive plants‌ ‌were‌ ‌encouraged‌ ‌not ‌to‌ ‌spend‌ ‌on‌ ‌trinkets‌ ‌but‌ ‌rather‌‌ buy‌ ‌consumer‌ ‌goods,‌ ‌appliances‌ ‌and‌ ‌cars—specifically,‌ ‌his‌ ‌Model‌‌T: “it will be so low in price that no man making a good salary will be unable to own one” (Ford, 1922). Here, Ford articulates his notion of exchange value, equating material artifacts with labor through total integration: a work force manipulated to buy the cars they produce (along with the highways driven on). P ‌ rojecting‌ ‌and‌ ‌creating‌ ‌the‌ ‌future‌ ‌is‌ ‌always‌ ‌alive‌ ‌and‌ ‌well‌ ‌in‌ ‌the‌ ‌corporate‌ ‌sector,‌ ‌a‌ ‌consequence‌ ‌of,‌ ‌as‌ ‌‌ Vint‌ ‌puts‌ ‌it,‌ ‌“the‌ ‌manipulative‌ ‌conflation‌ ‌of‌ ‌profit‌ ‌with‌ ‌progress‌” (Vint, 2014, p. 95). Especially‌ ‌so,‌ ‌when‌ ‌the‌ ‌exchange‌ ‌is‌ ‌not‌ ‌valued‌ ‌for‌‌ utility‌ ‌but‌ ‌rather‌by desires,‌‌generated by ‌advertising.‌In contrast to a society constituted by well-meaning technocratic paternalism, Carrin lives and works in a structure of corporate feudalism demanding his allegiance with attendant loss of autonomy. As Stiegler (1998, p. 24) observes, “the human of the industrial age is dependent on the technical system, and serves it rather than making it serve itself”. Thus, allegorical readings of Sheckley’s story explore the original question: what does it cost to make a living in a technologized world? But now the question applies in broad perspective to society rather than the individual. And, bringing this q‌ uestion to the present, ‌who‌‌defines‌‌progress‌‌for‌‌us? Inherent in this reading is an ambiguous, “direction-of-fit” issue: the actions enabled by technology create the social

18  “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World

247

environment, while societal pressures simultaneously alter the manner in which technologies are employed. The larger implications of the relationship between technology and society inevitably bring to the fore the debate regarding technological determinism as opposed to the social construction of technology. A comprehensive discussion of these issues is not possible here; however a brief return to focus on the concept of embeddedness will prove especially relevant. Embeddedness applies not only to economic and technological realities shaping the individual. Broadly construed, this notion relates to decision-making and valuations shaping the social environment, again by “enabling and constraining” (Kiran, 2015). The development of a highway system serves as an excellent example. Here then is an expanded definition for “technologized”: the social structure is itself reflexively constituted, embedded in its own technological enterprise.

18.7 The Imagination of Progress Discussions of progress need not imply “technology out of control”, however. The perception of progress results from the attachment of social values to the products of technology. As Feenberg (2010, p. 10) observes in articulating his Eighth Paradox of Technology, “values are the facts of the future”. Do technological decisions affecting social progress also create a form of social indebtedness that transfers forward in time? An affirmative answer seems obvious. At present, laws regarding intergenerational passage of economic debt for individuals vary, but how national debts are transferred is highly problematic. Similarly, choices regarding technological activities conducted in the present can produce world-altering residuals (e.g. radioactive waste, climate change) as an unwanted burden—an international technological debt. Eventually, this debt will come due and must be resolved. Simply put, as a remedy should we apply social thinking to the adoption of technology or should we apply technology to social problems? The first option aligns with moving from Substantivism toward Critical Theory in Feenberg’s (2003) analysis discussed previously: a shift towards technological systems under human control where rational choices produce the linkage for means and ends. Actions taken under the second option would resemble Weinberg’s notion of the “Technological Fix” (1966), tied closely to technocratic decision-making but without much consideration of democratic principles. He suggests: “if people want more water, one gets them more water rather than requiring them to reduce their use of water”. Making arguments that resonate with the broader message of Sheckley’s story, however, Oelschlaeger calls Weinberg’s “Fix” a myth, in that it “rests on assumptions that it is more efficacious to engineer technological solutions to social problems” (1979, p. 47).

248

S. C. Kranc

18.8 Echoes from Popular Culture Back in Carrin’s world: it seems likely that his employer is Avignon Electric, but what exactly is his job, to which he drives in a 300-MPH car? He tests washing machines as they pass by on an assembly line. Like George Jetson, the animated, “digital index operator” appearing on television first in 1962 (Hanna  & Barbera, 1962), his job is pushing buttons. Last year’s models just beeped, but the new models actually say something. However, Carrin does not like standing at the assembly line pushing buttons, the epitome of a mind-numbing, unskilled task (Plotnick, 2018). Popularized by Kodak in one of the most successful advertising campaigns ever (“just press the button, we do the rest”), button-pushing is a simple binary decision that provides the illusion of autonomy. ‌Likewise, ‌the AE‌‌finance‌‌agent, Mr. Pathis, has a job that ‌involves‌ ‌pushing‌ ‌buttons,‌ ‌only‌ ‌he‌ ‌pushes‌ Mr. ‌Carrin’s‌ ‌buttons,‌ enticing ‌him‌ ‌to‌ ‌increase‌ ‌his‌ ‌indebtedness‌ ‌by‌ ‌comparing‌ ‌his‌ ‌consumption level‌ ‌to‌ ‌that‌‌to one of‌his ‌neighbors, living in an identical house, ‌just down‌‌the‌‌street. Coincidentally,‌ ‌one‌ ‌of‌ ‌Carrin’s‌ ‌proposed‌ ‌purchases‌—one of his desires yet to be satisfied—will‌ ‌eliminate the burden‌ ‌of‌‌ pushing‌ numerous ‌buttons‌‌ ‌around‌ ‌his‌ ‌house,‌ ‌by reducing‌ ‌everything‌ ‌to‌ ‌the‌ ‌“one-touch”.‌ Gertz (2018) calls this the “‘leisure-asliberation’ paradigm of technological design”. In this technologically advanced society, why are humans pushing buttons? Why not have all labor relegated to a robot work force—isn’t this the goal of engineering—to reduce human effort? Such was the plot of “The Brain Center at Whipple’s”, a Twilight Zone episode, staring Robbie the Robot of Forbidden Planet fame as the robot boss (Serling, 1964). Unsurprisingly perhaps, Fordism provides the answer. In legendary exchange with Walter Reuther, the head of the United Auto Workers, a Ford executive suggested that workers could be replaced by robots in the future. Reuther’s response was to point out that robots would not be purchasing automobiles (O’Toole, 2011). If Carrin himself has become automatonized, as Crisp says (1987), why would corporations invest their capital in robots?

18.9 Conclusions Did Henry Ford and his fellow industrialists design the world from which Robert Sheckley wrote his speculative story 70 years ago? And who today, living in the realization of that world, will plan the future for the next generation? Beyond 3-D printing, self-driving cars, drone delivery, and voice actuation (to replace button pushing), who knows what tomorrow’s new innovations will be? The technologized world today always already projects tomorrow and constantly updates Sheckley’s story to the present. While predicting a dystopic society is a common theme for science fiction, blaming an alleged technocratic elite, the engineers and scientists responsible for developing material goods, simply will not do. The consequences of

18  “The Cost of Living” in a Technologized World

249

absorbing a technological indebtedness are terrifying—worse than any alien invasion—in the sense that we willingly (and progressively) take it onto ourselves. ‌Sheckley‌ ‌conjures‌ ‌up a‌ ‌world‌ ‌of‌ ‌economic‌ science fiction ‌and‌ ‌temporal‌ ‌paradox with no realistic alternatives. But his world does not simply‌reverse ‌convention, wherein the‌ ‌parent‌ supports ‌the‌ ‌child.‌ ‌What‌ ‌will‌ ‌Billy‌ do‌ ‌for‌ ‌a‌ ‌living?‌ ‌He‌ ‌wants‌ ‌to‌ ‌fly‌‌ to‌ ‌Mars,‌ but ‌that is not ‌likely, even as a stowaway. ‌Billy’s‌ ‌other‌ ‌choice‌ ‌is‌ ‌to‌ ‌become‌ ‌a‌ ‌Master‌ ‌Repairman‌ ‌for‌ ‌those high level‌ ‌appliances‌ ‌that‌ ‌service‌ ‌lesser‌ ‌appliances that have broken down, quite possibly the obsolete ‌junk that he will inherit and still be in debt for. In any case, the future Billy will find himself not simply in debt, but commodified and absorbed into that very same system. Even with life extension, if burdened with debt, how will he ever satisfy his own desires, yet to be developed and advertised in the future? For Billy, becoming a stowaway could offer escape from his debt and personal autonomy regained. The only other choice is suicide, like Carrin’s neighbor down the street. If this is satire it is not funny. The story of Mr. Carrin poses an enduring “question concerning technology”: what is the human condition in a world totally imbued by technology? Carrin thinks he makes choices, in reality he just pushes buttons, like a test animal, trying to get his reward. Not only is Carrin surrounded by “machines for”, his very existence is completely linked to and constrained by these machines, even the potential to escape. But we are going to go to Mars, someday—if we can afford it.

References Althusser, L., & Brewster, B. (2001). Lenin and philosophy and other essays. New York University. Asimov, I. (1964). Visit to the World’s fair of 2014. The New York Times Books. Retrieved from https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/23/lifetimes/asi-­v-­fair.html. 16 Mar 2022. Crisp, R. (1987). Persuasive advertising, autonomy, and the creation of desire. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(5), 413–418. Feenberg, A. (2003). What is philosophy of technology?. Lecture for the Komaba undergraduates. Retrieved from http://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/komaba.htm. 21 Apr 2021. Feenberg, A. (2010). Ten paradoxes of technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 14(1), 3–15. Ford, H. (1922). Henry Ford discusses manufacturing and marketing. Retrieved from https://college.cengage.com/history/primary_sources/us/henry_ford_discusses.htm. 25 Apr 2021. Gertz, N. (2018). Nietzsche, postphenomenology, and nihilism-technology elations. In A. Fritzsche & S. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp. 257–270). Springer. Gordon, J. (2006). The World’s fair. American Heritage, 57(5). Retrieved from https://www.americanheritage.com/worlds-­fair-­1#2. 30 Mar 2022 Grandin, G. (2009). Fordlandia: The rise and fall of Henry Ford’s forgotten jungle city. Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt. Hanna, W., & Barbera, J. (1962). The Jetsons. Hanna-Barbera Productions. Screen Gems. Heidegger, M. (2008). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper Perennial/Modern Thought. Huxley, A. (1932). Brave new world. Chatto & Windus. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld. Indiana University Press.

250

S. C. Kranc

Kiran, A. (2015). Four dimensions of technological mediation. In R. Rosenberger & P.-P. Verbeek (Eds.), Postphenomenological investigations: Essays on human-technology relations (pp. 123–140). Lexington Books. Marx, K. (1999), Capital: A critique of political economy, Vol. I. The process of capitalist production. Marx/Engels Internet Archive (Online Version). Retrieved from https://www.marxists. org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-­Volume-­I.pdf. 15 Jan 2022. O’Toole, G. (2011). “How will you get robots to pay union dues?”, “How will you get robots to buy cars?”. Quote Investigator. Retrieved from https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/11/16/ robots-­buy-­cars/. 26 Apr 2021. Oelschlaeger, M. (1979). The myth of the technological fix. The Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, 10(1), 43–53. Older, M., & Pirtle, Z. (2021). Imagined systems: How the speculative novel Infomocracy offers a simulation of the relationship between democracy, technology, and society. In Z.  Pirtle, D. Tomblin, & G. Madhavan (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy. Reimagining technology and social progress (pp. 323–339). Springer. Plotnick, R. (2018). Power button: A history of pleasure, panic, and the politics of pushing. MIT Press. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Beacon Press. Serling, R. (1964). The brain center at Whipple’s. In The twilight zone, episode 153. CBS. Sheckley, R. (1954). Untouched by human hands. Ballantine Books. Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and time: The fault of Epimetheus 1. Stanford University Press. Verbeek, P.-P. (2006). Acting artifacts: The technological mediation of action. In P.-P. Verbeek & A. Slob (Eds.), User behavior and technology development (pp. 53–60). Springer. Vint, S. (2014). Science fiction: A guide for the perplexed. Bloomsbury. Weinberg, A. (1966). Can technology replace social engineering? The University of Chicago Magazine, 59(1), 6–10. Wellock, T. (2016). ‘Too cheap to meter’: A history of the phrase. U.S.  NRC Blog. Retrieved from public-­blog.nrc-­gateway.gov/2016/06/03/too-­cheap-­to-­meter-­a-­history-­of-­the-­phrase/. 25 Apr 2021.

Chapter 19

Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality Daniel Gihovani Toscano López

Abstract  This chapter presents the thesis that claims that technologies and practices of human enhancement are transformed into an unprecedented biopolitical power over the living, whose objective not only focuses on regulating population processes from a distance but also on the intervention of its own molecular texture. The advance of these unleashes an unprecedented power until they become instruments of power over the living. In order to bring this to fruition, in the first place, we inquire whether the desire to enhance the human being is a new task or if, on the contrary, it is something that has always been accompanying humanity. Secondly, it addresses the specificities that characterize contemporary technology, in general, and the technologies and practices of human enhancement, in particular. This relates to a way to unconceal reality, articulated with a biopolitical power of atomization, molecularization, and fragmentation of living matter. Finally, and thirdly, the characteristic notes of this biopolitics of vitality are revealed, which are evident in artificial human enhancement. Keywords  Human enhancement · Contemporary technology · Molecular biopolitics · Bioeconomy · Biocitizens

This chapter has been written as part of the project “The Device of Human enhancement: a biopolitical perspective in the era of biotechnological colonization of the body,” directed by Professor Daniel Toscano López and funded in the 2019 Initiation FONDECYT call for projects. Fondecyt Initiation N°11190340. D. G. Toscano López (*) Faculty of Medicine, Center for Bioethics/Observatory of Bioethics and Law, Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile, Santiago de Chile © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_19

251

252

D. G. Toscano López

19.1 Introduction Human enhancement is not an exclusive preoccupation of our increasingly technified, globalized societies in which these promises, but also dilemmas, are nested by progressively offering the possibility of designing, manipulating, and completely transforming both human and non-human life. This occurs due to the vertiginous development of life sciences (biology, medicine, genetics) and the mutual leverage among converging technologies (nanotechnology, biotechnology, bioinformatics, and cognitive sciences). Now, the desire and the capacity to self-enhancement are as old as the history of the human being, as they arise from the fact that human life, although “it is given to us, it is not given to us made, but we need to make it ourselves, each one their own” (Ortega y Gasset, 1962, p. 3). The capacities of self-­ knowledge, transcendence, and overcoming of our species as a response to enhance and dominate its natural and social surroundings have been strengthened over millions of years by the work of natural selection: “relatively small changes in genes, hormones and neurons were enough to transform Homo erectus – who could produce nothing more impressive than flint knives – into Homo sapiens, who produces spaceships and computers” (Harari, 2016, p. 45). Nevertheless, the human species in the era of the Anthropocene1 is a geological force capable of globally impacting the planet, possibly competing for DNA and brain structure remodeling between the technical control of its own biological substrate and natural selection. Because of that, the Technosphere2 is now covering the spaces of the Biosphere and the Geosphere. In other words: “tools like newspapers, telephones, cars, television and the computer have covered our lives like different layers of technology which have become just as natural to us as wearing clothes” (Fritzsche, 2010, p. 307).

19.2 Enhancing the Human Being: Old Wine in New Wineskins? Since ancient times human enhancement has been spurred on by conditions of biological underfunding, and lack of organ equipment and instinctive resources which could empower the human being to face the hostile natural environment (cf. Gehlen, 2004). Such human condition of “being deficient” (mängelwesen), whose relationship with its natural environment is that of a radical inability of adaptation, reveals

 Concept coined by the Dutch chemist Paul J. Crutzen in 2000 as a distinctive note of our current era in which the human being has become responsible for the occupation and administration of the Earth in its entirety (cf. Sloterdijk, 2016), see also, (cf. Crutzen & Brauch, 2016). 2  With this term, in 2013, Peter Haff designated a new sphere of the Earth as a globally interrelated autonomous system in which fossil energy plays an important role in turning the Technosphere into a huge CO2 factory. Within this context, human intention stands as a geological force with a strong influence on the development of the Earth’s history (cf. Haff, 2014). 1

19  Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics…

253

both an essential vulnerability of the human being against the natural world and the fact that he constitutes a technical animal. However, it is not that the human being has or possesses a technique, as though it were a barnacle externally attached to it, but rather as something “embodied” on his organism: “it is evident, even in the structure of his sensorimotor life” (cf. Gehlen, 1988). Given the impossibility of adapting to the environment, as non-human animals do, the human has, on the contrary, to adapt the environment to himself (cf. Ortega y Gasset, 2000). That is why technology is the product of his practical and inventive intelligence, as a methodical and organized capacity that, on one hand, allows the construction of a second nature and, on the other, the protects of both internal nature (appetites and impulses) and external nature (threats related to the outdoors, hunger, cold, etc.). Therefore, enhancing the physical and mental capacities of the human being is an old-fashioned task that accompanies humanity in the incessant and unfinished struggle to forge a technical-like supernature that allows for survival and somehow compensates the fact that he is organically helpless (cf. Ortega y Gasset, 2000, p. 324). As a cultural being, the human being has invented and resorted to “social techniques such as education or laws (for moral or mental enhancement), or traditional techniques related to physical exercise, intake of medicinal plants, food customs (for physical enhancement)” (Diéguez, 2017, p. 31). Within the wide spectrum of “cultural prosthetics” the human being has built, we can find writing, science, art, law, among others. With these, the human being has been able to boost his cognitive capacities and, thus, enhance his quality of life. Such an artificial environment or second nature serves as a kind of incubator that drapes our species and, for this reason, man is considered a cultural being, even, from the most elementary level. Unlike traditional and social techniques of human enhancement, contemporary techniques and practices of artificial enhancement seek the domination, redesign, and modeling of life, in such a way that our species might be manipulated genetically, for example. In addition, they also unveil a progressive and secular project that suggests that “it is time to take the course of our evolution into our hands (⋯) Soon we will have the possibility to become designers of our own evolution” (Fraser, 2018, p. 124). For this reason, human enhancement technologies are understood as those that target the normal physical, mental, emotional, and moral human capacities that need to be intervened by techno-artificial means for optimization purposes. Hence, they go beyond the therapeutic realm because they seek happiness, perfection, and the extension of life.3

 The practices of human enhancement can pursue different non-therapeutic goals, for instance: the pursuit of happiness (modifying moods, emotions, cognition through drugs, or manipulating memory to extract saddening episodes out of it); the pursuit of perfection (altering the brain through cognitive enhancement neuropharmaceuticals or manipulating genetics in an attempt to create physically and mentally gifted individuals) (cf. Blackford, 2004); the pursuit of life extension (for example, ageless bodies through the use of tissue engineering, nanotechnology, or other techniques that try to slow down the aging of tissues (cf. Kass, 2003). 3

254

D. G. Toscano López

While the assertion that the current technology-mediated artificial enhancement may resonate some echoes and a fear of a State eugenics4 associated with the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis in the name of race enhancement, the truth is that would be a discontinuous nexus. This means that, although there is a desire for human enhancement at the base in both, the former is articulated with the current bioeconomy of vitality, in addition to the specific knowledge of life sciences and the ideology of transhumanism. The latter is based on the production and economy of death in concentration camps; it is based on an instrumental technical-scientific knowledge, oriented by the goal of a “racial hygiene” of negative sterilization of the weakest; finally, it is based on a racist and dogmatic ideology centered on biological determinism. We consider, then, that the problem of applying human enhancement to an individual or a population does not rely on the desire of enhancement itself, be it therapeutic or meliorative as some authors propose (cf. Sandel, 2009). Instead, the problem relies on these practices and techniques falling into the hands of a totalitarian state for domination and manipulation purposes; on them being interpreted and justified by and for racist ideologies that wield a genetic determinism for their legitimacy, or even, that is used deliberately as a mechanism of power to continue expanding and perpetuating social and economic inequalities.5 In other words, that is what Sloterdijk designates as “heterotechnic”, or the use of technology that “is based on violating and outwitting nature” (Sloterdijk, 2016, p. 13). In this sense, the dreams of a biotechnological reason could produce monsters, not because there is a continuous and invisible nexus that inevitably connects eugenics and human enhancement under the sign of fatality, but, rather, when the technique that must serve the human blurs its essential goal, which is to give wellbeing to the human being (cf. Ortega y Gasset, 2000). The risk occurs when heterotechnic, on one hand, undermines values such as autonomous decision-making, a sense of justice, solidarity, and liberty, and, on the other hand, when it is degrading and enslaving. Along with artificial enhancement technologies, we are currently witnessing a “great planetary experiment” the human being is part of because it is absorbed and transformed unexpectedly when it builds his own biotechnological artificial world. All in all, the biotechnological intervention of human enhancement practices, “is not nature’s denaturalization, but the specific production of a kind of nature” (Mendiola, 2006, p. 53). For that reason, this “techno-biopolitical lab6” that targets  The difference between Galton’s classical eugenics -established in 1883  in his work “Human Faculty and its Development,” whose theoretical-scientific interest was to emulate the mechanism of natural selection to find out whether inheritance was manipulable or not (cf. Mukherjee, 2016) and the current human enhancement is Galton’s emphasis on human phenotype or physical features, while artificial enhancement is committed to gene manipulation. Although the Nazis were also interested in genetic manipulation, they did so as a weapon of war to exterminate their enemy; while current enhancement sees genetic engineering technologies as one of several ways to benefit the human species, disregarding race. 5  Nancy Campbell refers to “suspect technologies” as “technologies of which there is reasonable suspicion that their development, deployment, and effects are unevenly distributed, differential, and more likely to be socially unjust than not” (Campbell, 2005, p. 375). 6  See Foucault (1976, 2004). 4

19  Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics…

255

both human and non-human life from the point of view of its molecular texture, has not left immune the action of the human being, which Jonas calls “paradoxical character of the technologically mediated human action,” because modern technology, as a novel occasion, has modified the human action and its effects on its core (cf. Jonas, 1984). Nevertheless, what happens when such technologically mediated actions are modeled, on one hand, within the context of a performance-based, globally interconnected, and interdependent society and, on the other, within artificial enhancement practices that are carried out not only for mere survival purposes, but also to design, manipulate, and model both human and non-human life? At a certain point, would it not just happen that the human being will end up “burning himself” within this “virtuous” circle of human enhancement by pursuing increasingly ambitious goals and falling into a self-referentiality such as that in which Jules Verne’s hero, Phileas Fogg, in Around the World: “In the absence of coal, he begins to tear down the additional wooden structures of the ship itself to feed the steam engine boilers” (Sloterdijk, 2016, p. 11).7

19.3 Unconcealing Contemporary Technology and Practices of Human Enhancement Although practices are “any coherent and complex forms of socially established cooperative human activity through which goods internal to that form of activity are realized in the course of trying to achieve those standards of excellence which are appropriate to it” (MacIntyre, 1981, p.  205); human enhancement consists of a coherent activity as the human being seeks to transcend himself through it since he is not a static entity trying to obtain better results and greater wellbeing. Such enhancement can be carried out naturally by using natural talents and abilities, for example through physical or intellectual exercise, or artificially “by using biological means that directly affect the human body or some aspect of it (⋯) by using biological measures to replace, add or remove some parts of the human body. Such replacement, addition or removal is achieved artificially” (Ida, 2009, p. 61). On other hand, it could also be said that practices of human enhancement are a cooperative activity because different disciplines such as medicine, genetics, and biology partake in them, and they are supported by the scientific ideology of transhumanism.8 Although from the moral viewpoint no consensus legitimizes them,  The translation is mine.  One of the most representative discourses of this deliberate improvement of the human being by technological means is the scientific ideology of transhumanism. Transhumanism is not a creed nor is it a completely homogeneous movement, but it sees in convergent technologies (Nano-Bio-InfoCogno) the possibility that scientific research finally brings to fruition the dreams of an immortality-yearning, computer-minded human reason, as well as “explorations and colonization of distant parts of the universe, or unusual mental and sensory experiences, completely alien to our species, like those that the protagonist of the movie Avatar lives virtually” (Diéguez, 2017, p. 20). 7 8

256

D. G. Toscano López

they are established scientifically and technologically, more than socially. Now, these practices and technologies still suffer from rules and local, national, and international regulatory frameworks. In addition, they also lack what MacIntyre calls models of excellence, which experience-wise, might point out the specific cases and contexts in which artificial enhancement must be limited or not. These models of excellence also recognize that in certain cases there is not enough knowledge to be able to act meaningfully, without causing any harm. Therefore, if there is no way of representing the effect of the action, then we are facing a monstrous effect that we should not assume (cf. Anders, 1988). In any case, the danger of every practice is not the practice itself, but the fact that it is naturalized and unreflectively and uncritically executed without assuming a responsible attitude without discerning the impacts that it might have over the individual and the society. The current biotechnological power, capable of designing and reshaping the human mind, body, and desires, are not arbitrary speculations that feed science fiction, but rather emerging realities that are supported by current developments of biological technologies, cyborg engineering, and the engineering of non-organic beings (Harari, 2016, p. 45). These three biotechnological paths that Harari devises can promote homo sapiens into homo deus in the twenty-first century in the sense of enhancing his capacities and could assert a strong blow for old age, death, and disease. For this author, the commitment to enhancement through biotechnology is possible due to the number of alternatives and technologies that are currently a reality: “We can be quite certain that humans will make a bid for divinity because humans have many reasons to desire such an upgrade, and many ways to achieve it” (Harari, 2016, p. 47). Hence, the question is not whether or not the human being will achieve technological improvement, but rather to think about how practices of human enhancement9 can quickly and completely transform the very structure of the living being. This leads us to ask, from a biopolitical perspective – which also deploys a genealogical horizon – about the new types of subjectivity that, perhaps, technologies of human enhancement are producing. To what extent will the start of the human enhancement apparatus require contemporary human beings to live in environments for which they are not naturally prepared to live? To what extent will the conceptual boundaries that separate the normal from the pathological, the therapeutic from the meliorative, natural selection from artificial selection, the healthy body from the deliberately enhanced body will be erased forever by the design power of genes, cells, enzymes, DNA, RNA, and epigenetic instances? To find out what such technologically mediated practices of human enhancement do, it is necessary to ask about the specific actions they carry out, for which it is essential to take a short tour through the problem of technology. In Heidegger’s essay The Question Concerning Technology, the author refers to it as Gestell, as a structure of imposition or provocation that corresponds to the essence of technology and modern science. For this author, technology is not a

 For a detailed study of human enhancement both at a general and specific level, see: Savulescu and Bostrom (2009). Human Enhancement. Oxford University Press, New York. 9

19  Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics…

257

technical framework and, because of that, “this work is, therefore, neither only a human activity nor a mere means within such activity” (Heidegger, 1977, p. 21), but rather a way of revealing or unconcealing (Entbergen), which draws from the inside out, first, to expose (Darstellen) what lies latent without any ambiguity or taboos, then to take over and take advantage of what is unconcealed, which is production (Herstellen). Consequently, the result of the action of modern technology is that the unconcealed (Bestand) becomes “existence” or a marketable commodity, which turns the world into a repository of available resources. Let us remember that, for Heidegger, one of the main differences between the ancient or artisanal technology, and the modern technology, exemplified in a windmill and a hydroelectric power station, lies in the fact that while the former consists of a concealment process that cares for or shelter: “bring forth hither” (hervorbringen), the latter consists on a sort of unconcealment in terms of a “provocation” or to “demand out hither” that is done to nature (cf. Heidegger, 1977, pp. 14–16). In a scenario of technological complexity such as the current one, where so-called human enhancement technologies proliferate, the problem does not rely on mere survival and conservation of the quality of life; instead, it relies on recreation and self-production of human and non-human life through techno-artificial means. However, what does this biopolitical way to unconceal the current human enhancement technologies consist of? Why does it force the being to reveal himself?

19.4 Human Enhancement as Biopolitics of Vitality In the first place, human enhancement technologies, unlike old and modern technologies, consists of a frantic and systematic transformation of the structure of the living in which the human being is both an actor and raw material of his own Promethean dreams. Contemporary technology atomizes, fragments, and scatters the organism, separating it from its surroundings, with the promise of bringing it back to them with new capabilities and enhanced functions. In contrast to the ancient-artisanal and modern-industrial technologies, contemporary technology has penetrated, colonized, and unconcealed a new infra-empirical and microscopic reality through the power of the convergent technologies, which was an unexplored territory of the genomic components of life (enzymes, DNA, RNA, etc.) 80 years ago. In other words, human enhancement technologies put the future of the human race in their own hands for the first time, something that the human race can model like clay in the hands of a sculptor. Second, the unprecedented power of today’s artificial technology is not only to forcefully demand nature to unleash its energies so that they are accumulated and then distributed, but also to deliberately design and model life, the body, and subjectivity: the creation of a subjectification in which people become “biocitizens,” whose rights over their own biological existence are added to their already existing civil, political, and social rights. In this sense, groups and individuals are mobilized in pursuing social support and claiming their right to access health services which they must know of as “somatic individuals.” They also

258

D. G. Toscano López

need to responsibly manage the implications of their own body and genome. Third, human enhancement technologies do not work in a vacuum, but rather within the context of a bioeconomy in which living organisms are commoditized within the framework of bionetworking made up of biotech companies, laboratories, the pharmaceutical industry, and government entities. The global economy captures the human and non-human living in its networks, in such a way that it is all about a “global commodification of living organisms” (Braidotti, 2013, p. 8). It does so, on one hand, by connecting heterogeneous actors (investing groups and biotechnology companies, pharmaceutical industries, and government agencies at the state or supra-state level), with experts and knowledge from specific contexts, (cf. Sleeboom-­ Faulkner, 2014) and within singular power relationships. Fourth, the objective of the current technique is optimization and performance, which, being leveraged by the strength of biocapital, replaces a purely therapeutic medicine with new forms of consumption. Beyond the rigid boundaries between the normal and the pathological, and health and disease, the new technologies manipulate normality itself: the life of the healthy patient is modified to manipulate life at the molecular, genetic, and cellular levels. Therefore, it is all about conceiving life as incessantly modifiable through biotechnology, which must be understood as “hybrid assemblages oriented toward the goal of optimization” (Rose, 2007, p. 17). Finally, and in the fifth place, the contemporary technique involves, not only a mere “vertical integration of successive machines” (cf. Ellul, 1977) but also a biopolitical power characterized by a rhizomatic configuration of technologies as the result of different and heterogeneous practices such as genetic engineering and nanotechnology, among others. So we are in front of an apparatus or machine10 in constant remodeling, which fulfills a dominant strategic function, similar to the Heideggerian Gestell because it is always out of balance, and for this reason, it is not consistent, it is a set of lines mobiles, instead. When designing and thinking about the possible application of technologies that deliberately and artificially improve individuals considered “normal”, it is suggested that the engineers and technicians in charge of carrying out these innovations reflect upon the importance of setting the goals such innovations are oriented to, making sure that these goals make sense and are socially legitimate. Such a goal could be health or wellbeing, even if it may as well comprise intermediate advantages that contribute to the achievement of a higher intrinsic goal. For instance, if the ultimate goal of enhancement practices is profit, perfection for the sake of perfection, or feeding the mere power of machines, we may experience a thirst for machine accumulation and capitalism. If the ultimate goal of the quest to change biochemistry and reshaping our body and brain is to merely obtain enjoyable and pleasurable sensations, upon their disappearance, human enhancement solutions  An interesting position that affirms that machines are a projection and an imitation of the organic is Kapp’s, for whom making utensils is an essential requirement for reflective thinking and selfconsciousness to emerge in the human being. Hence, artifacts are tools for understanding and adaptation. See: Kapp (2018). Elements of a Philosophy of Technology: On the Evolutionary History of Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 10

19  Unconcealing Contemporary Technology: Human Enhancement as Biopolitics…

259

will enter the frantic race of satisfying emotions and urges that cannot be gratified. In this sense, rather than serving the human being, human enhancement technologies will get him addicted to them. Another important aspect to be considered concerning these technologies is that they must be developed not only within a regulatory framework but also around shared values and rights to access them. Furthermore, to this idea, it is necessary to add the principle of autonomy in the sense that whoever decides on such enhancement should do so in a free and informed manner, since it must not be a technology imposed or carried out by market pressure or by the decision of the State.

19.5 Conclusion It has been argued that artificial technologies and practices of enhancement are erected in a kind of molecular biopolitics that acts by intervening in the intimate structure of life, in the unconcealing of which such technologies are capable of designing and constructing new materialities, technical-scientific objects, and subjectivities. The current biopolitics complements its power of management and administration of the living from a government of individuals and populations with the governance of biological systems regarding cells, molecules, genomes, and genes. Technologies of human enhancement are not exhausted in the knowledge of the ill man, nor are they limited to getting organisms to overcome their pathological condition, but they aim to transform the molecular structure of the living being. In other words, they are not mere therapeutics, but technological activities with the power to intervene in life in its “normal development” for empowerment purposes. For this reason, to solve the moral problem that using practices of human enhancement implies, it is still somewhat naïve to maintain at all costs the wall that separates the sharp distinction between the therapeutic and the meliorative, because, after all, no matter what shape it adopts, it will be part of the new territory colonized by molecular biopolitics.

References Anders, G. (1988). Wir Eichmannsöhne. Verlag C. H. Beck oHG. Blackford, R. (2004). Humanity enhanced. Genetic choice and the challenge for liberal democracies (basic bioethics). MIT Press. Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Polity Press Ltd. Campbell, N. (2005). Suspect technologies: Scrutinizing the intersection of science, technology, and policy. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30(3), 374–402. https://doi. org/10.1177/0162243903261952 Crutzen, P., & Brauch, G. (2016). Paul Crutzen: A pioneer on atmospheric chemistry and climate change in the Anthropocene. Springer. Diéguez, A. (2017). Transhumanismo. La búsqueda tecnológica del mejoramiento humano. Herder.

260

D. G. Toscano López

Ellul, J. (1977). Le système technicien. Calmann-Lévy. Foucault, M. (1976). La volonté de savoir. Histoire de la sexualité. Gallimard. Foucault, M. (2004). Naissance de la biopolitique. Cours au collège de France, 1978–1979. Gallimard – Le Seuil. Fraser, P. (2018). Transhumanisme. Au-delà du corps. Éditions V/F. Fritzsche, A. (2010). Engineering determinacy: The exclusiveness of technology and the presence of the indeterminate. In I. Van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and Engineering. An emerging agenda (pp. 305–312). Springer. Gehlen, A. (1988). Man. His nature and place in the world. Columbia University Press. Gehlen, A. (2004). Die Seele im technischen Zeitalter und andere soziologische Schriften und Kulturanalysen. Vittorio Klostermann. Haff, P. (2014). Humans and technology in the Anthropocene: Six rules. The Anthropocene Review, 1(2), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019614530575 Harari, N. (2016). A brief history of tomorrow. Signal Books, McClelland & Stewart. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. Garland Publishing, Inc.. Ida, R. (2009). Should we improve human nature? An interrogation from an Asian perspective. In J. Savulescu & N. Bostrom (Eds.), Human enhancement (pp. 59–69). Oxford University Press. Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility. In search of an ethics for the technological age. The University of Chicago Press. Kapp, E. (2018). Elements of a philosophy of technology: On the evolutionary history of culture. University of Minnesota Press. Kass, L. (2003). Ageless bodies, happy souls: Biotechnology and the pursuit of perfection. The New Atlantis. Spring, 1, 9–28. MacIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue: A study in moral theory. University of Notre Dame Press. Mendiola, I. (2006). El jardín biotecnológico. In Tecnociencia, transgénicos y biopolítica. Los libros de la Catarata. Mukherjee, S. (2016). The gene. Scribner. Ortega y Gasset, J. (1962). Historia como sistema. Revista de Occidente. Ortega y Gasset, J. (2000). Meditaciones de la técnica y otros ensayos sobre ciencia y filosofía. Alianza. Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton University Press. Sandel, M. (2009). The case against perfection: What’s wrong with designer children, bionic athletes, and genetic engineering. In J.  Savulescu & N.  Bostrom (Eds.), Human enhancement (pp. 71–89). Oxford University Press. Savulescu, J., & Bostrom, N. (2009). Human enhancement. Oxford University Press. Sleeboom-Faulkner, M. (2014). Life assemblages and bionetworking: Developments in experimental stem cell therapies in India and Japan. In Global morality and life science practices in Asia (Health, technology and society). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi. org/10.1057/9781137317407_7 Sloterdijk, P. (2016). Was geschah im 20. Jahrhundert? Suhrkamp Verlag.

Part IV

Engineering Education

Chapter 20

What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is Defined by Engineering Instructors Diana Adela Martin and Eddie Conlon

Abstract  The literature on engineering ethics education highlights the diversity of goals and topics employed in its instruction. The contribution aims to examine the conceptualisation of engineering ethics education in terms of how it is defined and how its goals are articulated. The research is conducted in cooperation with the national accrediting body Engineers Ireland. It is based on interviews with instructors teaching courses self-identified by engineering programmes as having a strong ethical component and evaluators serving on accreditation panels. The main findings confirm the existence of a varied and uneven understanding of engineering ethics education. The study encountered conflicting views and lack of clarity as to what falls under the scope of engineering ethics education, especially when considering the topics of sustainability and safety. In terms of goals, instructors emphasize fostering responsibility, enabling agency and developing broad and critical thinkers, while value sensitive design was found to have a lesser conceptual prominence. The study also found that engineering ethics is preponderantly defined through its connection to engineering practice, rather than in its theoretical dimension. The chapter is envisioned to contribute to debates tracing the conceptual domain of engineering ethics education, given that clarifying educational goals is an important prerequisite for employing and designing consistent instructional methods. Keywords  Engineering ethics education · Learning goals · Macroethics · Microethics · Interviews

D. A. Martin (*) Philosophy & Ethics, TU Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands School of Multidisciplinary Technologies, TU Dublin, Dublin, Ireland e-mail: [email protected] E. Conlon School of Multidisciplinary Technologies, TU Dublin, Dublin, Ireland © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_20

263

264

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

20.1 Introduction There is a diverse conceptualisation of engineering ethics education put forward by dedicated scholars and researchers, representative of broad theoretical approaches such as microethics, macroethics, value sensitive design, virtue ethics or feminism (Martin et al., 2021a). Nevertheless, the reality of the teaching practice points to an uneven conceptualisation of engineering ethics (Colby & Sullivan, 2008; Polmear et al., 2019). The result is a limited understanding of the extent to which the different theoretical conceptualisations of the subject are present in the classroom (Bielefeldt et al., 2016; Mitcham, 2017; Hess & Fore, 2018). This is compounded by the instructors’ lack of familiarity and training in teaching ethics (Walczak et al., 2010; Barry & Herkert, 2014), which risks leading to a limited treatment of ethics that transmits simplistic messages to students (Holsapple et al., 2012). The contribution is part of a broader mixed-methods study conducted in cooperation with the national accreditation body Engineers Ireland that examined the conceptualisation and education of ethics in engineering programmes in Ireland. It aims to examine how engineering instructors in Ireland define ethics education, aiming to situate their understanding of the subject within existing  theoretical debates. As such, the chapter will contribute to the discussion on how ethics teaching is perceived by instructors and the topics that are relevant for courses on Engineering Ethics. We make clear the limitation that other important issues, such as methodological issues of professional ethics teaching, will not be considered in this chapter, due to the magnitude of these topics.

20.2 Background Engineering ethics is a branch of professional ethics, focused on the specific societal role of engineers (Lynch & Kline, 2000). According to Harris et  al. (2009), professional ethics is one of the three categories of morality, alongside common morality and personal morality. It refers to a set of ethical principles adopted by a particular profession qua professionals, and usually instantiated into a body of professional codes.

20.2.1 Definitions of Engineering Ethics In the first report commissioned in the US on the state of engineering ethics, the subject was defined as “dealing with judgments and decisions concerning the actions of engineers (individually or collectively) which involve moral principles” (Baum, 1980, pp.2–3). It studies the decisions, policies, and values that are morally desirable in engineering practice and research (Martin & Schinzinger, 2013). Herkert (2002) considers that the key concept in engineering ethics is “professional

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

265

responsibility”, a concept understood by Whitbeck (1998) as the “exercise of judgment and care to achieve or maintain a desirable state of affairs.” As such, engineering ethics must address questions about ethical principles, rules of practice, justification, good judgment and decision making (Pritchard, 2005). Harris et al. (2009) provide a list of possible outcomes for the education of engineering ethics, such as stimulating the ethical imagination of students, enhancing recognition of ethical issues, facilitating the analysis of key ethical principles, helping students deal with ambiguity, encouraging students to take ethics seriously, increasing students’ sensitivity to ethical issues, increasing knowledge of relevant standards, improving ethical judgement and increasing ethical willpower. Davis (1999) names four goals of engineering ethics education: enhancing ethical sensitivity, increasing knowledge of relevant standards of conduct, improving ethical judgment and enhancing ethical will-power. Devon (1999) suggests broadening the goals of engineering ethics education, from an individual focus to a new approach he labels “social ethics” which aims to make students aware of the “social relations of expertise” in connection with technology management and decision-making. Similarly, Haws (2001) argues that engineering ethics should aim to cultivate students’ concern for public health and safety and help them defend their solutions to ethical problems. Other goals that have been mentioned are taking a stance towards technological developments (Keirl, 2003), empowering students to reshape the social, economic and legal context of engineering practice (Conlon & Zandvoort, 2011), helping students identify which organizational practices can potentially threaten public safety and welfare (Lynch & Kline, 2000), enhance students’ awareness of the social dimension of engineering practice (Martin et al., 2018; Martin et al., 2019) and raising awareness of how designers implicitly or explicitly inscribe values and modes of use and interaction into their products (Verbeek, 2008). A more detailed description of the goals for engineering ethics education can be found in Table 2 of the literature on engineering ethics education we surveyed in Martin et al. (2021a). The table mentions 12 goals, pertaining to the development of moral sensibility, moral analysis, moral creativity, moral judgment, moral decision-making, moral argumentation, moral knowledge, moral design, moral agency and action, moral character and virtue  development, moral emotional development and moral situatedness (Martin et al, 2021a, p.60). 

20.2.2 Conceptual Models of Engineering Ethics Education According to Herkert (2005), there are two major theoretical frames for engineering ethics education: the microethical approach focused on the individualistic perspective of an agent faced with an ethical dilemma, and the macroethical approach concerned with the collective responsibilities of the profession and societal decision-making about technology. Another popular theoretical approach is value sensitive design, which shifts the focus away from assigning responsibility in situations of crisis to reflection about the values inscribed in technological artefacts at

266

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

the design stage (Verbeek, 2008). The feminist approach is closely aligned with the precepts of value sensitive design (Whitbeck, 1998), by reflecting on the gendered assumptions inherent in technological design and promoting the development of technological artefacts that do not discriminate against the female gender (Michelfelder et al., 2017). It has a common history and agenda with social justice movements, through the focus on ending “different kinds of oppression, to create economic equality, to uphold human rights and dignity, and to restore right relationships among all people” (Riley et al., 2009; Riley, 2013). Finally, virtue ethics is an aspirational theoretical approach, whose focus lies not on the rightness of engineering decisions, actions or outcomes, but on the attitudes or virtues of the deciding moral subjects (Schmidt, 2014; Hillerbrand & Roeser, 2016), thus emphasizing character development (Harris, 2008). These approaches serve as guidance in categorizing how participants understand the discipline of engineering ethics education.

20.3 Methods This contribution is part of the first author’s doctoral study conducted in cooperation with the accreditation body Engineers Ireland, which examined the conceptualisation, implementation and teaching of ethics in engineering programmes in Ireland (Martin, 2020). While the larger study employs mixed methods, the research method for exploring how engineering ethics is defined is qualitative in nature. The research questions that are the focus of this chapter are: RQ1: How is ethics as a subject in the engineering curricula defined? RQ2: What is understood to fall under the scope of engineering ethics education? RQ3: How can these understandings of ethics be subsumed under broader theoretical frames? To address them, we rely on semi-structured interviews with 16 instructors1 teaching ethics content in six institutions whose engineering programmes underwent accreditation between 2017–2019 and 5 evaluators2 serving on the accreditation panels of these programmes (Table  20.1). Given that instructors have the role of Table 20.1  Main demographic characteristics of study participants Demographic Category Gender Age (in years) Specialization

 Abbreviated as L1 to L16.  Abbreviated as E1 to E5.

1 2

Interview participants (n = 21) F: 7       M: 14      non-binary/other 0 60: 3 Engineering: 18   philosophy: 3

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

267

“curriculum workers” (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013), it was important to explore through in-depth interviews how they define engineering ethics education and how their understanding of the subject inform their teaching approach. Evaluators serving on accreditation panels were included due to the significant role their recommendations play in shaping the engineering curriculum. For the interview analysis, we sorted the data into meaningful categories following two coding iterations (Lofland, 2009). While the first coding iteration inspected the interview transcript line by line, enquiring what each item represents and what is an example of, the second coding iteration led to a more analytical organization of the previously identified meanings and examples into themes. The analysis process was recorded in a codebook developed by the first author which included the code theme, its definition that specifies inclusion and exclusion criteria, and examples rendering verbatim the participants’ answers (DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011). As such, a well-documented audit trail of materials was established, which contributed to the reliability of the analysis. To ensure inter-rater reliability higher than 75%, the authors discussed the thematic categories before coding separately the first four interviews. Any discrepancies in coding were discussed, to understand the rationale for opting for different codes, before rechecking for consistency by coding separately a fifth interview. The remaining interviews were coded by the first author.

20.4 Defining Engineering Ethics Exploring the participants’ views on engineering ethics education, a variety of – sometimes opposing– conceptions is revealed. In what follows, we are presenting the major ways in which engineering ethics has been defined, rendered in Table 20.2. Table 20.2  Definition of engineering ethics education (Total = 21) Engineering ethics education is.. about decision-making in complex situations relevant to engineering practice socially embedded character shaping common sense and obvious

Respondents expressing agreement 9 (7L; 2E) 6 (5L; 1E) 4 (L) 5 (4L; 1E) 1 (L)

Respondents expressing disagreement 1 (E) 1 (E) 1 (L) 1 (L)a

This is the same instructor that agrees that ethics is common sense and obvious, as she expressed these two contrasting opinions during the interview a

268

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

20.4.1 Decision-Making in Complex Situations The interviews revealed a strong focus on the decision-making dimension of engineering ethics. Evaluator E5, who took part in the discussions about the introduction in Ireland of an accreditation criterion dedicated to ethics, recounted the description of this outcome given at that time by a representative of the accreditation body of Engineers Ireland. The representative of the accreditation body was said to stress to programme chairs that decision-making is at the core of engineering ethics. More specifically, “what falls within the scope of this programme outcome has everything to do with decisions relating to people, to society and to the environment.” This view is shared by 9 participants, who defined engineering ethics as involving decision-making (L2; L4; L5; L7; L8; L12; L13; E1; E5). In this sense, ethics is conceived to be about confronting dilemmas and making difficult decisions. As instructor L4 claims, “ethics is not about a simple ‘this is right, this is wrong’ answer. Ethical questions are complicated. If it is a simple question, if it is a case of something that is obvious, it is not really an ethical question.” This view is mirrored by instructor L2, who considers that “ethics always comes in when it is a hard decision to make, a difficult decision. If it is an easy decision, I think ethics just does not come into it.” Ethical decision-making is described as “complex” and situated in “grey areas.” The increasingly challenging character of decisions that engineers have to make means that “the more complex the world becomes, the more important ethics is” (L7). Closely linked to the previous conception, we encounter a vision of engineering ethics concerned with ambiguous situations and uncertainty. Decision-making situated in “grey areas” was explicitly mentioned by five participants (L5; L7; L9; L14; L15; E3). According to E3, “engineering is very often about being precise, being black and white, and ethics is about being comfortable with grey.” L5 considers that with ethics, “there is always going to be a grey area and you have to make some kind of decisions,” while L14 states that ethics does not deal with “things that are obviously morally wrong, we are talking about very grey areas.” It is important for ethical decision-making to be “value based” (L8) and considerate of a wide range of “satellite effects” (L10; L15), constricting factors (L7; L9; L14) and stakeholders (L8; L11; L15). Commenting on how the complexity of ethical decision-making is integrated in engineering education, L8 considers that “traditionally and currently, ethics is seen as being something that is just about the right or wrong thing for an individual to do in a non-problematic environment.” According to L8, “engineering educators should make explicit not just the individualistic moralistic point of view.” Although the participants revealed a prevalent view according to which engineering ethics is about decision-making in ambiguous and complex situations, one respondent disagrees, considering that “ethics is about life and death situations” and “in engineering the consequences are not so severe” (E1).

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

269

20.4.2 Connection to Practice Another definition points to the practical nature of engineering ethics, set in opposition to “philosophical” ethics. According to six participants, engineering ethics is less theoretical in nature and strongly linked to practice (L4; L8; L9; L10; L11; E3). This view is best rendered by an instructor with a background in philosophy. L9 describes teaching ethics differently to engineering students than she would teach philosophy students: I am not going to talk about Kant and Aristotle, that is not going to do anything. The way I understand professional ethics is very close to professional practice. So I need to understand how and what engineers are doing, what kinds of devices they will be developing, how they interact with people, whether they are working in big companies or individually, in order to have a sense of what are the actual practical challenges.

She considers that a “cognitive divorce from practice” exists in the education of engineering ethics and is “not sure” if a theory focused instruction would “make engineers more ethical.” The distinction between how ethics is understood and taught by philosophers as opposed to engineers has been described as an important reason why the instructors and the programmes they are part of do not reach out to philosophy departments to collaborate on the implementation and teaching of ethics. L4 explains why the collaboration with a philosopher specialised in the ethics of technologies and science has ended, noting that partly because his presentation was more aimed at philosophers. There was more obvious ethics, and I wanted to give students a background in ethics, but more focused towards things they are likely to experience in work situations […] and trying to make it more practical.

Similarly, L2 does not collaborate with members of the philosophy department “because philosophy sometimes can be not practical enough.” L12 also comments on his department’s decision to forgo a collaboration with the philosophy department, highlighting the difference between the abstract nature of ethics instruction in philosophy education, as opposed to the practical dimension of ethics encountered in the engineering workplace: one option would have been at the extreme end to get our philosophy department to give formal lectures on ethics. We had some very brief discussions about that, but it seemed that they wanted to do a very theoretical sort of ethics, a series of ten lectures and that was it. And we felt that was not the way that it would help our students.

E3 emphasizes the importance for engineering programmes to include the practical dimension of ethics, as opposed to teaching ethics in an abstract way. He thinks that academia and industry “look at ethics completely differently. The academic guys look at ethics very much in the academic sense, referencing, plagiarism, and they talk about responsibility to the environment in kind of abstract terms.” The connection of engineering ethics to practice is traced back to the pervasiveness of ethics (L8, L10, L11, E3). L8 considers that “there are values in anything we do in our engineering practice, embedded in our practice.” L11 states that ethics is

270

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

“imbued across all their activities,” while E3 considers that “ethics permeates everything.” L10 sees the pervasiveness of ethics: everything engineers do has a potentially ethical dimension. They do not have to be a senior manager in Ireland or for a space shuttle to make decisions that have ethical consequences. A very strong example is the medical device industry, where a big percentage of our graduates are working. The work they do every day can have a real impact on the quality of life for people who use these products.

Not all those interviewed agree with the presence of ethical concerns in engineering practice, with E1 stating that “unlike pharmacy,” engineering is “isolated from ethical concerns.”

20.4.3 Social Embeddedness According to four participants (L1, L9, L11; L14), engineering ethics is about including the perspectives and needs of different stakeholders. The rationale is that engineering does not happen in abstracto. More so, L9 emphasizes the social dimension of engineering as a key to understanding the practical character of engineering ethics, given that “ethical practice is part of social dynamics to some extent.” L1 agrees that “a lot of the questioning and the ethics will be looking at something from various sides, from other people’s point of view.”

20.4.4 Character Shaping and Moral Development Six of the participants interviewed discussed the role of ethics education in shaping character (L2; L4; L8; L11; L15; E1). One instructor considers that ethics is not about moralising, while five participants understand engineering ethics education precisely in terms of character development. As such, L8 does not consider his “role as to be moralising or telling students this is right and this is wrong, telling them how to think or what to think.” Nevertheless, E1 disagrees with this view, considering that ethics instructors should be a role model that guides students in their practice through the power of example. According to E1, you need to be ethical in every way, the way you deal with the students, as well as how you deal with the topic, and try to encourage them to deal with it. I suppose you have to practice what you say is about.

L11 considers that engineering ethics education should impact not only the “professional sphere,” but also the “personal sphere.” According to L11, fostering the development of personal virtues affects how one practices engineering. Virtues such as intellectual discipline, intellectual courage and intellectual empathy are woven into everything else that you would do in your professional life in terms of your interactions with all

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

271

of the stakeholders. I see the building of a certain kind of character as an essential part of what we do.

L4 agrees that ethics education can have a transformative role, stating that “I cannot control how students are like personality wise,” but “by broadening their picture, you have some influence on them.” L2 emphasizes the role of motives guiding engineering practice. According to L2, engineering ethics implies making decisions based on the right reasons, and that “doing good deeds is not necessarily a good moral behaviour, because you could be doing good deeds for the wrong reason […] and be legally OK, but morally and ethically wrong.” L15 considers that “the purpose of an education is formation, essentially. So you are forming these young people into being really good engineers.”

20.4.5 Common Sense According to Harris et al. (2009, p.8), common morality is one of the three types of ethics and represents “the set of moral beliefs shared by almost everyone.” L1 is the only participant who points to an underlying common-sense view of engineering ethics that informs education, according to which ethics is “obvious” and “a given.” As L1 explains, we know certain things are good and bad. We have a moral compass of our own that we know what is good and bad. […] There is a common sense approach to some of it [..], so ethics seems to be kind of brushed over to a certain degree as a given. […] Probably because some of it is obvious.

Throughout the interview, while reflecting on some instances of ethical decision-­ making in engineering practice, L1 starts to cast doubt on the view previously expressed, admitting that “maybe, maybe ethics is not as common sense as I think it is.” This change of mind is also reflective of the confusion generated by attempts to define engineering ethics education and what falls under its scope, an issue which we will return to later in the chapter.

20.5 The Scope of Engineering Ethics Education During interviews, we encountered different views about what counts as engineering ethics education (Fig. 20.1), in some cases marked by confusion and disagreement. In what follows we present how the coverage of engineering ethics education, as understood by the participants interviewed, could be interpreted as falling under the major theoretical approaches. Only one participant (L8) explicitly situated his teaching in one of these approaches, as macroethical.

272

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

Engineering ethics education addresses (n=21) Values in design Regulatory and legislation issues Health and safety Ethical theories Societal challenges The perspectives of different stakeholders Professional codes 0

5

10

15

20

Fig. 20.1  The scope of engineering ethics education

20.5.1 Macroethical Scope Ten participants (L4; L6; L8; L9; L10; L11; L12; L13; L16; E3) highlight the need to extend the scope of ethics content to broader societal considerations, including how to tackle grand challenges. Reflecting on current educational practices, L8 considers that this “broader societal understanding of ethics is perhaps slightly deficient or wanting”. L10 emphasizes the role of engineering ethics education in contributing to the betterment of society and addressing the “massive societal challenges ahead,” while also stressing the need for “the engineering profession as a whole in stepping up to that.” L10 considers that preparing engineers to take such responsibilities to heart “begins in education.” According to L10, “ethics is not only about engineers as employees, but as citizens and their responsibilities for far bigger things.” The need for a broad set of responsibilities is highlighted by L13, who considers that one of the discriminators between scientists and engineers is that the engineer must think broader in their solution of a problem. They just do not come up with a numerical value to solve a problem, they have to consider […] any issues that could have an impact on society in general. Coming into all that focus, ethics has a huge role to play.

L12 also emphasizes the inclusion of “a wider picture with a wider group and community that would be affected by the work of engineers.” When describing what falls under the extended scope of engineering ethics education, three main areas of coverage are revealed: sustainability, the societal dimension of engineering and legislation. These coverage areas can “make explicit not just the individualistic moralistic point of view,” as L8 considers.

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

273

20.5.1.1 Sustainability Sustainability is the topic most often mentioned in connection to broadening the education of ethics (L3; L4; L6; L8; L10; L11; L13; L15; L16; E2). Its role is linked with the impact of engineering on the environment and fighting climate change. According to L6, “the responsibility for global sustainability and influencing or not influencing climate change is included in what we do, but it is getting stronger.” The sustainable goals are mentioned by instructors L2, L8 and L16, but also waste disposal and recycling, with E2 considering that “anything you are disposing of would be under the category of ethics.” While we see a strong focus on sustainability in the participants’ interpretation of what type of coverage falls under the scope of engineering ethics education, we also encountered a dissenting opinion. For example, L2 does not consider that ethics is about sustainability, sharing this view also with her students. According to L2, “students do not really understand ethics. I find they get it confused with sustainability or corporate social responsibility and all that kind of things, which is not ethics.” The point is reinforced and questioned later on during the interview, hinting to a diminished expertise. When discussing the challenges encountered while teaching ethics, L2 points to the fact that the students do not always grasp what ethics is and they get it confused with sustainability or doing the right thing for the environment. It is kind of that, but really it is not. So it is challenging trying to get them to understand what ethics actually is. I do not always understand it myself.

Of a different opinion is L4, who also points to the challenge of making students recognize the wider range of issues falling under ethics, but who considers sustainability to be among these. According to L4, “one of the big problems was the students’ ability to categorize something as being ethics.” 20.5.1.2 Societal Dimension of Engineering Another significant coverage area that falls under the scope engineering ethics education refers to the societal dimension of engineering. Ten participants (L1; L6; L8; L9; L10; L11; L12; L13; L16; E4) consider that ethics coverage should include the responsibilities that engineers have towards society and the impact of engineering practice on different stakeholders. According to L8, this can be understood to “incorporate the broader context of the organizational culture and societal culture.” L11 adds that ethics education needs to comprise “the balance of issues around justice and fairness, harm and prevention of harm,” given that “these are significant issues that are going to impact not just the stakeholder you are working for, but the community where that stakeholder is.” For L10, engineering has an impact on the quality of life and growth of society, such that ethics education should address the kind of responsibility of engineers to do with that and also look historically at the correlation between the growth of technology and the growth of energy production with

274

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

s­ tandards of living. […] We can see the historical advances over the last 200 years, and to connect that as a positive ethical achievement.

Several instructors note that ethics education should prompt students to engage with stakeholders in their practice. According to L14, students should tolerate different perspectives because “very few are going to spend the rest of their lives in a lab or in a purely design role, they will progress into some sort of management role, which means they are dealing with people.” For L6, this means tackling dissenting opinions about the societal challenges engineers address, such as climate change, given that the debate and the public is becoming more and more polarised. Engineers have to work in that environment, so they have to be aware of it. Even if some of the extreme views are not consistent with the engineers' own beliefs, they have to be aware that they would come across it.

Stakeholder perspectives and societal considerations are considered pivotal for engineering ethics education. According to L11, “when you are working in engineering, you have to think about all stakeholders,” and ethics education can foster this type of reflection. L8 agrees that the mission of engineering ethics education is to develop “more fit for purpose engineers who can productively engage with society.” Overall, for L13 it helps prepare “a more holistic engineer, who is more conscious of their role in society”. 20.5.1.3 Regulation and Legislation Five respondents consider that engineering ethics education should include regulatory and legislative issues (L7; L9; L10; L14; L16). Such topics are seen to offer students an “all rounded view of engineering management” (L14). According to L9, “it would make sense for engineers to know more about protected disclosures and whistle blowing in terms of the legislative part of it.” Other topics that engineering students would benefit from are rooted in “which legislation do people want to be covered, for example, and […] how much data protection legislation do they actually need to know.” L9 noticed that within an engineering programme “sometimes you get the law and it is totally separate from the ethics, and I think it needs to be integrated because a lot of the ethical questions are around the edges of the legal questions.” L10 considers that the inclusion of regulatory and legal issues could prompt engineers to take a more active role in policymaking. He singles out the medical profession, who “takes a role in advising the governments and in regulating, a much stronger role than the engineering profession has.” Given the “massive societal challenges ahead now with climate change,” L10 favours the inclusion of these topics to prepare “the engineering profession as a whole for stepping up to that. I guess that begins in education.” L6 mentions topics such as “environmental directives,” the “precautionary principle” and the “polluter pays principle” for preparing students to address climate change.

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

275

20.5.2 Microethical Scope The interviews revealed three main areas representative of microethics. These pertain to health and safety, professional codes and ethical theories. 20.5.2.1 Professional Codes Professional codes are a popular topic, included by twelve instructors (L1, L2, L3, L5, L6, L7, L9, L11, L12, L13, L15, L16). Several instructors emphasize the importance of introducing students to the code of ethics from the first year. For L1, “it is worth highlighting to students at an early stage, if they become charter members of Engineers Ireland or members of any of the institution, what they are actually agreeing to do.” L2 agrees and presents Engineers Ireland’s code of ethics “even from the first year. So we are trying to tell them the criteria for just being a good engineer.” Although national code is presented by all participant instructors, three of them also include other professional codes. L6 includes the Irish Engineers Ireland code as well as the American Society of Civil Engineers code, just to show that they have a lot in common. […] What I have tried to give students is a view on what the situation is in a number of different countries, so they are not exclusively based on the way the codes are formulated in Ireland, because we expect them to be able to work anywhere in the world.

While L6’s motivation for introducing students to different ethics codes is cast in terms of the globalization of the engineering workplace, L16 does so in order to frame concrete examples of improper practice and engineering failure. L16 introduced Engineers Ireland's code of practice and also the eight canons of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and we use these to understand and to discuss things that might be really high profile engineering failures, that might violate two different aspects of the code of ethics or where there was fundamentally a lack of understanding.

For a similar reason, L13 introduces “codes of ethics from various professional bodies and how they pertain to the work they are doing.” L15 addresses the rationale for an ethics code to guide engineers’ work, stating that he includes “the more pertinent aspects of Engineers Ireland code, and why Engineers Ireland presents what it presents and why it does what it does, why it exists.” L5 is “looking at the Code of ethics from the point of view of money,” adding that “it is my view that the Engineers Ireland code of ethics is actually quite weak in this area.” L9 looks at the professional codes through the lens of “the ethical governance of the profession.” The approach described by L9 starts with “Engineers Ireland’s ethics code: this is what your profession says, those are the things your profession wants you to be aware of and those are their concerns, and that is what it means in practice.” The code is also seen as facilitating students’ understanding of the

276

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

“concepts or ideas behind it, such as responsibility or accountability or sustainability and client management and consent and then transparency. L3 noticed that students’ reception is oftentimes problematic, as codes are regarded as irrelevant: “the problem is that many of our students are not members, and do not see it as relevant in their careers.” 20.5.2.2 Health and Safety Six participants consider that ethics education should include health and safety (L2; L6; L9; L10; L11; L13). L16 understands this topic in terms of “putting appropriate safety measures in place and risk assessment,” while L11 emphasizes the “focus on issues around safety and design, on quality control.” L13 gives the example of robots in agriculture in order to prompt students to consider “what do we need to be aware of in terms of what can happen and what are the safety implications.” One instructor explicitly mentioned that health and safety coverage by itself is insufficient (L9). The topic attracted different opinions on its connection (or lack thereof) to engineering ethics education. While for L10, ethics “of course” includes health and safety considerations, 3 respondents expressed a lack of clarity towards the interpretation of health and safety as falling under the scope of ethics. L5 admits that until the members of an accreditation panel pointed out that this topic is part of ethics, there was an institutional lack of awareness of this fact. L5 explains how “it was pointed out to us by a preliminary review panel that whenever you are talking about safety issues you are addressing ethical matters, and we had not appreciated that fact until that point.” One evaluator also expressed doubts whether health and safety fall under ethics. E2 was “not sure exactly if safety may not be under the category of ethics.” L2 views health and safety alongside ethics, but different from it, considering that ethics “is in there along with communication, teamwork, universal design, health and safety.” 20.5.2.3 Ethical Theories Seven instructors mentioned ethical theories as falling under the scope of engineering ethics education (L1; L2; L4; L6; L7; L11; L15). Nevertheless, one instructor expressed doubts about how fitting this topic is because “there is nothing that is totally universal” (L9). L6 includes issues such as “morality versus ethics, also environmental ethics, and here we look at different ways of thinking about it, the Western thinking, but there are also others approaches, extensionist and biocentric.” L15 uses “various theories, both grounded in religion and in philosophy”. L2 presents “all the different types of ethics, rights ethics, duty ethics, utilitarian ethics, virtue ethics, the different moral frameworks and the pros and cons of each of them.” L1 also introduces

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

277

different ethical theories and “the types of ethical decisions and that what is important is actually having that discussion where there is an ethical dilemma.” L4 notes that while “a small amount on ethical theories” is covered in the course, he considers that “I am not qualified to teach that, there is not enough time to cover it, and also they may not be particularly interested.” L4 is not the only one who notes the challenges of preparing teaching ethical theories. L1 describes struggling in her first year of teaching, as she “just went with what I was given and it was very much just talking to the students and telling them these are the facts and I have read a few things about them.” L2 “still can’t really wrap my head around this” and finds the textbooks “too hard”, so she prepares by watching and referring to the TV series The Good Place and videos on ethics posted on social media channels. No other topic falling under engineering ethics education has been described as particularly challenging to grasp, as is the case with ethical theories. One possible explanation could be related to the demographic characteristics of those interviewed, who were educated during a time when ethics was largely absent from the engineering curricula.

20.5.3 Value Sensitive Design Five instructors note that value sensitive design should be part of the ethical education of students (L3; L4; L8; L10; L15). The topic is presented through considerations about universal design (L4) and ergonomical design (L3), by inviting students to reflect on values inscribed in the development of engineering artefacts at the design stage. Although L12 admits not teaching about value sensitive design, he is aware that “some people bring it into their design work,” coming across this approach during his experience as an accreditation evaluator.

20.6 Discussion The qualitative data gathered in the study found two main sources influencing engineering ethics instructors’ understanding of the subject: the instructor’s connection with engineering practice and their motivation to teach engineering ethics. The data is inconclusive for drawing inferences about the scope and understanding of engineering ethics based on the participants’ demographic, although it provides light on the confidence with which participants approach the subject based on their disciplinary profile. First, the instructors’ connection with engineering practice seemed to favour an understanding of ethics in more practical terms. As such, instructors who have professional experience outside academia - either in the private sector, in policymaking or healthcare - show a high concern with ethical decision-making in complex situations, the embeddedness of ethics in social situations and with topics related to

278

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

sustainability, policy or professional codes. This is in  line with findings of our broader study into the teaching methods employed in engineering ethics education, which found that the instructors with a non-academic background favoured the use of real-life case studies (Martin et al., 2021b). Instructors with an academic background seems to have a higher reliance on ethical theories, philosophical concepts and character development in ethics instruction. Second, considering the motivation for teaching ethics, only four instructors admitted that they intended to teach a course that includes ethical content, while the majority of instructors mentioned the “necessity” of teaching ethics. The latter category mentioned having to teach ethics due to being asked at programme level to do so. Ten instructors admitted that initially they were not interested in teaching ethics, but there was no one else that could teach the subject, and their non-academic background marked them as suitable instructors to the programme leadership. At the opposite end, we have two instructors who aimed to introduce ethical content in the curriculum of their engineering programme, and to attain this, had to pursue what they described to be an institutional battle. These two extreme attitudes are revealing of the status of ethics in the engineering curriculum, highlighting that ethics is a topic for which appears to be a lack of expertise and institutional support, minimum resources allocated and no dedicated hiring process minimum (Martin, 2020; Martin & Polmear, 2023). Third, considering the demographic characteristics of the participants, the limited data does not allow us to trace patterns about how instructors understand and define engineering ethics. Our study found examples of microethical and macroethical understandings of engineering ethics among instructors with an engineering background or a philosophy background, distributed evenly across the different genders and age categories. The difference between instructors with a philosophy background and those with an engineering background consists in the confidence in teaching the subject expressed by the former demographic group, even if the scope was understood differently by the three philosopher participants, as comprising religious topics, professional aspects of engineering responsibility or applied ethics. This finding highlights the need for continuous professional development courses or trainings for instructors assigned to teach ethics, irrespective of their disciplinary background. The diminished confidence and perceived lack of expertise for teaching ethics expressed by engineering instructors can be traced down to the education that engineering participants received, which did not include a mandatory requirement for ethics instruction. Ethics is a more recent component of the engineering curricula, such that our limited data seems to point towards a lower perceived expertise among the older cohort of participants in the study. Desha and Hargroves (2014, p.  46) found a similar rationale for the “lack of faculty competences” in sustainability education. According to Desha and Hargroves (2014, p.  46), “educators teach according to their education and experience” and “where sustainability has not formed part of their training, faculty are unlikely to consider it as a skill of value or be prepared to include it in programs”.

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

279

20.7 Conclusion The study confirms the existence of a varied and uneven understanding of engineering ethics education among instructors, which prompts us to suggest that there is a need for additional research in other geographical contexts about how engineering ethics education is understood and what theoretical approaches are made manifest to students. As our study found that the understanding of the discipline varies based on the experience of the instructor outside academia and the instructor’s motivation to teach the subject, we recommend that future studies examine in more depth the influence of disciplinary backgrounds on instructors’ understanding of engineering ethics. Several common themes emerge that point to the practical and decision-making character of the subject, but there are also points of contention as to what exactly engineering ethics education is about. The study found that engineering ethics is preponderantly defined through its connection to engineering practice, rather than in its theoretical dimension. As Godfrey and Parker (2010, p.10) remark, “abstract, philosophical concepts, such as ethics and sustainability were unacceptable to both faculty and students unless taught in a practical, relevant context.” Participants reported a low engagement with ethical theories, with learning goals seldom targeting the development of theoretical knowledge about ethics in the form of knowledge of formal definitions, ethical theories and vocabulary, supporting the findings of Hess and Fore (2018). According to participants, engineering ethics is considered to come into play when decision-­ making in complex situations is required. The study also encountered an emphasis on the societal dimension of engineering, reflecting a similar focus to that identified by van de Poel and Royakkers (2011, p.25), who highlight the role of different actors in influencing “the direction taken by technological development and the relevant social consequences.” While both the micro and macroethical approaches are endorsed by the participants in our study, other approaches such as value-based design are less represented in the education of engineering ethics, with feminist considerations being completely absent. It is also notable that virtues representative of virtue ethics approaches, such as discipline, courage or empathy, are present at the level of how engineering ethics education is defined, but there is less information on how they are included. Only one instructor made explicit reference to virtue theories. The focus on the embeddedness of ethical decision-making in contexts of practice that require careful deliberation and critical reflection hints at developing the intellectual virtue of practical judgement or phronesis (Nair & Bulleit, 2020). Similar to observations made by Herkert (2005) and Conlon and Zandvoort (2011), participants consider that sustainability, the societal dimension of engineering and legislation could provide a focus for broadening the curriculum to integrate ethics and STS.

280

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

Finally, it is notable that the study encountered disagreement and confusion as to what counts as engineering ethics education. A major challenge revealed by our study is experienced by instructors unfamiliar with the subject when identifying the ethical dimension of technical topics. The instructors expressed conflicting views and lack of clarity whether topics such as sustainability or health and safety purport to ethics. Reed et al. (2004) have similarly encountered situations when ethics has been incorporated without the awareness that ethical content has been touched upon. We suggest that this can be remedied through institutional support for the development of CPD training programs and resources, which could address the different conceptualisations of engineering ethics. Of major importance is also the development of communities of engineering ethics instructors and sharing examples of teaching practice. The fPET meetings offer a crucial context for discussing the theoretical tenets of engineering ethics education and ways for these to be conveyed to students. As an outcome of these meetings, we see the aspirational approach put forward by Bowen (2009) towards a vision of the good inspired by McIntyre’s practice of virtues, a virtue-based approach championed by Harris (2013) or Kanemitsu’s (2018) take on Verbeek’s mediation theory as a way to develop an aspirational view of ethics among engineers. This is exactly the type of curricular content that the research study found to be barely present in the teaching of ethics and also considered by instructors to be challenging, either due to students’ lack of engagement or instructors’ lack of familiarity with philosophy. Ultimately, the chapter confirms the timeliness of dedicated sessions during the fPET biennial events and the need to further develop philosophically oriented educational strands at future fPET conferences.

References Barry, B. E., & Herkert, J. R. (2014). Engineering ethics. In A. Johri & B. M. Olds (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of engineering education research (pp. 673–692). Cambridge University Press. Baum, R. J. (1980). Ethics and engineering curricula. The Hastings Center, Institute of Society, Ethics, and the Life Sciences. Bielefeldt, A. R., Canney, N. E., Swan, C., Knight, D. (2016, June), Efficacy of macroethics education in engineering. 2016 ASEE annual conference and exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. Bowen, W. R. (2009). Prioritising people: Outline of an aspirational engineering ethic. In I. Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Philosophy of engineering and technology (Vol. 2). Springer. Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327–338. Conlon, E., & Zandvoort, H. (2011). Broadening ethics teaching in engineering: Beyond the individualistic approach. Science and Engineering Ethics., 17(2), 217–232. Davis, M. (1999). Ethics and the university. Routledge. DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Marshall, P. L., & Mcculloch, A. W. (2011). Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development research project. Field Methods, 23, 136–155. Desha, C., & Hargroves, K. C. (2014). Higher education and sustainable development: A model for curriculum renewal. Routledge.

20  What Is Engineering Ethics Education? Exploring How the Education of Ethics Is…

281

Devon, R. (1999). Toward a social ethics of engineering: The norms of engagement. Journal of Engineering Education, 88, 87–92. Godfrey, E., & Parker, L. (2010). Mapping the cultural landscape in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 5–22. Harris, C. E. (2008). The good engineer: Giving virtue its due in engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 153–164. Harris, C.  E. (2013). Engineering ethics: From preventive ethics to aspirational ethics. In D. Michelfelder, N. McCarthy, & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process. Philosophy of engineering and technology (Vol. 15). Springer. Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (2009). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases (4th ed.). Cengage. Haws, D. R. (2001). Ethics instruction in engineering education: A (mini) meta-analysis. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(2), 223–229. Herkert, J. R. (2002). Continuing and emerging issues in engineering ethics education. The Bridge, 32(3), 8–13. Herkert, J. R. (2005). Ways of thinking about and teaching ethical problem solving: Microethics and macroethics in engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 375. Hess, J., & Fore, G. (2018). A systematic literature review of US engineering ethics interventions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(2), 551–583. Hillerbrand, R., & Roeser, S. (2016). Towards a third ‘practice turn’: An inclusive and empirically informed perspective on risk. In M. Franssen, P. Vermaas, P. Kroes, & A. Meijers (Eds.), Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn. Springer. Holsapple, M. A., Carpenter, D. D., Sutkus, J. A., Finelli, C. J., & Harding, T. S. (2012). Framing faculty and student discrepancies in engineering ethics education delivery. Journal of Engineering Education, 101, 169–186. Kanemitsu, H. (2018). New trends in engineering ethics – A Japanese perspective. In A. Fritzsche & S. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering. Philosophy of engineering and technology (Vol. 31). Springer. Keirl, S. (2003). Ethics and technology education: Another ac-prac or an education for humanity? In G. Martin & H. Middleton (Eds.), Initiatives in technology education: Comparative perspectives (pp. 148–161). Griffith University. Lofland, J. (2009). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Wadsworth. Lynch, W. T., & Kline, R. (2000). Engineering practice and engineering ethics. Science Technology and Human Values, 25(2), 195–225. Martin, D.  A. (2020). Towards a sociotechnical reconfiguration of engineering and an education for ethics: A critical realist investigation into the patterns of education and accreditation of ethics in engineering programmes in Ireland. Doctoral Thesis, Technological University Dublin. https://arrow.tudublin.ie/engdoc/126/ Martin, D. A., & Polmear, M. (2023). The two cultures of engineering education: Looking Back and moving forward. In S. H. Christensen, C. Mitcham, A. Buch, C. Didier, M. Murphy, & E. Conlon (Eds.), Engineering, social sciences, and the humanities: Have their conversations come of age? Philosophy of engineering and technology series. Springer Nature. Martin, M. W., & Schinzinger, R. (2013). Ethics in engineering (4th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Book. Martin, D. A., Conlon, E., & Bowe, B. (2019). The role of role-play in student awareness of the social dimension of the engineering profession. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(6), 882–905. Martin, D.A., Conlon, E., Bowe, B. (2018). A Constructivist Approach to the use of Case Studies in teaching Engineering Ethics. In: Auer, M., Guralnick, D., Simonics, I. (eds) Teaching and Learning in a Digital World. ICL 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 715. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73210-7_23

282

D. A. Martin and E. Conlon

Martin, D. A., Conlon, E., & Bowe, B. (2021a). A multi-level review of engineering ethics education: Towards a socio-technical orientation of engineering education for ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(5), 60–98. Martin, D. A., Conlon, E., & Bowe, B. (2021b). Using case studies in engineering ethics education: The case for immersive scenarios through stakeholder engagement and real life data. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/2205495 2.2021.1914297 Michelfelder, D. P., Wellner, G., & Wiltse, H. (2017). Designing differently: Toward a methodology for an ethics of feminist technology design. In S. O. Hansson (Ed.), The ethics of technology: Methods and approaches (p. 193–218). Rowman & Littlefield. Mitcham, C. (2017). Engineering ethics: From thinking small to deep and big. Colorado School of Mines Distinguished Lecture. Nair, I., & Bulleit, W.  M. (2020). Pragmatism and care in engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, 65–87. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum foundations, principles and issues (6th ed.). Allyn and Bacon. Polmear, M., Bielefeldt, A. R., Knight, D., Canney, N., & Swan, C. (2019). Analysis of macroethics teaching practices and perceptions in engineering: A cultural comparison. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44, 1. Pritchard, M. S. (2005). Perception and imagination in engineering ethics. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(3), 415–423. Reed, P. A., Hughes, A., Susan, P., & Stephens, D. I. (2004). The status of ethics in technology education. In R. B. Hill (Ed.), Ethics for citizenship in a technological world (pp. 163–186). Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. Riley, D. (2013). Hidden in plain view: Feminists doing engineering ethics, engineers doing feminist ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19, 189–206. Riley, D., Pawley, A., Tucker, J., & Catalano, G. D. (2009). Feminisms in engineering education. NWSA, 21(2), 21–40. Schmidt, J. A. (2014). Changing the paradigm for engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 20(4), 985–1010. van de Poel, I. R., & Royakkers, L. M. M. (2011). Ethics, technology, and engineering: An introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. Verbeek, P. P. (2008). Morality in design: Design ethics and the morality of technological artifacts. In P. E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, A. Light, & S. A. Moore (Eds.), Philosophy and design: From engineering to architecture (pp. 91–103). Springer. Walczak, K., Finelli, C. J., Holsapple, M. A., Sutkus, J. A., Harding, T. S., & Carpenter, D. D. (2010). Institutional obstacles to integrating ethics into the curriculum and strategies for overcoming them. Proceedings of the 2010 ASEE annual conference and exposition, Louisville, KY. Whitbeck, C. (1998). Ethics in engineering practice and research. Cambridge University Press.

Chapter 21

‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities Héctor Gustavo Giuliano, Leandro Ariel Giri, Fernando Gabriel Nicchi, Walter Mario Weyerstall, Lydia Fabiana Ferreira Aicardi, Martín Parselis, and Sergio Mersé

Abstract  The aim of this work is to lay a foundation for discussion on the importance of philosophy in professional training sustained in the mainstream definition of engineering provided by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). Such definition states that specific engineering knowledge is applied ‘with judgment’ by engineers. The particle ‘with judgment’ officiates as a link between epistemological aspects associated with knowledge, and pragmatic aspects referring to the purposes that such knowledge should have. In this work we will provide a formal definition of ‘judgment’ in order to enlighten the conceptual links between choosing courses of action, rationality and critical thinking in the context of the engineering profession. In doing so we point out the relevance of including philosophical formation in engineering training. It is important that the engineer, by means of the adequate study of humanities, develops the groundwork for critical thinking such that will enable them to identify, select or create a rational system with cultural criteria directed towards the ‘benefit of humanity’, while being able to H. G. Giuliano (*) · S. Mersé Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Agrarias, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina e-mail: [email protected] L. A. Giri Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas, Buenos Aires, Argentina F. G. Nicchi · L. F. Ferreira Aicardi Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina W. M. Weyerstall Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Tecnología, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Tucumán, Argentina M. Parselis Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_21

283

284

H. G. Giuliano et al.

justify their actions using paradigms that go beyond mere technique. Finally, we present a pedagogical approach called ‘kite model’ that allows us to put these ideas into practice in the classroom. Keywords  Engineering education · Technological rationality · Critical thinking · Judgment

21.1 Introduction In the present work we develop some core ideas to strengthen the integration of humanistic knowledge in the technical formation of engineers. As recently remarked by Bucciarelli and Drew (2015) it is the interest of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), among other institutions like Argentinian CONFEDI (Consejo Federal de Decanos de Ingeniería), to promote critical reflection that allow future graduates to have the skills to contextualize their professional practices. Such proposal was discussed extensively in a double issue of Engineering Studies which reflected on the relevance, obstacles, and possibilities associated with the topic under discussion (Giuliano et al., 2022). Fifteen years before, this need was also addressed by Gene Moriarty (2000) who suggested that the expansion of technological education requires a new kind of question during the training period. Just as in its beginnings, engineering studies were fundamentally associated with knowing how the different mechanisms work; as well as, signaling an important turn, the inclusion of the natural sciences was necessary in order to know why the mechanisms work the way they do; now, in the face of reality and the challenges of the current era, it is time to add a third approach related to contextual questions that open the reflection about the ends: for what and for whom does a design work and which are its costs and broad consequences. Our contribution to this debate is based on the classical definition of engineering proposed by ABET in all its complexity. Engineering is the profession in which a knowledge of the mathematical and natural sciences gained by study, experience, and practice is applied with judgment to develop ways to utilize economically the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of mankind. (Emphasis added)

The concepts of ‘judgment’, ‘utilization with economic criteria’,1 and ‘benefit of mankind’, emerge in the definition of engineering proposed by ABET. Judgment is assessed based on the optimization of resources and the benefit of mankind. We believe that paying attention to them could contribute to overcoming at least some  We understand ‘utilize economically’ as ‘use with economic criteria’ (i.e., allocating efficiently in a context of scarcity). 1

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

285

of the obstacles to the inclusion of humanities into the technical formation of engineers.

21.2 Formalizing Our Proposal We think that the very concept of ‘judgment’ deserves analytical elucidation, as it is a concept used frequently in common sense frameworks: everybody knows (at least intuitively) what it means, but consensus about whether or not an agent’s decision reflects good judgment is not always easy. It seems to be relative to sociohistorical, ideological or, basically, cultural factors. This is the reason why such a concept introduces a complication in our understanding on how a good engineer should act, and how to develop judgment skills in engineering education. ‘Judgment’, as we understand it, is a qualitative ordinal variable, so it is not possible to use a quantitative scale to establish it. However, if we want the concept to be useful in thinking about our practices, it must be possible to state that an agent A in some circumstance has been more judicious than an agent B in the same circumstance, or, counterfactually, that if the agent would have taken a different course of action than the one actually taken, she would have been more judicious. Such statements necessarily imply that we make explicit our assumptions about the fact that we will consider something better than something else, as such assessment will be relative to those assumptions. It is only in very extreme cases, those where everybody is satisfied or unsatisfied, that consensus is easy.2 It seems clear that the notion under analysis is relative to each individual and to each cultural context in the broad sense. However, the analysis cannot stop here, since each individual in each cultural context is not entitled to hold any position, but a finite set of positions. Besides, no matter how many restrictions may exist, there are still degrees of freedom for decision making. Even in the most restrictive context, the agent has flexibility to select within a space of possible courses of action to solve each problem (Dym & Little, 2003). Because of that, we will propose a working definition of judgment in the context of engineering practice that can be attached to an agent choosing courses of action. However, the evaluation of judgment must imply an explicit rationality (i.e., a system of shared methodologies, objectives and values). A course of action must be evaluated as better or worse according to such rationality. Of course, such rationality is bounded as every agent in real practice is not omniscient: she does not know every possible course of action, nor does she know the consequence of choosing each one. More information and technical  Daniel McLaughlin (2021) performs a very interesting analysis in this sense starting from the Aristotelian concept of phronesis and seeking its relationship with Koen’s heuristic-based engineering methodology. Our analysis uses a different approach that we believe has points in common with his work. Providentially, both works have been carried out simultaneously, so we hope to be able to analyze their complementarities in greater depth in the future. The authors would like to thank the reviewers for suggesting this source. 2

286

H. G. Giuliano et al.

criteria widen the scope of the agent and her capability to choose wisely between alternative courses of action, but engineering rationality for fixing ends and evaluating judgment transcends epistemic (i.e., technical) values. There is a wide consensus, both in science and technology that human praxis implies also non-epistemic values, meaning political, ideological or, in a wide sense, cultural criteria for election (i.e., Longino, 1990; Feenberg, 1999; Giri, 2017). Technological design is an essential part of human praxis, and so, both epistemic and non-epistemic values are involved in it. Education of engineers must necessarily take this into account including resources from philosophy and humanities to train the capability to elaborate, make explicit and analyze different rationalities by means of critical thinking. But, as we will point out, it is also essential to relate these inputs with classical technical knowledge and skills by way of an adequate epistemological model. Lavinia Marin (2020) has already highlighted the importance of critical thinking in engineering education. She argues that although educating engineers for the challenges of the twenty-first century should include not just technical skills but also societal and ethical competencies, the ethical reflection is often difficult to teach because it has not been defined and operationalized enough to make it distinguishable from other forms of thinking. Since ethical reflection is an under-determined concept in education, she proposed a way of operationalizing by drawing inspiration from competency of critical thinking. She highlights that ‘critical’ is the characterization of the process itself, not of the outcome of the judgment: CT [critical thinking] is not just about being logical in one’s practical judgments or arriving at a correct answer, but about being careful, taking as many different aspects as possible into consideration while also being sensitive to one’s own cognitive biases. (1355)

As she notes, ethical reflection uses an overall critical approach in its processes, such as questioning the very premises from which one builds moral knowledge, including the cultural and religious foundations of norms, values and practices. Lionel Claris and Donna Riley (2012) also remarks that such critical thinking should be applied both to the consequences of engineering as well as to engineering itself, and Gary Downey (2009) introduces an image of engineering practice as “problem definition and solution” that includes this reasoning. Viola Schiaffonati (2013) again recognize the necessity of philosophy tools to training reflective and responsible engineers. With the aim of advancing towards this integration of critical thinking we have developed a formalization of the concept of ‘judgment’ in the context of engineering as follows (see Giuliano et al., 2022): An agent A uses judgment if and only if given a space of possible courses of action C, agent A chooses course of action Ci, where Ci is satisfactory according to rationality Rj; and Rj is the rationality that the agent A considers the most suitable to reach the ends E, selected within a space of rationalities R by means of critical thinking.

We affirm in it that judgment will be relative to a given rationality. For example, if the horizon of our rational system is shaped by neo-classical economics, the central criteria to discuss the judgments according to Rj about the decisions Ci of our engineer will be dominated by individual order values of utility (homo economicus). On

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

287

the other hand, if our horizon of rationality were guided by sustainable development ideas, the argument of the Ci through Rj would be centered on minimizing the environmental and societal externalities (homo solidarius). Then, it is possible that different agent rationalities conflict with each other by pointing toward different decision alternatives. Our proposal implies that it will be possible to differentiate between good and wrong judgment to the extent that the answers elaborated are or are not in harmony with the rationality sustained by the design agent. But, ultimately, we are not asking for ‘good’ judgment, but simply asking for ‘judgment’: being able to have arguments that do not arise out of nowhere. No one thinks she has a wrong judgment. Everyone is going to think they have good one. This does not mean an absolute relativism about what is good and what is wrong. We are only saying that we are advocating an education that places engineers at least at an earlier stage: having the ability to make a judgment of a certain quality. In that sense, the word ‘rich’, as a counterpoint of ‘poor’, is more appropriate than ‘good’. And for that, we need the incorporation of the humanities.3 At this point we have finally got to the heart of the problem. It is important that the engineer, by means of the adequate study of the humanities, develops the basis for critical thinking such that it allows her to identify, select or create a rational system with cultural criteria directed towards the ‘benefit of humanity’. Otherwise, rationality could be imposed by her education, her socio-institutional context (for example, the organization in which she performs her duties) or basically by any ideological bias that operates in a veiled way, which would turn the engineer into an uncritical agent, who may even operate against herself. This situation is typical for engineers trained within ‘technical walls’, training that leaves them outside of the culture (Weyerstall, 2015). Therefore, in order to argue that an engineer has judgment, she must have the possibility of putting critical thinking into practice, in addition to knowledge of the natural sciences and mathematics. She would then be able to justify her actions from rational paradigms that go beyond mere technique. This does not free the engineer from calculation errors, but it does make her an ‘honest agent’, an executor of honest actions, a creator of honest technologies (Parselis, 2018).4 As pointed out by Grasso and Martinelli (2010): In this evolving world, a new kind of engineer is needed, one who can think broadly across disciplines and consider the human dimensions that are at the heart of every design challenge. In the new order, narrow engineering thinking will not be enough. (11)

This concern goes back many years in Argentina. In the first Argentine Conference on Teaching and Research in Electrical Engineering, held in Tucumán (north of Argentina) in spring of 1963, humanistic training for engineers opened the  Here we are using the meaning of ‘rich’ which indicates interesting because full of diversity or complexity. 4  A novel proposal which is helpful in the definition of criteria of judgment are the ‘Honest Technologies’ by Miguel Angel Quintanilla (2017), who proposes designs involving coherence between thought and action, linking objectives and consequences in their use and implementation by other agents such as users. Responsibility and honesty could be inspiring principles for a relationship between agents and a good base to find judgment between different rationalities. 3

288

H. G. Giuliano et al.

meeting’s agenda. On that occasion Herbert C. Bühler, Director of the Institute of Electrical Engineering of the Universidad Nacional de Tucumán and promoter of the conference, affirmed: The need for training in broad social and cultural content is critical in those people who will be responsible, not only for keeping the technological world in which we live in motion, but also for harmonizing its action in all its aspects. (Weyerstall, 2020: 126).

More than half a century separates us from that debate but it still continues to knock on our doors: we need to expand the topics of engineering education in order to make them able to walk beyond the merely technical, towards the human.

21.3 Putting Our Proposal into Practice Today the demand remains. For example, Argentinian authorities and entities related to the training of engineers, by the Argentinian Ministry of Education, in its Resolution 1232/01, stated that: ‘the curriculum must include topics of social and human sciences aimed at training engineers for their social responsibilities’ (2001: Annex I). And CONFEDI proposed a new graduate profile ‘that enables the engineer to learn and develop new technologies, with an ethical, critical and creative attitude (...), with a human-oriented perspective’ (2018: 20). In this paragraph ‘attitude’ seems to relate to ‘judgment’ (as they explicitly took it from ABET’s original statement) but only in general terms. Such ‘attitude’ is still not a well-defined category and requires further elaboration. In tune with this concern, in 2006, at the request of a change in curricula, the Faculty of Engineering and Agrarian Sciences of the Argentinian Catholic University (UCA) decided to include a course named ‘Introduction to Engineering’ in the first semester of the common cycle of all engineering careers. It was intended to provide students with a broad view of the profession showing its relevance within a social conception according to the basic Christian values. With no comparative frames of reference, and after several twists and turns, the following goals were finally set: • To place the engineering discipline within the cultural context and for the common good. • To know and critically analyze the foundations of technological rationality. • To understand and develop the engineering design methodology in a contextualized way. • To elucidate and discuss the relationship between engineering and culture with analytical elements. • To raise awareness and work on the relationship between engineering and nature within the framework of sustainable development. In order to provide these contents in an integrative way and not as decontextualized ‘patches’ within traditional engineering frameworks, it was necessary to develop an epistemological model that would allow the different aspects to be related. Thus, we

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

289

arrived at a conceptual scheme that we have called the ‘kite model’ (Giuliano, 2016). It is a strict morphological representation of a kite integrated by four interconnected nodes –as can be seen in Fig. 21.1, but it is also figurative insofar as the image allows us to wonder about the effective power of control of those who hold the string of technological progress. The model aims to capture the complex notion of ‘judgment’ as we developed above, and in some sense is inspired by the work of French philosopher Gilbert Simondon (2017), for whom the future of the relationship between man and the world is divided between a technicality and a religiosity. The first is manifested in the genesis of artifacts through the operation of a technical logic, the second gives rise to the unfolding of humanistic culture through ethical and aesthetic mediations. Both modes are in permanent tension and must be compensated by a relational convergence force that maintains unity despite divergences. As we have already pointed out, the ‘kite model’ responds to a morphological scheme containing two axes –diagonals of the rhombus– completing the interconnection between nodes. One axis is defined by engineering logic and methodology, and the other is defined by nature and humanistic culture. What the scheme suggests is that engineering logic, aimed at solving problems efficiently, puts pressure on nature while it is challenged by cultural priorities – including political and economic trends– that define what counts and what does not count as a problem. In turn, culture is simultaneously transformed by the ever-­ changing material structure producing unforeseen shifts in the value scales that generate social instability. At the same time, the method used by engineering finds limitations, both practical and conceptual, to be able to account for all these relationships simultaneously. Putting the model into practice makes it possible to state a series of questions that go beyond mere technique as the concept of judgment demands. They are inscribed in the need to begin to develop in the student the habit of critical thinking and the ability to base their actions on an explicit (and often controversial) rationality. For example: • Engineering Logic: What does the design allow to do that would be impossible without it? What does it replace or make obsolete? What is gained from its use? What is lost with its use? Who defines its desirability? What other technologies Fig. 21.1  The ‘kite model’ and the stress relationships present in the design activity

290

H. G. Giuliano et al.

does it make possible? What type of capital does it require? How is its efficiency considered? • Engineering Method: How are the objectives and technical specifications defined? How does the user participate in the design process? What technical knowledge is necessary? What previous technologies does it require? What energy does it consume? What is the context of its production? Is the possibility of repairs being considered? • Culture: Who does it benefit? Who does it harm? What values does it promote? What does it symbolize? Does it promote democratic participation? Does it encourage the development of solidarity practices? Does it contemplate the problem of employment? Does it promote the common good or exacerbate inequality? Can it be controlled? • Nature: Does it increase, decrease or replace the use of limited resources? How much and what types of waste does it generate? Where does the waste go? Does it reflect linear or cyclical thinking? Does it break or rebuild the link between humans and nature? Does it distance users from the environmental effects it produces? Does it endanger the planet and future generations? As we discussed previously it is necessary to develop a series of conceptual contents (in an academic way and not from their preconceptions) so that students can begin to find possible answers to these questions. These contents are based on broad contributions from the theory of engineering design, the studies in Science, Technology and Society (STS), the philosophy of technology, to the sociology of artifacts, among others (Giuliano, 2016). Regarding the uniqueness of internal logic, its objective is to approach engineering knowledge as an activity especially oriented to solving problems by technical means and to show that this logic is different from the scientific one (Niiniluoto, 2016). In order to achieve this, support is sought from prominent figures in epistemology and history of engineering presenting for example the concept of ‘heuristics’ (Koen, 2003) and the variety of sources of knowledge for solving engineering problems provided by Vincenti (1993). Emphasis is also placed on the efficiency indicator and on the imperative of its maximization, introducing some questions that allow the students to observe the complexity of acting with judgment, in order that the valuation of the set of results is related to the anthropological and ideological conceptions that define our place in the world. Finally, the concept of restriction is emphasized which is of central importance to contextualize the design methodology, an object to which the following topic is dedicated (Broncano, 2000). About the method, its objective is to show that the preparation of a new design is not the exclusive task of engineers. There is an interrelation that links technical knowledge both with the close area of the company and with the most distant area of society. For this motive, the ‘principle of indeterminacy of the relationship between form and function’ is presented (Franssen, 2009; Kroes, 2013) and the classic ‘five-stage model’ is discussed (Dym & Little, 2003). The notions of interpretive flexibility, style and meaning are also shown. These notions allow students to observe that the design process has contingent characteristics. It is emphasized

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

291

(following constructivist studies) that the problems only acquire relevance depending on the existence of some social group that recognizes them as such. There are no problems isolated from an environment of interests (Pinch & Bijker, 1984). As a result of all of this, it becomes apparent that there are different views that explain the links established between technology and culture, a theme that is explored in the next point. Relating to culture, its objective is to show that there are different positions regarding the relationship between engineering and society. On the one hand there are authors who suggest that technology is developed through an autonomous process, while others believe that it must be possible to control it by society. It is also shown that evaluative opinions can be ambiguous. While for some it is a neutral instrument, for others it is loaded with values and interests. It is pointed out that, as technology occupies an essential space in contemporary culture, the diversity of opinions has weighty normative implications (Winner, 1980; Feenberg, 1999). The strategies for action and the type of engineering solutions that are derived from each point of view have different normative scopes, so they are not innocuous for the development of ‘judgment’. This fact is evident in the ways nature is used. The unity of nature reveals the controversial relationship established between engineering and the environment. It starts from the fact that engineering has taken on the challenge of contributing to the construction of a sustainable world. But also put into evidence that there is still a theoretical path to travel to apply the conceptual premises on which proposals of ‘sustainable development’ are based. In this sense, the concept of ‘eco-efficiency’ is presented and questioned and alternative methodologies are presented, such as ‘cradle-to-cradle’ design (Braugart & McDonough, 2002), ‘Earth systems engineering management’ (Allenby, 2001), or even the ‘degrowth’ proposals that recommend another relationship between man and nature (Latouche, 2009). Finally, an attempt is made to show that there are still open issues whose responsible approach is of crucial importance for the practice of the engineering profession with judgment in today’s world. The humanistic contextualization of the model is made explicit at the intersection of the horizontal and vertical axes, the center of the kite. The human being is housed there: the person who remains standing up after unfolding their engineering training, the human being who supports the engineer. Here, we find the very complex questions of philosophical anthropology, and among its answers it conceives the human being as a being in relation: in relation to nature, in relation to other human beings, in relation to itself, and in relation to the unknown. And also, following the metaphor of the kite hinted above, we can figure out who holds the thread of our subjective word. The kite model, as a model inspired by the Judeo-Christian tradition, affirms the centrality of the human being. As engineers keep these foundational relationships alive and healthy, the kite is structured in balance for its flight. We can say then that these actions are inhabited by the ‘judgment’ formalized above, and to the extent that they overcome cultural blindness (including not only the relevant actors, but all those involved without distinction), we can say that they are contributing to the ‘benefit of mankind’. Analyzing for a given technology its manifestation in the nodes of the kite provides

292

H. G. Giuliano et al.

clues for the elucidation and explanation of its rationality, but also of the rationality of the evaluator himself, who through the conceptual tools provided can make a well-founded judgment as to whether or not good engineering judgment is present in such technology.

21.3.1 Students’ Academic Projects The practical experience in ‘Introduction to Engineering’ undergraduate course is substantiated by conducting a case analysis by the students. The work includes the formation of commissions to encourage group interaction and an oral presentation for their approval. In the guidelines for carrying out the academic project, it is requested to analytically develop the link between each node of the ‘kite model’ for the case under study and to detect the tension between nodes. Finally, as a conclusion, a synthetic overview must be carried out, in which a global appreciation of the chosen case can be done. The topics of the academic projects are changing, and the interest of the students, their location in a closed environment, and availability of adequate information, all influence their choice. The exercise allows students to put the ‘kite model’ into practice and ask and answer the questions it proposes. As they are first-year students, an in-depth analysis of each case is not intended, however the experience is enriching. Among the cases analyzed by the students is that of CRISPR-9, a genetic editing technique used for the high-precision modification of genomes. The students explored the state of the art of technology, advanced on the objectives set, desired and undesired results, and critically raised aspects that were not considered in the design stage, in order to evaluate the presence of good or bad judgment (or something in between). They addressed the constraints that limited the solution space. They identified relevant social groups and detected the ethical and moral tensions posed to use this technology when manipulating the human genome. They reflected on the possibilities of control and the relationship between means and ends in this development. In the case of open-pit mining and mineral processing plants, the students analyzed several cases such as the Veladero and Alumbrera mines, located in Argentina. They analyzed the state of the art of this technology, the proposed objectives, the desired and undesired results. They also detected the tensions between provincial and national governments, business groups, workers, residents, etc. They delved into the environmental problems that generate this type of solution. They reflected on the tensions between the applied methodologies and the environmental and social effects they generate. In these cases, it was possible to work with the different rationalities, and applying ‘judgment’, gave rise to opposite results: that of the mining companies and the state that considered that the installation of the mines was reasonable for economic and political reasons, compared to the environmental groups and the population of the area that see their quality of life affected, except for those who got jobs within the mining project. It was also observed how

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

293

compliance with environmental regulations (i.e., ISO 14000) contrasts with a ‘judgment’ on the implication of these activities on sustainability, finding interesting tensions between environmental, economic and social issues. Another case analyzed by the students is the development of ‘Bioclimatic Homes’ aimed at solving energy problems using renewable energies. They conducted an effectiveness and efficiency analysis. They determined relevant social groups and detected the tensions between state agencies and different user groups when implementing and using such home designs. They analyzed the environmental advantages generated by these types of solutions, but also disadvantages, as they find that costs and environmental impacts of supposedly sustainable technologies can be very high, which is shocking and novel for students accustomed to discourses that oversimplify the benefits of new technologies and the detriments of traditional ones. With this framework of analysis, the students were also able to discuss the case of the “Train of the Clouds”, an important international tourist attraction in the Argentinian province of Salta. For economic reasons, the train stopped running for 2 years and today only a few kilometers of its route have been rehabilitated. This case reveals the tensions between economic reasons, local indigenous communities’ interests, and cultural and tourist heritage that this technological marvel implied. Both in this case and in others, the students were able to reveal how the criterion of ‘judgment’ varied in different cultural and political contexts. This modality of work encourages active participation and the development of the necessary competencies to apply the model proposed here. When analyzing the cases, students must unveil the set of rationalities put into play and which one or ones were chosen by the designers to achieve the proposed purpose. From the analysis of the results and the problems following the implementation of the design, different alternatives emerge, with which each student can begin to build the guidelines for their own judgment, but also to interpret their own rationality and heuristics to elucidate those of other. In doing so, students acquire competencies to defend their point of view in a critical and reasoned manner.

21.4 Conclusions We hope that this formal proposal has been able to highlight the importance of understanding the complexity of the word ‘judgment’, present in the canonical definition of engineering. An understanding supported on the basis that technical-­ instrumental rationality is not enough to face the challenges of modern engineering. The ability to solve problems in a technical way allows selecting good courses of action within a rationality, but it does not allow questioning the validity of that rationality or its adaptation to a series of ethical, aesthetic or other values as shown in the ‘kite model’.

294

H. G. Giuliano et al.

In this sense, limiting the training of students only to technical content leads to a dissociation of these constitutive values from the course of action and, therefore, from the product of engineering work. Therefore, we promote an education in critical thinking that can operate at a higher level than purely technical solutions. In this way, it is possible to relate technical solutions to the values of the engineer and to the ‘benefit of mankind’. Our kite model has allowed us to train the skills of future engineers to critically evaluate the application or non-application of good judgment in technological designs. Such results convince us of the importance of humanistic content for engineers, and we are proud that, despite all the improvements that may be suggested to our proposal, the development of critical thinking in students is no longer just a rhetorical gimmick but a palpable reality in our graduates. Acknowledgement  This work was carried out under the economic auspices of the Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica de la República Argentina and the Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina.

References Allenby, B. (2001). Earth system engineering and management. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 19(4), 10–24. Braugart, M., & McDonough, W. (2002). Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. Macmillan Publishers. Broncano, F. (2000). Mundos artificiales: Filosofía del cambio tecnológico. Paidós. Bucciarelli, L., & Drew, D. (2015). Liberal studies in engineering – A design plan. Engineering Studies, 7(2–3), 103–122. Claris, L., & Riley, D. (2012). Situation critical: Critical theory and critical thinking in engineering education. Engineering Studies, 4(2), 1–20. CONFEDI. (2018). Libro Rojo, at: https://confedi.org.ar/download/documentos_confedi/ LIBRO-­ROJO-­DE-­CONFEDI-­Estandares-­de-­Segunda-­Generacion-­para-­Ingenieria-­2018-­ VFPublicada.pdf Downey, G. (2009). What is engineering studies for? Dominant practices and scalable scholarship. Engineering Studies, 1(1), 55–76. Dym, C., & Little, P. (2003). Engineering design: A project-based introduction. Wiley. Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology. Routledge. Franssen, M. (2009). Design, use, and the physical and intentional aspects of technical artifacts. In P. Vermaas et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and design: From engineering to architecture. Springer. Giri, L. (2017). Modelización, predicción y valores sociales. In F. Tula Molina & H. G. Giuliano (Eds.), El riesgo de que todo funcione: para una evaluación amplia de la tecnología. Nueva Librería. Giuliano, H. G. (2016). La ingeniería: una introducción analítica a la profesión. Nueva Librería. Giuliano, H. G., et al. (2022). Critical thinking and judgment on Engineer’s work: Its integration in engineering education. Engineering Studies, 14, 6–16. Grasso, D., & Martinelli, D. (2010). Holistic engineering. In D.  Grasso & M.  Burkins (Eds.), Holistic engineering education. Beyond technology. Springer. Koen, B. (2003). Discussion of the method. Oxford University Press. Kroes, P. (2013). Engineering design. In J. Friis, S. Pedersen, & V. Hendricks (Eds.), A companion to philosophy of technology (pp. 112–118). Wiley-Blackwell.

21  ‘Judgment’ in Engineering Philosophical Discussions and Pedagogical Opportunities

295

Latouche, S. (2009). Farewell to growth. Polity Press. Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton University Press. Marin, L. (2020). Ethical reflection or critical thinking? Overlapping competencies in engineering ethics education. In J. van der Veen, N. van Hattum-Janssen, & H.-M. Järvinen (Eds.), Engaging engineering education: Book of abstracts, SEFI, 48th annual conference (pp. 1354–1358). McLaughlin, D. (2021). Engineering, judgement and engineering judgment: A proposed definition. In Z. Pirtle et al. (Eds.), Engineering and philosophy (pp. 199–217). Springer. Ministerio de Educación de la República Argentina. (2001). Resolución 1232/01, at: https://www. coneau.gob.ar/archivos/538.pdf Moriarty, G. (2000). The place of engineering and the engineering of place. Techné, 5(2), 83–96. Niiniluoto, I. (2016). Science vs. technology: Difference or identity. In M. Franseen et al. (Eds.), Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn (pp. 93–106). Springer. Parselis, M. (2018). Dar sentido a la técnica ¿pueden ser honestas las tecnologías? OEI - Catarata. Pinch, T., & Bijker, W. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399–441. Quintanilla, M. A., Parselis, M., Sandrone, D., & Lawler, D. (2017). Tecnologías entrañables. ¿Es posible un modelo alternativo de desarrollo tecnológico? OEI - Catarata. Schiaffonati, V. (2013). Future reflective practotioners: The contribution of philosophy. In D. Michelfelder et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process (pp. 79–90). Springer. Simondon, G. (2017). On the mode of existence of technical objects. Univocal Publishing. Vincenti, W. (1993). What engineers know and how they know it: Analytical studies from aeronautical history. Johns Hopkins University. Weyerstall, W.  M. (2015). Ser Ingeniero. Revista de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, 10(29), 263–272. Weyerstall, W.  M. (2020). Humanismo para ingenieros, un dilema de hierro. Tecnología y Sociedad, 9, 125–130. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity?, 109(1), 121–136.

Chapter 22

The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners Priyan Dias

Abstract  It is argued that deficiencies in reflection are found not so much in engineers vis-a-vis philosophers; but rather in engineering entrants vis-a-vis engineering practitioners. Existential philosophy, history of technology, and technology ethics are suggested as humanities courses that would make engineering students more reflective, and hence better fitted for their careers. Martin Heidegger’s ways of escaping from “average everydayness” are presented as relevant for the consolidation of an engineering role identity that recognizes both innovation and context embeddedness. Historical case studies from the Science, Technology and Society (STS) literature are demonstrated as providing examples of socio-technical complexity and alternative ways to interpret situations. Issues in technology ethics are shown to have the potential for stimulating critical thinking through deeper analysis, and appreciating different viewpoints. While the core engineering courses that are supposed to promote reflection are those on design, the above humanities subjects can also contribute towards a mindset that resonates synergistically with synthetic design thinking. Keywords  Engineering education · Existential philosophy · History of technology · Technology ethics · Reflection · Role identity · Context · Complexity · Alternatives · Heidegger

22.1 Introduction The importance of reflection for professional practice has been emphasized by Schon (1983). These ideas have been applied to engineering as well (Dias & Blockley, 1995); including the idea of reflection at increasingly deeper levels. The P. Dias (*) Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_22

297

298

P. Dias

shallowest level can be called ‘knowing in action’, which Polanyi (1967) called “tacit knowing” – exhibited by scientists, but also by cabinet makers. Deeper levels of reflection can be called ‘reflection in action’, which involves an intimate interaction with one’s self and context, and with others. Even deeper levels of reflection – ‘reflection on action’ – undertaken after acting, can be called ‘learning’ (e.g. asking the question “How have we learnt from our actions?”); or ‘evaluation’ (e.g. asking the question “How good have we been at learning over the past year?”). Such reflection can take place within the individual, but even more pertinently, within organizations, giving rise to the concept of a “learning organization” (Dias, 2019, Chap. 3). The gap between engineering education and practice has been highlighted before, the former being largely theoretical while the latter eminently practical (Dias & Blockley, 1995). The suggestion that this has given rise to an identity crisis among engineers has also been made (Dias, 2019, Chap. 2). Other ‘gaps’ that have been referred to (Dias, 2019, Chap. 2) are those between philosophy, science and theory on the one hand (with their emphases on understanding) and technology, engineering and practice on the other (that have transformation as their goal). But does ‘being reflective’ also serve as a divide across these disciplines? Is philosophy reflective by definition, while engineering essentially pragmatic (and hence non-­ reflective); with the two disciplines mapping onto the vita contemplativa versus vita activa divide articulated by Hannah Arendt (1958)? Or conversely, is engineering practice steeped in reflectiveness, given that engineering fabrication is characterized by uncertainty, engineering design by conflicting constraints and the entire profession by complexity, largely because it is practiced in an “open world” (Blockley, 1989); and hence demanding phronesis (practical wisdom or ‘mindfulness’ for action) as described by Aristotle (2000)? Note that while Blockley used the term “open world” to denote the partial or incomplete knowledge under which engineering decisions need to be made, the term is broadened here to capture the idea that engineering solutions or proposals are open to many possibilities (or realizations), as well as (often unintended) consequences. The opening premise of this exploration is that the gap in reflectiveness is not so much between philosophers and engineers, but rather between engineering entrants (i.e. those who enter university from secondary school to pursue engineering degrees) and engineering practitioners, who have layers of experience over and above their university training. University entrance for engineering degrees typically requires competence in physics and mathematics, subjects that are characterized by precise answers and unique solutions to well defined problems. By the time engineers graduate from programs accredited by the International Engineering Alliance (IEA, 2020) through the Washington Accord, they are required to have the ability to solve complex, ill-defined problems; the solutions to which have been described by Goldman (2017) as being shaped by “highly contingent factors that, from a logical as well as a natural perspective, are arbitrary: time, money, markets, vested interests and social, political and personal values”. Neely et al. (2018) also describe modern manufacturing engineering as encompassing an appreciation of markets, technology, operations and distribution, in addition to its core components of physics, mathematics and technical design. Engineering programs are supposed

22  The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners

299

to bring about this intellectual transformation within students. They do so largely through the increasing exposure of students to engineering design, which is synthetic in nature, and requires skills different from the analytical mindset required for physics and mathematics. Note that such analysis is utilized in the synthesizing process too, but only as a part of it. At the same time, the IEA also requires engineering students to undertake complementary studies in the humanities. It is the contention in this paper that such humanities subjects will not only broaden the outlook of students, or complement their engineering skills in order to deliver engineering projects successfully, but also in fact contribute towards developing their core engineering mindset. This paper considers three such humanities subjects, and explores how they can contribute to the formation of reflective engineering practitioners. This is by no means to say that the humanities are of value only for the purpose of enhancing an engineering ethos. However, given the often skeptical views of even many engineering educators regarding the place of the humanities within engineering programs, this paper seeks to focus specifically on the utilitarian value of the humanities towards the formation of engineers. The humanities have the capacity for promoting reflectiveness, which would be essential for tackling real world complexity in the practice of engineering. So the argument in this paper is as follows: the IEA requires engineering graduates to solve complex engineering problems; such problems require the kind of reflectiveness that engineering entrants are not used to; engineering programs seek to inculcate such reflectiveness via their design courses; but humanities subjects can also help to develop a sort of reflectiveness that is not very different to that employed in engineering practice.

22.2 Role Identity and Context Embeddedness Through Existential Philosophy Where engineers are concerned, even before being reflective about their practice, they may need to be reflective about their role. This arises due to the gap between engineering education and practice, alluded to before. So practicing engineers would have questions as to whether they are supposed to be using theoretical knowledge from first principles; or practical and codified knowledge in often routine tasks. An exposure to the existential philosopher Martin Heidegger could help prepare engineers for this role duality they will probably experience in their careers. Other pragmatists such as Pierce, Dewey or Rorty could also be worth engaging with, but Heidegger in particular has been ‘recruited’ by engineering academics to shed light on an engineering mindset (Turk, 2001; Winograd & Flores, 1986). What follows below is only a bare outline of a few key Heideggerian ideas that are relevant to this paper. More in-depth treatment on Heidegger’s relevance to technology can be found elsewhere (e.g. Ihde, 1990).

300

P. Dias

Heidegger was concerned about the “human way of being”, or Dasein. His proposition (Heidegger, 1997) was that humans are all socialized into “average everyday” practices (which we could call “know-how”), well before they acquired any theoretical understanding (which would correspond to “know-what”) of the world around them (see also Dias, 2019, Chap. 7). Such socialization created an averaging tendency, which could be the experience of many engineers, especially those involved in routine tasks, whether design, construction, fabrication or maintenance. This could create angst in such engineers, because they are somehow thwarted from achieving their ‘authenticity’ by exercising ingenuity. Note that the Latin ingenium (meaning intelligence) is one of the roots of the word ‘engineer’. Also, many organizations employ experienced technicians or foremen, who could be better at routine activities, given their longer period of socialization, than (especially recent) graduate engineers – this could create doubt in the minds of engineers regarding the practical value of a theoretical engineering education. Heidegger says that there is a limited but real scope for one’s “ownmost way of being”, and hence an escape from “average everydayness”. Engineers are constrained to adopt such “average everydayness”, not only by the laws of nature (which they cannot violate), but also by codes of practice (which are semi-legal documents), and by the ever present imperative to minimize cost. However, the context of their projects can provide opportunities for escaping from “everydayness”, whether in design or fabrication. For example, the obstacle of having deep water in a river, over which a bridge has to be constructed, can lead to the innovation (in fabrication) of floating bridge segments to the required locations; and the relatively novel solution (in design) of floatable hollow precast concrete segments that are later post-tensioned in-situ. The above solutions are not new anymore, although still the exception; but they would certainly have been a departure from the routine when first adopted by the industry. It is the theoretical background of engineers, and their ability to think from first principles (know-what), that gives them the confidence to innovate. But they do so not in a vacuum, but while in their “thrownness” into particular contexts (Heidegger, 1997; Turk, 2001). The other way that “average everydayness” is transcended, according to Heidegger, is when “breakdowns” occur in the routine. Heidegger (1997) describes this through a carpenter, whose seamless experience of carpentry (involving himself, a hammer, a nail and a timber artifact) is disturbed when he happens to pick up a wrong hammer, or if the head of the hammer comes off. Heidegger argued that it is such breakdowns that prompted theoretical reflection or scientific inquiry (e.g. What is the weight of this hammer? What properties are required for the hammer head to be properly jointed to the handle?) – see also Dias (2019, Chap. 7), which refers to the difference between the functional and physical descriptions of the above carpentry example. Engineers of course do not seek breakdowns or failures in their practice. When they do occur however, engineers must seize the opportunity to learn from them and expand engineering knowledge (Dias, 1994). Note that Hegel is also associated with the ‘dialectic’ of learning from failure. However, a key aspect of Heidegger’s ‘breakdowns’ is that it signals the transition between practical wisdom (know-how) and theoretical reflection (know-what).

22  The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners

301

One key engineering example of learning from failure is the Ronan Point debacle in 1968, where a gas explosion in a kitchen on the 18th floor of a 22 storey apartment block led to the collapse of all the kitchens in the block that were vertically in line. The rapid construction technology for these types of apartments was well established at the time (know-how). The failure however, led to industry wide reflection on the state of the art (know-what). This led to a change in design philosophy that became embedded in codes of practice, and sought to eliminate or minimize the possibility of collapse that is disproportionate to its cause. While landmark failures (i.e. ones that lead to changes in the design process) may be few and far between, engineers can learn from many smaller scale failures (or indeed ‘near misses’) to improve their practice. Engineering students who wish to delve deeper into Heidegger (1971) could also be encouraged to reflect on whether the planning and building of a ‘house’ was a mere joining together of geometric spaces, or rather the creation of locations within which “earth and heaven, divinities and mortals” were to be gathered together – and whether in fact it was possible for mass-produced apartments in multi-storey blocks to be such locations. Heidegger then provides two ways for escaping from “average everydayness”. One involves actively transcending the routine by using context to generate innovation. The other uses disruptions of the routine to improve practice. Both of them require reflectiveness. It is not that engineers do not do this already, especially when they think functionally (e.g. “What is the best way to provide vehicular access across this river?”), rather than physically (e.g. “What is the best way to build this bridge?”). But Heidegger can give them a rationale’ for their reflective practice, and philosophical respectability for their role – a role that would include both the routine and the novel; and encompass both practical action and theoretical fundamentals. And engineering students who are exposed to this kind of philosophical understanding, especially in its application to engineering (Dias, 2019, Chap. 7), will be better fitted for fulfilling their engineering roles upon graduation. The above exposition may not be the only way to interpret Heidegger. Others have done so in slightly different ways, because philosophy is a discipline open to interpretation; but they too have recognized the importance of role and context, and indeed the importance of Heidegger for engineers (e.g. Winograd & Flores, 1986; Turk, 2001).

22.3 Complexity and Interpretation Through History of Technology There are two ways that engineering programs already pay some attention to history. The first is through exposing students to case studies, generally of significant engineering failures, and occasionally of successful engineering design. In addition, some programs may offer a formal course in the history of engineering. This would enable students to grasp how “the great sources of power in nature” have historically been directed towards “the use and convenience of man”. This paper argues

302

P. Dias

that giving students a deeper exposure to history could have even greater benefits, and presents some approaches. One avenue that can be explored is the Science, Technology and Society (STS) literature. While such studies are set in a variety of historical contexts, one of their purposes is to reveal how widely differing factors combined to result in technological success. For example, Noam Cook’s (2006) tracing of the rise in mass literacy undermines the notion that the Gutenberg press was somehow the single most important reason for the same. Students exploring his article would discover that the achievement of global literacy was also dependent on a range of other complementary technologies  – e.g. raw materials and manufacturing processes for ink and paper; developments in printing press design; and the discovery of new sources of power. Even more than the above, they would understand that the spread of such literacy was contingent on sociological factors such as the demand for reading created by both religious and mercantile communities; the ‘rights of man’ movements and the American and French revolutions that emphasized human equality; and the resulting universal free education provided by governments. Another example is John Law’s (1987) thesis that Portuguese naval expansion was contingent not only on advances in shipbuilding, but also on the provisioning of crews, the invention of the compass, and the discovery of meteorological phenomena. The article itself is titled “Heterogeneous Engineering”, conveying once again the multi-disciplinary interactions required for technological progress. In short, STS studies such as the above give insight into the socio-technical complexity involved in successful engineering. The success of a smart phone or a new city depends not merely on electronics or civil engineering respectively, but also on a host of other technological and sociological considerations. The way that the International Engineering Alliance (IEA, 2020) differentiates between education for professional engineers (as per the Washington Accord) and engineering technologists (as per the Sydney Accord) is that the former need to acquire the attributes required to solve complex (and ill-defined) engineering problems, rather than even only broadly defined ones. To be sure, engineering design modules in engineering programs, especially the capstone design project, would provide avenues for such graduate formation. However, this could very profitably be reinforced through exposure to STS examples in a history course, especially since such examples tend to highlight sociological aspects. Note that the IEA (2020) is in the process of broadening the list of aspects required in accredited engineering programs, one of which is the social sciences. The other benefit of exposing students to such STS articles (i.e. by Cook and Law) is that they could be made to understand that history, while being as faithful as possible to the facts pertaining to the past, can nevertheless be interpreted in different ways. This is not unlike engineering solutions to problems – while they are constrained by the design brief and the laws of nature, they can nevertheless constitute a variety of creative interpretations. Yet another way to gain insight through history is to understand the nature of the discipline itself. It has been argued elsewhere (Dias, 2014) that engineering has more in common with the discipline of history in some respects than with that of

22  The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners

303

science. This is because both history and engineering consider individual contextual ‘particulars’ (i.e. events for history, and features of a solution for engineering) as central to their practice; whereas science tries to strip away the particularities of contexts to form or test general laws. Also, repeatability is crucial for science, while highly unlikely for engineering and history – notwithstanding the use of modular components in the former, and the rather loose aphorism that “history repeats itself” where the latter is concerned – once again because of the great variety of contexts with which they engage. Finally, a well-researched historical novel with an engineering hero can also give insight into the engineering role, while sparking the imagination of engineering students too. Although engineering heroes are few and far between, reflecting on a novel such as Pompeii by Robert Harris – where the hero is a Roman hydraulics engineer  – can highlight issues such as engineering reasoning (mathematics and logic); interactions with experienced subordinates (e.g. foremen); careers in public service; conflicts of interest; working against time; engineering contributions to culture; being out of the public eye; nature as an adversary; and the difference between science and engineering – see Dias (2010). History and literature both require interpretation, and their study cannot be undertaken with the intention of finding or giving “precise answers and unique solutions to well defined problems”, referred to in the introduction as what engineering entrants are used to. Therefore, apart from exposing students to complexity, such subjects can also help them to develop the confidence to hold individual opinions arrived at after reflection – something that is not dissimilar to the engineering judgement they will need to exercise during their careers.

22.4 Alternative Viewpoints and Critical Thinking through Technology Ethics Another area in which the IEA (2020) is broadening its requirements is that of ethics – i.e. for engineering curricula to include not merely professional ethics, but also technology ethics. Professional ethics has largely been characterized by case studies (Dias, 2019, Chap. 5) – e.g. examples such as the Challenger space shuttle disaster, where an engineering manager, who wanted to postpone the launch because of safety concerns, subsequently changed his mind to look after his employer’s interests (Pinkus et al., 1997); or the market release of the economical and fuel-efficient Ford Pinto motor car, despite the engineers knowing there was a lack of integrity in its fuel system that could cause a fire if it was ‘rear-ended’ in an accident (Birsch & Fielder, 1994). These have largely to do with conflicts of interest between duty to employers and responsibility to the public. Hypothetical examples are also used in ethics classes. Exposure to such ethical dilemmas, and more importantly, reflection upon and opinion generation regarding the same, would be extremely useful in the formation of engineers. As in the case of history and philosophy, students taking

304

P. Dias

courses in ethics will appreciate that alternative views can be held and defended – if nothing else through the differing bases for ethics, e.g. utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics (Blockley, 2005). Technology ethics however, constitutes a deeper treatment of ethics than does professional ethics. Any serious treatment of technology will demand that it be reflected on with suspicion. Once again, Heidegger can be of use. He warned against seeing technology as merely neutral, since he considered it to be a “way of being” that suppressed all others (Heidegger, 1977). At any rate, technology now has ‘a life of its own’, with embedded values and unintended consequences that are complex and difficult to perceive. The increasingly concealed effects of technology have been described as hazardous, unjust, sociological and psychological (Dias, 2019, Chap. 6). Courses in ethics with such broadened scope can help students to ask questions about the results of their actions as future engineers – for example whether carbon intensive technologies can be as hazardous as nuclear ones; or whether the construction of a large multi-purpose dam can lead to a heightened need for its security, thus possibly opening the way to the securitization of an entire society. Such reflection will enable students to understand and perform well in design projects that require value judgements (Kheirandish et al., 2020). It will also train students, perhaps subliminally, in the kind of deep critical thinking that is required to reason functionally rather than purely physically, in order to produce innovative solutions to problems. Another approach, especially to “aspirational” ethics (Kanemitsu, 2018), is to present the resolution of ethical dilemmas as design problems – thus enabling the learning of both ethics and design to feed off each other. An even deeper issue for the engineering profession, pointed out by Mitcham (2020), is that its aims are not as clear as for say medicine (i.e. health) or law (i.e. justice). Such engineering aims, while laudable in themselves – e.g. “holding paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public” and “the use and convenience of man”, need to be socially negotiated, because virtually any engineering project or product can be subsumed under them. This could lead to the engineering profession becoming captive to big government or big business. These are clearly rich areas for reflection in an ethics course  – there will certainly not be “precise answers and unique solutions” to these questions.

22.5 Discussion What is of paramount importance is to appreciate that these three humanities subjects in the areas of philosophy, history and ethics are meant not merely for the purpose of broadening the education of engineers; but rather for actually contributing towards the formation of their engineering mindset. Although we have discussed rather specific subjects in the above areas in order to make our arguments  – i.e. Heideggerian existential philosophy, history of technology with an STS orientation, and technology ethics, other subjects in these general humanities areas of philosophy, history and ethics may serve equally well for developing reflective engineers.

22  The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners

305

Such reflectiveness is essential for engineering practice – much more so than for the practice of pure science. This is because science is practiced by shrinking the number of real world variables, either by excluding them in controlled environments or ignoring them in others; whereas engineers are always forced to grapple with the vicissitudes of an “open world”. As stated in the introduction, it is this “open world” nature of engineering that demands reflectiveness. Some aspects of this are that (i) every engineering solution or proposal will depend on its context, which needs to be interpreted and catered for; (ii) such catering for can be done in many ways, thus requiring the evaluation of alternatives, with the best alternatives often arising out of critical thinking that starts with functional requirements before arriving at physical specifications; (iii) such evaluation not only needs to consider the requirements of a client, but also to ensure that the public is safeguarded and the environment protected; thus frequently giving rise to conflicting constraints and/or imperatives, the complexities of which need to be resolved at an appropriate cost within an allotted time, to deliver an acceptable quality; (iv) this calls for decisions regarding the engineering role and approach – i.e. whether established routine approaches could be used, or whether thinking from first principles is required. The reader would recognize that the italicized words also occurred in our descriptions of existential philosophy (context, role), history of technology (complexity, interpretation, alternatives, context) and technology ethics (alternatives, critical thinking). This is why we argue that the humanities would be of great benefit for creating in students the kind of reflective mindset that would be required for their engineering practice in an “open world”. However, the core engineering courses for the formation of such an engineering mindset are those on design. In this context, it is somewhat perturbing that the capacity for design thinking has been reported as actually decreasing from first to final year students (Coleman et  al., 2019). This could be because the entrants, although steeped in physics and mathematics at secondary school, enroll in engineering programs with intentions to be creative and “change the world” (Neely et  al., 2018); and conversely, because engineering programs may still be offered largely in ‘engineering science’ mode – i.e. reinforcing the “precise answers and unique solutions to well defined problems” mode. The resolution of such issues must clearly be tackled within the core engineering courses – e.g. enhancing the design components at the expense of the science ones. The argument in this paper however is that humanities courses can also help, as demonstrated above, because they can inculcate in students the kind of reflectiveness that is used in engineering practice too. There are references in the literature about how humanities subjects have been integrated into design  – for example by infusing values into design projects (Kheirandish et al., 2020); while others describe the complementarity of humanities subjects to engineering ones (Dubreta, 2014; Bilsel et al., 1998). A common problem cited is the skepticism of engineering educators to recognize the benefits of the humanities; perhaps compounded by the inability of humanities teachers to deliver course content to engineering students in a relevant manner. This paper is a contribution towards addressing such obstacles.

306

P. Dias

22.6 Conclusions This paper has argued that deficiencies in reflection are found not so much in engineers vis-a-vis philosophers; but rather in engineering entrants vis-a-vis engineering practitioners. While the latter are forced to be reflective in the face of complex engineering problems (i.e. ill-defined and multi-disciplinary – e.g. as embodied in engineering design), the former are much less so, since they are used to “precise answers and unique solutions to well defined problems” associated with the physics and mathematics they have been schooled in. The argument in this paper is that the design courses in engineering programs, which are supposed to develop reflectiveness in engineering students, can profitably be supplemented by humanities courses towards this end. This is because of the exposure students will get to the concepts of role and context; complexity and interpretation; and alternatives and critical thinking  – through subjects such as existential philosophy, history of technology and technology ethics respectively.

References Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press. Aristotle. (2000). In R. Crisp (Ed.), Nicomachean ethics. Cambridge University Press. Bilsel, A., Oral, O., & Pillai, J. (1998). Turkish and American engineering programmes: A comparative study of curricular emphases on mathematics, basic sciences, humanities, and social sciences. IEEE Transanctions on Education, 41(4), 247–252. Birsch, D., & Fielder, J. H. (Eds.). (1994). The ford pinto case: A study in applied ethics, business and technology. SUNY Press. Blockley, D. I. (1989). Open world problems in structural reliability. In ICOSSAR’89, fifth international conference on structural safety and reliability. San Francisco. Blockley, D. (2005). Do ethics matter? The Structural Engineer, 83(7), 27–31. Coleman, E., Shealy, T., Grohs, J., & Godwin, A. (2019). Design thinking among first-year and senior engineering students: A cross-sectional, national study measuring perceived ability. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(1), 72–87. Cook, S.  D. N. (2006). Technological revolutions and the Gutenberg myth. In M.  Stefik (Ed.), Internet dreams: Archetypes, myths and metaphors. MIT Press, 1996. Dias, W.  P. S. (1994). Structural failures and design philosophy. The Structural Engineer, 72(2), 25–29. Dias, P. (2010). Pompeii by Robert Harris: An engineering reading. ICE Proceedings on Engineering History and Heritage, 163(4), 255–260. Dias, P. (2014). The disciplines of engineering and history: Some common ground. Science and Engineering Ethics, 20(2), 539–549. Dias, P. (2019). Philosophy for engineering: Practice, context, ethics, models, failure. Springer Nature. Dias, W. P. S., & Blockley, D. I. (1995). Reflective practice in engineering design. ICE Proceedings on Civil Engineering, 108(4), 160–168. Dubreta, N. (2014). Integration of social sciences and humanities into mechanical engineering curriculum. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 12(2), 137–150.

22  The Role of the Humanities in the Formation of Reflective Engineering Practitioners

307

Goldman, S. L. (2017). Compromised exactness and the rationality of engineering. In C. Garcia-­ Diaz & C.  Olaya (Eds.), Social systems engineering; the design of complexity (Chap. 1) (pp. 13–29). John Wiley & Sons. Heidegger, M. (1971). Poetry, language, thought (Rr. A. Hofstader). Harper and Row Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays (Trans. W. Lovitt). Harper and Row. Heidegger, M. (1997). Being and time (Trans. J. Stambaugh). SUNY Press. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Indiana University Press. International Engineering Alliance (IEA). (2020). UNESCO IEA WFEO Working Group – Review of IEA Graduate Attribute and Professional Competency Framework (GAPC). http://www.wfeo. org/consultation-­with-­wfeo-­members-­and-­partners-­on-­proposed-­updated-­iea-­benchmark-­for-­ graduate-­attributes-­and-­professional-­competencies/ (Accessed 01 November 2020). Kanemitsu, H. (2018). Ch. 17 – New trends in engineering ethics – A Japanese perspective. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp. 243–256). Springer. Kheirandish, S., Funk, M., Wensveen, S., Verkerk, M., & Rauterberg, M. (2020). HuValue: A tool to support design students in considering human values in their design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30, 1015–1041. Law, J. (1987). Technology, closure and heterogeneous engineering: The case of the Portuguese expansion. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 111–134). MIT Press. Mitcham, C. (2020). Steps toward a philosophy of engineering: Historico-philosophical and critical essays. Rowman & Littlefield International. Neely, A., Fell, S., & Fritzsche, A. (2018). Ch. 13 – Manufacturing with a big M – The grand challenges of engineering in digital societies from the perspective of the Institute for Manufacturing at Cambridge University. In A.  Fritzsche & S.  J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp. 191–200). Springer. Pinkus, R. L. B., Shuman, L. J., Hummon, N. P., & Wolfe, H. (1997). Engineering ethics: Balancing cost, schedule and risk – Lessons learned from the space shuttle. Cambridge University Press. Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Routledge & Kegan Paul. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Temple Smith. Turk, Z. (2001). Phenomenological foundations of conceptual product modeling in AEC. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 15, 83–92. Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. Ablex.

Chapter 23

The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible Engineering Practice and Education Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz, Alexei Ochoa-Duarte, and Andrés Leonardo León

Abstract  This chapter intends to reflect on the engineering practice and education from a Global South’s perspective, its relationships with grassroots social processes, and the transitions towards the Amerindian Buen Vivir, as opposed to the hegemonic colonial model of engineering from the North and its imperative of satisfying the market’s needs. This way, after a quick presentation of some aspects of both hegemonic and alternative/counter-hegemonic engineering practice and education panoramas (introduction), such panoramas are described in the decolonial theory’s terms (Sect. 23.2), and Buen Vivir’s central elements are sketched (Sect. 23.3). Then, two case studies from Colombia are described (Sect. 23.4), the specificities of this engineering training and practice are highlighted and systematized/theorized, and some of their disruptive potentialities are singled out (Sect. 23.5). In the final section, two main challenges of decolonial or counter-hegemonic engineering practice and education in general, and for the Buen Vivir, in particular, are briefly introduced: institutionalization and evaluation. Keywords  Buen Vivir · Decolonial theory · Engineering practice · Engineering education · Colombia

23.1 Introduction Both engineering practice and education have been marked by a fragmentation of knowledge, ignorance, and lack of commitment to the context in which they are carried out. In a first approximation, it can be said that this is the case because C. C. Cruz (*) Aeronautics Technological Institute (ITA - Brazil), São José dos Campos, Brazil A. Ochoa-Duarte · A. L. León Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_23

309

310

C. C. Cruz et al.

positivism has cemented the traditional engineering approach, with which whoever exercises this profession intends to seek objectivity and neutrality (Cech, 2013). Additionally, it has been influenced by the hegemonic notion of development, driven from an evolutionary point of view and based on war and the market (Goldberg, 2010) and on the satisfaction of needs, whether individual, collective, or from the capital (Ochoa-Duarte et al., 2021). This way, under this interpretation of the world, design, implementation, and use of technologies have mainly focused on the aspects said or taken as purely technical, resulting in that not only important social, cultural, and environmental areas (or possibilities) are neglected (Nieusma, 2013) but are also taken as entirely separated or alien to the technical realm. That is made evident, for instance, on the almost nonexistent critique of the engineering’s traditional paradigm and the resulting distancing that it presents from several of society’s conflicts (Galceran Huguet, 2013). Usually, engineering has been passive concerning the demands of different marginalized communities since they are not placed inside engineering’s hegemonic paradigm, being thus seen as something external. However, there is a significant diversity of conceptions, approaches, practices, and experiences challenging such paradigm (Catalano, 2006). That is why, from various geographies, educational institutions, and social organizations, proposals that reflect on engineering’s social meaning have arisen, aiming at a new praxis both in engineering education and practice (Kleba, 2017). Drawing on ideas already circulating in the engineering realm and on dialogues with other areas of knowledge, some concepts were created, such as Humanitarian Engineering (Reina-Rozo & León, 2017), Engineering for Peace Building (Reina-­ Rozo & Kleba, 2021), and Popular Engineering (Fraga et al., 2020), which some authors have tried to group under the umbrella concept of Engaged Engineering (Kleba, 2017). This chapter focuses on a specific type of engaged engineering that aims to support the sociotechnical construction of local realities following the Amerindian worldview and philosophy called Buen Vivir. This way, the next section analyzes mainstream or hegemonic engineering according to the decolonial theory lenses, evidencing engineering’s central role in supporting the triple coloniality of power, knowledge, and being. Section three presents the central elements of the Buen Vivir philosophy and worldview, whose incorporation into engineering training and practice is illustrated in the following section through two Colombian case studies. The penultimate section highlights and discusses some of the specificities and potentialities of practicing and training this Buen Vivir engineering in particular and decolonial engineering (a subgroup of engaged engineering) in general. Closing remarks summarizes part of the chapter’s main arguments and sketches two challenges concerning decolonial engineering practice and education.

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

311

23.2 Engineering and Coloniality To argue that positivism is to blame for the average engineering practice and education disregard concerning (non-hegemonic projects or conceptions of) society and the environment is, as said, just a first approximation. Indeed, how does positivism, as such, manage to impose itself? Where did it emerge from, and how so? First, it is necessary to define what is being called “positivism” here. Grosso modo, it is an understanding pervasive in the engineering realm up until today that, among other things, sustains that: (1) engineering can be practiced based entirely on technical-scientific knowledge and cognitive and instrumental values; (2) technical-­ scientific knowledge is objective, neutral, and universal or is expected to become so the more it is developed; (3) there exists an objective best solution to any problem, and this solution is expected to be valid universally (Riley, 2008, Chap. 2; Ferguson, 1992; Cruz, 2021c). Defining positivism this way allows for identifying two general driving principles to engineering practice and education: eliminating all that cannot be entirely stated in technical-scientific pureness or objectiveness, and growing universal. Compelling as such goals might seem, the question is whether they could be achieved and to what extent in engineering. If the vast literature produced in Science and Technology Studies since the 1970s is considered, the answer is that objectiveness and universality can never be fully achieved in engineering. The reason for that is at least triple: technological development is underdetermined, requiring the supplementation of ethical-political values to be fulfilled (Pinch & Bjiker, 1989); engineering design has significantly to do with art (Ferguson, 1992) or style (Simon, 1971), relying on aesthetic values and some other non-cognitive or instrumental elements, such as imagery lexicon (Cruz, 2021b); and every solution is sociotechnical (Feenberg, 2010) or cosmotechnical (Hui, 2016) in nature, which means that they are particular products of a collectivity’s values, worldviews, or cosmology (underdetermination) and, at the same time, the very producer or emulator of such values, worldviews, or cosmology, so different values etc. will probably produce and demand different technologies (and engineerings) (Cruz, 2021a, c). This way, engineering’s positivism fails its three central claims. Thus, its enduring strength must be sought somewhere else than on epistemic grounds. Positivism or similar understandings survive because, or in as much as, it supports the hegemonic political-economic structure, which currently articulates neo-liberalism and globalization with authoritarian or weakly democratic regimes. On the one hand, every value and worldview or cosmological trait that supports or is favorable to the established power is already translated into technical code or research agenda or adequately supported by the technical-scientific knowledge available. The technocratic handling of any technical problem is an example of that: it disempowers or does not empower the affected or interested ordinary people (which do not have a say in any significant part of the design process); the technical codes it follows only allow for producing more control over users/consumers, more submission of nature, and more capitalism (Baskoy, 2018); the other technical-scientific knowledge it

312

C. C. Cruz et al.

demands or relies on allows for understanding and acting on reality only through a perspective that is materialistic and dualistic (and does not properly acknowledge or support designs based or aiming at deeper interconnections between humans and non-humans, care, or solidarity, for instance). “Purely” and “objectively” doing this engineering will, thus, only reinforce the established political-economic power’s strength (through the support or emulation of the values, worldviews, and cosmology favorable to it). On the other hand, the externalities, impurities, or non-objectivities to be avoided in engineering practice are everything that threatens to imbalance or challenge such power. Shielding engineering from these “non-canonical” values, worldviews, or cosmologies is a way to forbid them to thrive or be implemented/materialized since such implementation/ materialization would inevitably demand a sociotechnical (Feenberg, 2010) or cosmotechnical (Hui, 2016) mediation or embodiment. In other words, defending positivism or current/mainstream engineering’s objectivity and universality produces, at the same time, both the reinforcement of the established political-economic order and the interdiction of any order different from that. There are many ways for political-economic power to shape engineering (knowledge), from funding (or not) specific engineering/technologic projects, programs, or research to academic procedures or decisions related to publication (i.e., the academic validation of any knowledge) and professional progression. Plus, if it can be argued that our time’s hegemonic political-economic structure is an actualization of the Western colonial order (Maldonado-Torres, 2009), the same can be said concerning the (supposedly universal) engineering we still teach in our universities, alongside modern science, which are originally a Western knowledge produced by, and producer/legitimator of, colonialism (cf. Maldonado-Torres, 2009; Quijano, 2000). This arrangement of knowledge and power manages to hold sway over our contemporaries’ minds, dreams, efforts, and desires because they shape and are shaped by specific ways of being (Maldonado-Torres, 2009; Quijano, 2000). Indeed, the mainstream individual adopts  – or is forced into  – some very peculiar identities (e.g., self-made and isolated (or monadic) individual, consumer, winner), worldviews (e.g., individualism, competition, nature’s domination), and cosmologies (e.g., human ontological inferiority concerning God (or gods), human ontological superiority concerning the rest of nature). Such an individual is not only a product of the hegemonic power and knowledge and an active supporter and producer of them but also a fierce fighter against power arrangements, knowledge, and ways of being different from these. In sum, the sociotechnical or cosmotechnical reality we live in is one possibility among many others equally legitimate and achievable. This reality is the result of the conjugation of three elements that shape and support one another: the established political-economic power (neoliberalism, globalization, and authoritarian or weakly democratic regimes), knowledge considered the only one legitimate or the best available one (Western technical-scientific knowledge and its praised, though partially false or non-realized, values of objectiveness and universality), and ways of being taken as the highest manifestation of our universal nature (with its

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

313

prescribed identities, worldviews, and cosmologies). The three are current actualizations of their Western colonialist equivalents. Its triple imprisonment actualizes European/Western colonialism: coloniality of power, knowledge, and being (Quijano, 2000; Maldonado-Torres, 2009). Buen Vivir and the engineering and technology it demands to construct another political-economic power structure and other ways of being are an attempt out of coloniality and its universalisms into the Zapatist “a world in which many worlds would coexist.” As such, they must be taken as enlargements or pluralizations of (not substitutes for) the hegemonic power, knowledge, and identity. Let us see how that is possible (next two sections) and what it teaches us about decolonial engineering practice and education (Sect. 23.5).

23.3  Buen Vivir The notion of development, which is a key element of the triple coloniality to which we are subjected, has acquired different interpretations over time, with the ideal of sustainable development being one of the most widespread globally today. However decolonial critiques (or critiques that articulate very well with decolonial theory) of this notion have emerged from different perspectives in recent years. They question its relationship with economic growth, the globalizing and single view of the world, and favoring the hegemonic capitalist system on a global scale (Eschenhagen, 2015). To go beyond the criticisms from various corners of the earth, other plural and diverse conceptions emerge that seek to build other possible futures. These include Degrowth (in the Global North), Buen Vivir (in the Andean-Amazonian countries), Ubuntu (in the south of the African continent), and Swaraj (in India) (Kothari et al., 2019). These critiques and alternatives to the notion of development have also been nourished by aspects that oppose the coloniality of power (Quijano, 2000), postdevelopment (Escobar, 2012), transmodernity (Ahumada Infante, 2013), as well as by concepts based on cosmovisions and philosophies proper to the native Latin American peoples (Sumak Kawsay, from Quechua and Suma Qamaña, from Aymara), which can be translated into Spanish as Buen Vivir1 (Gudynas, 2011). From this perspective, the concept of Buen Vivir is based on principles such as reciprocity and mutualism of existing forms of life, a plurality of life, balance, and

 Buen Vivir refers to a group of Latin American ideas that share a strong skepticism about development and other core elements of modernity while also proposing alternatives. It cannot be regarded as an ideology or culture, nor can it be compared to the Western concept of happiness or the ideal life. It indicates a deeper shift in knowledge, affectivity, and spirituality and an ontological opening to new ways of thinking about human-non-human relationships that do not necessitate the modern division of civilization and nature. It is an evolving and plural category that takes on diverse forms in different countries and regions. It is unconventional in that it combines indigenous aspects with internal modernity critiques (Kothari, Salleh, Escobar, Demaria & Acosta, 2019). 1

314

C. C. Cruz et al.

the cyclical movement of life itself (Weber & Tascón, 2020). Additionally, Buen Vivir is not a unique or finished concept, but is under constant construction and has been nurtured by various strands among which stand out: (1) the indigenist, also known as pachamamista, culturalist or irreducible (which is based on the self-­ determination of peoples, the conservation of their identity and their own spirituality), (2) the socialist, also called ecomarxist or statist (where social equity has a relevant role), and (3) the post-developmentalist, also known as ecologist or new age (in which taking care of nature is the center of attention) (Hidalgo-Capitán & Cubillo-Guevara, 2017). In the indigenist version, developed by indigenous people and indigenist intellectuals, mainly Latin Americans, the notion of development is rejected, considering it an additional form of coloniality. In addition, it is proposed to recover the harmony of the original peoples of Abya Yala (Americas) in order to foster the recovery of identity and promote a civilizational change. To this end, concepts such as plurinationality and self-determination are given great relevance, responding to a pre-modern conception of the world. On the other hand, in the socialist, ecomarxist, or statist, there is a revolutionary process aimed at improving equity, through the transformation of socioeconomic systems, from a post-capitalist perspective that gives a relevant role to the States in the implementation of Buen Vivir. In this way, its approaches can be associated with a modern vision of the world. Finally, the ecologist, post-developmentalist, or new age strand criticizes development and is close to Latin American social movements that propose Buen Vivir as a utopia under construction while associating development as a form of domination. In this view, the implementation of local and participatory social processes oriented towards a socio-ecological transformation is proposed. For this vision, participation in constructing a biocentric society is relevant, and its approaches are associated with the post-developmentalist paradigm (Hidalgo-Capitán & Cubillo-Guevara, 2017). A conjugation of some of these different perspectives of Buen Vivir can be found in the transformation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), promoted by the United Nations, into Objetivos del Buen Vivir (OBV) (Hidalgo-Capitán et al., 2019). These put the SDGs in question while proposing, from a non-capitalist paradigm, different ways of living and of sustainability to be pursued. The OBVs, as an alternative proposal to the SDGs, focus on the concept of harmony with all beings in nature, all human beings, and ourselves. Additionally, they are based on principles built on the concepts of post-capitalism (socioeconomic system based on other logics that move away from the market, private property, and utilitarianism), biocentrism (which conceives life as the center of the universe, impluing that human beings are but a small part of it), decoloniality (of power, knowledge, and being as a way to combat discrimination in any aspect) and depatriarchalization (which seeks an egalitarian world in terms of gender).

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

315

23.4 Engineering and Buen Vivir: Case Studies Buen Vivir’s philosophy, ideals, and practices have been incorporated into some Colombian engineering training activities and practice. That has made it possible for a new form of decolonial or counter-hegemonic engineering to emerge alongside a correspondent education. This section presents two intertwined case studies that illustrate this new engineering practice and education. The specificities of such practice and training are systematized and theorized in the next one.

23.4.1 The Ingenuity, Science, Technology, and Society Discipline The Ingenuity, science, technology, and society course arose in the National University of Colombia, campus Bogotá, aiming at offering students science and technology tools for working with communities, based on an educational ideal in engineering that is contrary to the hegemonic one, according to which university has (only) to form the market’s workforce (León & Molina-Soler, 2019). This discipline is shaped by a student base committed to grassroots communities; by an anti-capitalist stance to a world that transits towards Buen Vivir; by the humanitarian engineering concept of designing and making social technology; by theories from the Global South that support the construction of solutions based on the dialogue of knowledge. In other words, designing and making solutions: (1) that address the supported vulnerable/marginalized groups’ actual demands and support their empowerment/emancipation; (2) in a horizontal, inter- and trans-disciplinary way; and (3) making academic and popular knowledge dialogue and integrating knowledge and experience from everyone, including students, based on a Problem Based Learning methodology (Reina-Rozo & Peña-Reyes, 2015). At the discipline’s origin is a project in a school in the outskirts of Bogotá aimed at adapting a computer room furnished with equipment that had completed its cycle due to programmed obsolescence. The project recovered and put the computers into operation using free software. In so doing, it helped reduce the digital divide and practiced ideas such as technological sovereignty and free culture. Throughout this process arose the necessity of possessing tools from the social sciences for those taking part in it to work alongside the school community properly. That was addressed by creating a space of informal training for the group. The discipline arises from that. With this same idea, the course was offered from 2014 to 2020, building spaces of debate about science, technology, and society that allowed for developing projects with vulnerable or marginalized communities from different Colombian regions and in the communities’ territories. Among such projects, one can find urban agriculture, agroecology, social inclusion of people with disabilities, appropriate technologies, and technological recycling (León, 2020).

316

C. C. Cruz et al.

The course is based on the premise that the areas of science and engineering do not have sufficient academic, theoretical, practical, and methodological foundations to ensure that projects with vulnerable communities have the desired impact (Reina-­ Rozo & Peña-Reyes, 2015). In this sense, the projects are oriented by the principles of social justice and solidarity (Riley, 2008), putting science and technology to serve society’s liberation and humanization (Freire, 1979). As such, the course’s stance is opposed to charity, a prevalent idea that still shapes most of the work directed to communities affected by the system, which, although it can alleviate some of the harsh conditions such communities have to face, tends to encourage or create dependence or disempowerment, instead of liberation. Some of the course’s goals are developing capacities through mastering tools for interaction with different peoples, critically reflecting on technical implementations, questioning the notion of development, interacting with real situations and known problems, widening the possible meanings of doing engineering, and developing socio-emotional, writing, reading, and team working skills (León & Molina-­ Soler, 2019). The course’s methodology consists of guest lectures, with the active participation of students; group dynamics such as workshops, debates, role-playing games, and social mapping; short works related to readings on the topics of the subject; and, the main thing, the project in teams based on the identification of a problem, taking into account the time and resources available. Some of the topics that have been worked on are: introduction to the social studies of science and technology, logical framework, participatory action research, information collection methodologies, empathy, prototyping workshop, humanitarian engineering, concept of development, victims of development, alternatives to development, agroecology, technology and sustainability, appropriate technologies, territorial conflicts in Colombia, and transitions to Buen Vivir. All these topics are fundamental for constructing, learning, and practicing an engineering capable of supporting Buen Vivir or bringing it about.

23.4.2 Community Radio Station Articulated with the Ingenuity, science, technology, and society discipline, a project of university extension/ service learning was designed and implemented alongside an organized peasant community from Puerto Matilde village (city of Yondó, department of Antioquia, Colombia), which is part of the Peasant Association of the Cimitarra River Valley (ACVC, in Spanish). This project consisted of putting into operation a community radio station from scratch, aiming to have a community technological tool for ACVC’s organizing work, particularly that related to denouncing human rights violations caused by armed groups present in the region, defending the territory, diffusing the peasant culture, taking care of the environment and the group’s education, in sum, aiming at the community’s Buen Vivir.

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

317

Uniting experiences and knowledges, the community radio station project was designed collaboratively and obtained the 2018 National University of Colombia’s grant for solidarity extension. The idea originated in the community, motivated by ACVC’s previous experience in grassroots communication and the community’s need to possess communication media. It was also motivated by a dialogue with academia, materialized in the Research Group on Technologies and Innovations to Community Development (GITIDC, in Spanish), which had experience doing university extension/ service learning developing projects of technological literacy and others in communities networks. The whole process was developed together by students, teachers, and peasants, in a permanent interchange of experiences and knowledges, building knowledge through praxis, in the territory, and in dialogue, through two-way workshops, which are part of the Colombian social organizations’ tradition. Social bonds, participation, and communication are created in these workshops, and thoughts, feelings, and actions are generated (Romero & Camargo, 2009). The entire process was participatory, from the project’s name to the station’s operation, particularly the training, which is the main stage. The training was developed through the already mentioned two-way workshops, which took place in the territory, and a one-week-long intensive course in Bogota. Two ACVC members (who soon became the ones in charge of the radio station) along with some students, FARC-EP2’s ex-guerrilla, and members of other Colombian community radio stations attended the course, in which experiences and knowledges were shared, allowing for the construction of bonds and the improvement of many community radio stations’ work.

23.5 Decolonial Engineering: Practice and Education It is important to highlight that the developed engineering practices, part of which was described above, emerged from experience and explored different non-­ hegemonic approaches and conceptions, which have improved transition processes towards Buen Vivir. This means that, although there are some theoretical foundations upon which such alternatives have been built, these foundations have been changing and supplemented as the experiences have been carried out. Hence, a particular concept of Humanitarian Engineering was forged based on references from the Global North but contextualized in the South and enriched by the Brazilian idea of social technology, although mainly focused on teaching engineering in the territories. At any rate, this Buen Vivir has to be put into praxis, being incorporated into the engineering practice and fostering a dialogue of knowledge capable of transforming reality. This way, it must be articulated with non-hegemonic conceptions like social

 FARC-EP is the Spanish acronym of Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces – People’s Army.

2

318

C. C. Cruz et al.

technology and Global South’s humanitarian engineering, discarding the idea of development (Reina-Rozo & Kleba, 2021). Humanitarian engineering, defined like that, can be conceived as the convergence of community knowledges, the social sciences, science, and technology in an engineering praxis that allows for finding solutions to community problems oriented towards Buen Vivir (León, 2020). Its sociotechnical products are social technologies, i.e., technologies achieved through social and political construction developed in a contextualized and trans-disciplinary way (Dagnino et  al., 2004). They are solutions that are oriented towards solving environmental and social problems, that produce community autonomy via sociotechnical adequacy (Thomas, 2009), and that are characterized by the active role community plays in their design (Fressoli et al., 2015). In sum, this engineering practice and education differ from mainstream, colonial engineering in some essential aspects. First, it is highly contextualized, being developed in the territories and attentive to the local conditions (e.g., geography and environment) and the supported group’s specificities (e.g., necessities, interests, and knowledge). Second, it aims to learn with the supported group not only their actual needs and their requisites for the solution to be constructed but also how they manage to work, live, teach, etc. (i.e., learn with the group’s knowledge). Third, it is committed to the group’s empowerment/emancipation and to constructing a solution that embodies and emulates the sociotechnical/cosmotechnical order sought by the group. To do so, this engineering resorts to participatory methodologies (such as action research) that allow for the aimed dialogue of knowledge and solution co-­ construction to be achieved. More subtlely, it also relies on care and empathy that are the grounds upon which the trust relationship required for co-construction and dialogue of knowledge can be built. This way, it can be said that such engineering is both product and producer of the three forms of decoloniality. On the one hand, it arises from – and supports – an arrangement of power that is both anti/post-capitalist and committed to the emancipation/empowerment of poor, vulnerable, and marginalized people. On the other hand, it does not take mainstream technical-scientific knowledge as the only legitimate one, nor the available technical solutions as neutral, the best possibilities, or universal. Instead, it tries both to widen engineering through a dialogue of knowledge with the supported groups and to co-construct ultimately local solutions (social technology) that may range from unique inventions to sociotechnical adequation of mainstream technology (Dagnino et al., 2004). Finally, such engineering also arises from – and supports – different ways of being, based, for instance, on solidarity, biocentrism, and care. As such, this form of engineering, aside from being more legitimate for the supported groups (which are empowered to co-construct the world they are looking for), can be urgent to everyone else. That has particularly to do with the ecological impacts of its sociotechnical/ cosmotechnical solutions in a time when humankind faces enormous challenges posed by the effects of mainstream technologies. An engineering guided and shaped by Buen Vivir’s biocentrism and the Amerindian

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

319

worldviews, values, and knowledge from which Buen Vivir emerges is an engineering with considerable potential to invent sustainable solutions (as it is to widen or deepen what sustainability can mean). However, for maximizing this potentiality, it is necessary for engineering to go much further than simply incorporating some of the Amerindians’ biocentric values. It has both to open itself to a full dialogue of knowledge (incorporating to its “design instrumentalities” elements such as the supported group’s imagery lexicon and aesthetic values (Cruz, 2021b)) and to make the intervention/supporting process a way of actively recovering the group’s knowledge and worldviews (which could allow for the construction of other cosmotechnics (Hui, 2016) from the bottom-up (Cruz, 2021c)). This engineering is disruptive, concerning the colonial standards of power, knowledge, and being, not only in the technical realm but in the whole field of mainstream social practices. In other words, it is not the engineering course (alone) that colonizes the students’ minds, hearts, imaginations, and sensitivities. They usually arrive at the engineering classes already colonized and are immersed in a society that fosters colonization almost everywhere and through almost every institution. That is why educating an engineer capable of decolonizing engineering is more than just equipping them with some (theoretical, methodological, critical, behavioral) instruments or developing (theoretical, methodological, critical, behavioral) skills. Above all, educating a decolonial engineer requires decolonizing them. Taken together, the Ingenuity, science, technology, and society course and the extension practices developed linked to it are a powerful way of fostering such decolonization of the engineering students. The reasons for that are multiple: (1) they encourage a critical analysis (and de-reification/denaturalization) of reality in its political-economic, epistemic, and existential-ontological intertwined dimensions; (2) they provide opportunities for enlarging, pluralizing, fertilizing (the contents or possibilities of) these three dimensions; (3) they offer space for reflecting and acting, learning from theory and practice, and using theory to improve action as well as reflected action to improve theory (praxis); (4) they allow for bonds and commitment to be built and nurtured among engineering students (and teachers) and vulnerable or marginalized people; (5) as a result of all that, they encourage the development of rational and emotional skills alike, which is necessary for the rational, affective, and existential rupture that decolonization in general and decolonial engineering, in particular, demand (Cruz, 2021a, b, c).

23.6 Closing Remarks Despite extensive literature showing the opposite, mainstream engineering practice and education remain largely tributary of positivist claims for engineering neutrality, objectivity, and universality. It can be argued that this is by no means a fortuitous situation but the result of mutually shaping and supporting coloniality of power, knowledge, and being. In other words, positivist engineering is both product and producer of the hegemonic power arrangement (neo-liberalism, globalization, and

320

C. C. Cruz et al.

authoritarian or weakly democratic regimes) and way of being (with its prescribed identities, worldviews, and cosmologies). Nonetheless, there are numerous initiatives of engineering education and practice worldwide that intend to, to a certain extent at least, be different from that. This chapter analyzed the case of the Colombian Ingenuity, science, technology, and society course and its associated extension practices. It is a type of engineering that aims to be shaped by and to foster the Amerindian-inspired worldview, set of values, practices, and knowledge subsumed under the concept of Buen Vivir. Based on their ideals, actions, and fulfillment, such engineering practice and education can be called decolonial. They help denaturalize coloniality (of power, knowledge, and being), enlarging what can be known and technically designed, what can be taken as individual and collective identity, and how power can be structured (and which political actors must take the lead). Regardless of what has already been achieved in and through these initiatives, some challenges remain. In the remainder of this section, two of them are sketched. The first one is the institutionalization of a decolonial or counter-hegemonic engineering training, granting it academic space (say, with mandatory or elective disciplines) and recognition (in its practitioners’ professional progression, for instance), as well as a fund (to its research and extension activities). The Ingenuity, science, technology, and society course, for instance, was discontinued in 2020’s second term, despite the students’ interest in the course and its social impacts. There was no teacher interested in teaching it, it was seen as a second-class discipline by the faculty’s direction, and the virtualization of all courses imposed by the covid-19 pandemia was presented as an impediment to keep offering the discipline (even though in the 2020’s first term it was possible to develop projects alongside communities virtually). Concerning the solidarity extension/service learning projects, the main challenge is funding. However, some strategies have been proved fruitful here, such as applying for grants inside and outside the National University of Colombia. That is being done, for example, by the semillero PARES (Idárraga Moreno et al., 2020), an initiative that arises in the context of the Ingenuity discipline’s activities. The second challenge is evaluating the training provided (to give feedback to improve the offered activities) and the practice undertaken (to improve it according to the ideal horizon of decolonial engineering intervention sought). This challenge can be subdivided into three: (a) creating appropriate evaluative tools and metrics for the engineering education sought; (b) creating or improving appropriate training activities to ameliorate the education provided; (c) creating appropriate evaluative tools and metrics for the impacts on the supported group’s reality that is aimed at with the decolonial or counter-hegemonic engineering practiced. In something that also applies to the two case studies presented here, as can be seen in many counter-­ hegemonic initiatives from Latin and North America (Cruz et  al., 2021; Alvear et  al., 2021), sub-challenges a and c are still not properly tackled virtually anywhere. Sub-challenge b is in a better situation, but it is hard to be sure if it is being handled adequately without a and c being correctly addressed. For coping with a and c, it might be necessary to (further) explore non/counter-hegemonic possibilities, such as the objectives of Buen Vivir (instead of UN’s 17 SDG).

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

321

References Ahumada Infante, A. (2013). Transmodernidad: dos proyectos disímiles bajo un mismo concepto. Polis, 12(34), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-­65682013000100015 Alvear, C., Cruz, C., & Kleba, J. (2021). Engenharias e outras práticas técnicas engajadas  Volume 1: Redes e movimentos. EDUEPB. Baskoy, T. (2018). Thorstein B.  Veblen’s philosophy of technology and modern capitalism. In A. Frizsche & S. Julian (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases (pp. 137–150). Springer. Catalano, G. D. (2006). Engineering Ethics: Peace, Justice, and the Earth. Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology and Society (vol. 1). Morgan y Claypool Publishers. Cech, E. A. (2013). The (mis) framing of social justice: Why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers’ ability to think about social injustices. In Engineering education for social justice (pp. 67–84). Springer. Cruz, C. (2021a). Brazilian grassroots engineering: A decolonial approach to engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/0304379 7.2021.1878346 Cruz, C. (2021b). Valores estéticos, acervos imagéticos e procedimentos estruturados: ampliando e descolonizando a reflexão filosófica sobre a tecnologia. Trans/Form/Ação, 44, 207–230, Dossier Tecnica. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-­3173.2021.v44dossier.11.p207 Cruz, C. (2021c). Decolonizing philosophy of technology: Learning from bottom-up and top-­ down approaches to decolonial technical design. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 1847–1881. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-­021-­00489-­w Cruz, C., Kleba, J., & Alvear, C. (2021). Engenharias e outras práticas técnicas engajadas - volume 2: Iniciativas de formação profissional. EDUEPB. Dagnino, R., Brandão, F. C., & Novaes, H. T. (2004). Sobre o marco analítico-conceitual da tecnologia social. Tecnologia social: uma estratégia para o desenvolvimento (pp. 65–81). Fundação Banco do Brasil. Eschenhagen, L. (2015). El fracaso del desarrollo sostenible: La necesidad de buscar alternativas al desarrollo, algunas entradas. In A. G. Serna, A. G. Edvânia Tôrres, L. S. Carmona Londoño, & M.  Z. Alves de Albuquerque (Eds.), ESPAÇO, POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS E TERRITÓRIO: Reflexões a partir da América do Sul (Primera Ed) (pp. 72–102). Editora UFPE. Escobar, A. (2012). Más allá del desarrollo: postdesarrollo y transiciones hacia el pluriverso. Revista de Antropología Social, 21, 23–62. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_RASO.2012.v21.40049 Feenberg, A. (2010). Between reason and experience: Essays in technology and modernity. MIT Press. Ferguson, E. (1992). Engineering and the mind’s eyes. The MIT Press. Fraga, L., Alvear, C., & Cruz, C. (2020). Na trilha da contra-hegemonia da engenharia no Brasil: da Engenharia e Desenvolvimento Social à Engenharia Popular. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, 15(43), 209–232. Freire, P. (1979). La Pedagogía del Oprimido. Siglo Veintiuno. Fressoli, M., Smith, A., Thomas, H., & Bortz, G. (2015). De las Tecnologías Apropiadas a las Tecnologías Sociales: algunos dilemas persistentes de los movimientos alternativos de innovación. Aproximaciones al CTS en América Latina. FLACSO Ecuador. Galceran Huguet, M. (2013). Entre la academia y el mercado. Las Universidades en el contexto del capitalismo basado en el conocimiento. Athenea Digital: revista de pensamiento e investigación social, 13(1), 155–167. Goldberg, D. (2010). Why philosophy, why now? Engineering responds to the crisis of a creative era. In I. van de Poel & D.  E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 255–265). Springer. Gudynas, E. (2011). Buen Vivir: Today’s tomorrow. Development, 54(4), 441–447. Hidalgo-Capitán, A.  L., & Cubillo-Guevara, A.  P. (2017). Deconstrucción y genealogía del “buen vivir” latinoamericano. El (trino) “buen vivir” y sus diversos manantiales intelectu-

322

C. C. Cruz et al.

ales. International Development Policy | Revue internationale de politique de développement [Online], 9 | 2017. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/poldev/2517; https://doi.org/10.4000/ poldev.2517 Hidalgo-Capitán, A., García-Álvarez, S., Cubillo-Guevara, A., & Medina-Carranco, N. (2019). Los Objetivos del Buen Vivir. Una propuesta alternativa a los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios del Desarrollo, 8(1), 6–57. http://ried.unizar.es/index.php/ revista/article/view/354 Hui, Y. (2016). The question concerning technology in China: An essay in cosmotechnics. Urbanomic Media Ltd. Idárraga Moreno, S. D., Ochoa-Duarte, A., & León Rojas, A. L. (2020). Semillero de investigación/acción PARES. Revista Internacional De Ingeniería, Justicia Social Y Paz, 7(2), 28–51. https://doi.org/10.24908/ijesjp.v7i2.13695 Kleba, J. (2017). Engenharia engajada  – Desafios de ensino e extensão. Revista Tecnologia e Sociedade, 13(27), 170–187. https://doi.org/10.3895/rts.v13n27.4905 Kothari, A., Salleh, A., Escobar, A., Demaria, F., & Acosta, A. (Eds.). (2019). Pluriverse A post-­ development dictionary (First). Tulika Books. León, A.  L. (2020). Diálogo de saberes universidad-comunidades en proyectos de ingeniería humanitaria. Doctoral dissertation. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. León, A. L., & Molina-Soler, A. (2019). Cátedra Ingenio, Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, una experiencia de ingeniería humanitaria. International Journal of Engineering, Social Justice, and Peace, 6(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.24908/ijesjp.v6i1.12666 Maldonado-Torres, N. (2009). El pensamiento filosófico del “giro descolonizador”. In H. Dussel, E. Mendieta, & C. Bhohórquez (Eds.), El pensamiento filosófico latinoamericano, de Caribe y “latino” (1300–2000): historia, corrientes, temas y filósofos (pp. 682–697). Siglo XXI: Centro de Cooperación Regional para la Educación de Adultos en América Latina y el Caribe. Nieusma, D. (2013). Engineering, social justice, and peace: Strategies for educational and professional reform. In Engineering education for social justice (pp. 19–40). Springer. Ochoa-Duarte, A., León, A. L., & Reina-Rozo, J. D. (2021). STEAM, sociedad y extensión universitaria en Colombia: Una propuesta preliminar desde el Buen Vivir. Sociología y Tecnociencia, 11(Extra_1), 55–82. https://doi.org/10.24197/st.Extra_1.2021.55-­82 Pinch, T., & Bijker, W. (1989). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 17–50). MIT Press. Quijano, A. (2000). Colonialidad del poder: Eurocentrismo y América Latina. La Colonialidad del saber: Eurocentrismo y ciencias sociales. Perspectivas Latinoamericana, Edgardo Lander (comp.), 246–276. Reina-Rozo, J. D., & Kleba, J. (2021). Fostering peace engineering and rethinking development – A Latin American view. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120711 Reina-Rozo, J.  D., & León, L. (2017). Ingeniería Humanitaria desde/ para el sur global. In M.  B. Albornoz, J.  Jímenez, & J.  Rojas (Eds.), Ingeniería, innovación y tecnología social (p. 308). Universidad Nacional de Colombia – FLACSO. Reina-Rozo, J.  D., & Peña-Reyes, I. (2015). Inventiveness and society, an experience from the Problem Based-Learning approach for a post-conflict scenario in Colombia (South America). Global Research Community: Collaboration and Developments, 245. Riley, D. (2008). Engineering and Social Justice. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. Romero, N.  C. M., & Camargo, F.  M. (2009). Los procesos de formación en la Asociación Campesina del Valle del río Cimitarra (ACVC, Colombia) como política cultural contrahegemónica. Con-ciencia social: anuario de didáctica de la geografía, la historia y las ciencias sociales, 13, 147–152. Simon, H. (1971) Style in design. In Proceedings of the second annual conference of the environmental design research association (pp. 1–10). Carnegie Mellon University.

23  The Amerindian Buen Vivir as a Paradigm for Another Possible…

323

Thomas, H. (2009). Tecnologías para la inclusión social y políticas públicas en América Latina. Tecnologias sociais: caminhos para a sustentabilidade. Weber, S.  M., & Tascón, M.  A. (2020). Pachamama—La Universidad del ‘Buen Vivir’: A first nations sustainability university in Latin America. In Universities as living labs for sustainable development (pp. 849–862). Springer.

Chapter 24

Engineers Should Be Activists Thomas Siller and Gearold Johnson

“Whether you’re aware of it or not, your products embody your ideals. And as a result, engineers are activists, whether they want to be or not.” (Douglas et al., 2010)

Abstract  We think that what we need now are engineers who believe in, and take on, the role of activists. Why? Because our world and society need activist engineers who bring the passion and commitment to change to effect change. If engineers remain content to let society define problems for engineers to ‘solve,’ then engineers become the ultimate tool of society. And as is the case with all tools, their real value is in how they are used. We contend that engineers must decide for themselves how to be used by society, and not let society make that decision. Activists, on the other hand, actively pursue change. Therefore, an activist philosophy -believing in advocating for change, not just implementing change -will help bring new values to the engineering profession. Now, the important question to address is: What does it mean to educate engineering students to be engineering activists? The chapter provides suggestions for how engineering education can promote an activist philosophy in developing future engineers. Keywords  Activist · Values · Change · Sustainability · Environment · Engineering education

T. Siller (*) · G. Johnson Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Fritzsche, A. Santa-María (eds.), Rethinking Technology and Engineering, Philosophy of Engineering and Technology 45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25233-4_24

325

326

T. Siller and G. Johnson

24.1 Introduction In this chapter we shall take as being in common agreement two statements about engineers. First, engineers, through their work, help create the future. Second, engineers desire a future better than the present. With this as common background, we shall describe why we believe that this common ground should be extended, or enhanced, by having engineers adopting a more activist approach to their profession. A third statement, which may be disputed by some, but we agree with, is that engineers are already activists, as indicated by the epigraph above. To develop our argument for our belief that engineers need to be more activist in their profession regarding caring for the environment we start by describing what we understand as activism. This is followed by brief discussions of philosophies of engineering and education. These three ideas are then merged into our thesis on engineers becoming activists. To support this thesis, we present some ideas of how engineering education can contribute to this goal, including examples of our own approaches.

24.2 Philosophy of Activism There are many forms of activism, all of which have a focus on change. Activism concerns change rooted in peoples’ “beliefs and other principles” and includes the notions of “courage and perseverance” (Come On Up). Weizenbaum, as discussed in (Fritzsche, 2020), clarifies the difference between activism and evangelism by highlighting activism “seeks out experiences of failure as a chance to learn and gain a better understanding of the subject matter.” We believe activism goes further by using this improved understanding to effect change in society writ large. One definition, that captures our goal for engineering education to encourage activism comes from (Benfadhel, 2021): “Activism consists of efforts to impede or intervene in social, political, economic, or environmental reform to make changes in society toward a perceived greater good.”

The first concept we note in this definition that is most relevant to our argument that engineers need to be more activist minded in their careers is the focus on the environment. All forms of activism are important in bringing about social change but currently the existential concerns over climate disruption and the degradation of the environment are our main concern herein. Læssøe (2017) contends that “Neither environment nor activism are strictly defined concepts nor are they interpreted consistently by scholars.” Starting with the concept of environment, when it comes to activism the concept includes both critique of environmental risks and efforts to mitigate those risks. As we will discuss later, the effort to mitigate environmental risks, we believe, is a professional responsibility of engineers.

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

327

The second concept to be interpreted is activism. Here the question is: does activism refer to the “…basic human competence of activity, action, and/or agency…” or is it about a particular focus of agency (Læssøe, 2017)? In response to this question, Jamison (2003) proposes four categories of activism: (1) community, (2) professional, (3) militant, and (4) personal. The first two, according to Jamison, share a focus on changing politics and policy instead of changing beliefs and values. The latter focus is more associated with the third category, militant activism, and the personal category. It is this third category that may be the source of concern with encouraging engineers to be activists by what seems to be militant educators. We will come back to this concern later when we discuss the risks associated with promoting student activism. Our concern now is the second category: professional activism. Professional activism refers to the shift to professional organizations as the vehicle to create change for specific issues. Jamison describes how many new organizations, such as Greenpeace, continued the push for particular activities. We promote the idea that engineers, as members of a profession represented by many organizations (such as ASCE, ASME, AiCHE, and IEEE) have a natural vehicle for environmental activism. For example, ASCE has taken a very active role is transforming how infrastructure is developed in a more sustainable manner. A new rating system that provides metrics for more sustainable infrastructure, Envision, has been developed and actively promoted by ASCE as a path to changing how society views infrastructure (Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure, 2021). These professional organizations also promote what can be considered a personal commitment to environmental activism. For example, ASCE has engaged in actions to promote the value of sustainability in the work of its members. In ASCE’s code of ethics the first principle in the preamble states that engineers will: “create safe, resilient, and sustainable infrastructure…” This is followed by an ethical responsibility towards the natural and built environment that also emphasizes sustainable development. Taken together, professional engineering societies such as ASCE have become activist in their approach to environmental issues and consequently, so should individual engineers become more active in promotion of environmental concerns. Engineering plays an important role in shaping the future of society through the design of the physical environment. This role implies a responsibility to participate in the changes necessary to create a sustainable society. Whether it is through personal or professional activism, or both, engineers should take up this mantel of activism as part of their professional life. In the next section, we look at the role engineering education can impart and support students gaining competencies related to this responsibility.

328

T. Siller and G. Johnson

24.3 Educational Philosophy We will limit ourselves to a subset of educational philosophy that directly pertains to the argument for activism in engineering education. Specifically, the contrast between neutralism, which we claim is presumed -not actual, and engagement discussed by (Prince, 2008). On one side of this argument is the push for education to remain neutral, that is to not espouse any particular social agenda which could then be construed as being indoctrination. The fear of indoctrination of students is a major concern for many and has been articulated by many, including Bork (1996). When the authors presented their ideas about engineering activists at the fPET 2020 (2020) meeting in November 2020, the issue of student indoctrination was brought up as a major concern to the authors during the open question and answer session. Bork is particularly focused on ‘liberalism’ and the corrosive force he views it has to society. As he views much of higher education infected with liberalism, he pushes for a neutral education system. What Bork seems to fear is Jamison’s concept of militant activism (Jamison, 2003). Prince (2008, p. 42), on the other hand, promotes a contrasting educational philosophy that promotes what he calls engaged education, specifically activist engagement in contrast to reflective engagement promoted by others. These contrasting philosophies have serious pedagogical implications. The proposed neutral philosophy of education has manifested itself in engineering education through a process called depoliticization by Cech and Sherick (2015): Cech states: “…the ideology of depoliticization is the belief that engineering is a purely “technical” space and political and cultural concerns can—and should —be removed from that space.” Cech goes on to indicate that this depoliticized, or neutral approach to engineering education: “…presents an overly-abstracted, simplified, and decontextualized picture of the engineering profession.” Additionally, Cech believes this is a moral act that “prescribes how engineering work should be done.” This split between technical and social knowledge is often apparent in curricula. In the US the social aspect of education is typically included in some type of general education separate from the technical components of the curriculum. In many other parts of the world, such as the UK, students in engineering typically no longer take any social systems classes. This separation of knowledge naturally leads to a neutral pedagogical approach that values the technical content and therefore little fear of indoctrination. Engaged pedagogy (Prince, 2008) contrasts with neutral pedagogy as it is based on the belief in a holistic view of knowledge. Prince comes from the liberal arts tradition as opposed to the technical world of engineering education. The goal of liberal education is about developing habits of mind as much as learning particular content. But it should be remembered that habits of mind do stand on a foundation of knowledge. It is this habit of mind that critics like Bork attack as being vehicles for indoctrination. Liberal arts educators push back and state that the goal is not adoption of particular values by students, but the ability of students to think critically and develop their own values. How does Prince recommend implementing an engaged education? A key point he makes is that teachers need to act more as

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

329

‘coaches’ for students than objective observers (Prince, 2008, p. 43). Prince contends that faculty must model the behavior they want to develop in students, not the adoption of the faculty’s values. This focus on behavior and not indoctrination provides a good model for engineering educators to adopt.

24.4 Engineering Philosophy Similar to Cech’s description of engineering education (Cech, 2014), Karwat and colleagues (2013, 2015; Karwat, 2020) have described engineering practice as being ahistorical and apolitical. Karwat points out that this apolitical approach is the source of what Florman (1976) refers to as “the existential pleasure of engineering”. The result of this philosophy is “…engineers tend to ignore or dismiss considerations of intangibles like politics, emotions, and other ethical concerns.” Not surprisingly, Karwat attributes this situation, as does Cech, to the lack of coverage of these issues in engineering education. Johnston et al. (2000, p. 544) also trace this description of engineering practice to engineering education “Where many engineering courses have been structured so that they avoid explicit value judgments.” While the characterization of engineering practice given by Karwat and others may represent much of engineering practice, there are alternative views that attribute a more ‘humane’ approach to engineering practice. Davies et  al. (1976) describe the role of engineering intertwined with social needs and control. The inherent connection between engineering and social needs is also growing in association with the increasing emphasis on sustainability. For example, the UN Sustainable Development goals (United Nations, 2015) represent a mix of social needs and technical solutions. New sustainability rating systems for engineering projects (Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure, 2021; International Living Future Institute, 2020) are also beginning to explicitly require engineers to engage more directly with the communities impacted by their work. The future of engineering is shifting from this apolitical and ahistorical philosophy to a more humane approach. This shift is also occurring in engineering education and is discussed below in the engineering activism section. As a starting point to make this philosophical shift, Karwat (2020) suggests that engineering practice should start by asking: “What is the real problem, and does this problem ‘require’ an engineering solution?” These two questions have also been the subject of the authors of this chapter (Siller & Johnson, 2018). This leads to an important decision, how does engineering engage with these questions? Sørensen (2009) proposes two approaches that he calls: (1) “the transdisciplinary mode of appropriation” and (2) “the profession-based mode of appropriation.” In the first, engineers work with social scientists to combine knowledge in the pursuit of defining the ‘real problem’ and potential approaches. For example, Neely et al. state that for engineers to maintain their claim to responsibility for technical advancement, interaction with the social sciences is required (Neely et al., 2018). Social scientists may act as consultants providing both support and criticism. In the second approach,

330

T. Siller and G. Johnson

professional-based, engineers assimilate social science knowledge into their work as they address Karwat’s questions. Mitcham (1998) extends this concept by postulating that engineering design assimilates modes of thinking from the humanities along with the social sciences. This second approach maintains the control within the engineering profession. Both approaches acknowledge the critical role of social sciences in the future of the engineering profession. And knowledge of the social sciences will better prepare the type of activist engineering we do advocate for herein. We view Sørensen’s transdisciplinary approach as aligning closely with what Klein (2012) calls multidisciplinary work. In Klein’s definition of multidisciplinary efforts, different areas of expertise work together, informing each other. An example of how values expressed by other disciplines can naturally inform design is presented by (van de Poel, 2013). This is an approach we advocate and is discussed below when we address curricular issues.

24.5 Engineering Activism 24.5.1 History There appears to be little in the literature concerning engineering activism through history. While Edwin Layton, Jr.’s The Revolt of the Engineers (Layton, 1971) is not about activism, per se, Layton does describe the U.S. professional engineering societies’ fascination with Englishman Herbert Spencer’s “Social Darwinism” (Spencer, 2018) of the late nineteenth century. Spencer, educated in mathematics and natural sciences at Cambridge, was for a few years a railroad civil engineer. He declared that Darwin’s principles of evolution and natural selection applied to individuals, social structures, and entire societies and not just the evolution of biological species. He also promoted science over religion. It didn’t take much of a step to think that there were other “social laws” like those Spencer proposed that control other aspects of society. Many engineers thought that social progress could be developed in the same way that technological progress was developed. Thus, engineers would play the significant leadership role in human progress and enlightenment, that is, engineers would engineer society. Such ideas meant that engineers would not only control technology but also subsume economics, sociology, and politics into their body of knowledge. Some engineers did enter politics to promote their ideals. The culmination of this period was the election of Herbert Hoover, a successful civil and mining engineer, to the U.S. presidency in 1928. No social laws were discovered, and the role of engineers primarily as individual entrepreneurs was gradually displaced by most engineering graduates working for what would become the large multinational corporations. As the ideas of social engineering were waning, engineers were developing “scientific management,” but this time they had a firmer base to work from.

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

331

Time and project management became important tools for further technological advances during the second half of the twentieth century. New degree programs were introduced in engineering management, the management of technology and industrial engineering. The next major engineering activist movement arose following US President Eisenhower’s address warning of the rise of the military-industrial complex. The Viet Nam war in the mid-to-late 1960s and early 1970s also influenced some in the engineering profession to start to promote a more humanitarian and peaceful, i.e., non-weapon system, emphasis to engineering studies. Bernard Amadei founded Engineers without Borders in the United States (EWB, 2021) in 2002 to get undergraduate students involved with sustainable community development projects throughout the world. In 1995, Purdue University created the Engineering Projects in Community Service (EPICS) program (Oakes et al., 2015; Zoltowski and Oakes, 2014) for aiding development projects in  local communities. A Humanitarian Engineering minor was developed at the Colorado School of Mines as well as within other engineering colleges. Drexel University created the first M.Sc. degree program in Peace Engineering (Vesilind, 2013; Drexel University, 2021). More recently the promotion of peace engineering has gained an international following through the International Federation of Engineering Education Societies’ (IFEES, 2021) leadership and support. These developments through the active involvement of engineers and their professional engineering societies mainly fall under the banner of professional activism. Of course, some individual activism would be classified as personal activism as for example Engineers without Borders. Certainly, the EPICS program and many of the efforts involved with Humanitarian Engineering, particularly, sustainable community development, are examples of community activism. However, historically there seems to have been little militant activism in engineering.

24.5.2 Student Activism Morgan et al. (2019) provides data regarding the level of activism amongst college students. In this work, activism is identified through the following student engagements: • Socio-environmental political discussion • Consciousness raising activities • Socio-environmental political actions Based on this study, Morgan, et al. concluded that “… the results reveal that STEM majors are significantly less likely to participate in activism, which coincides with recent research detailing how these students avoid engaging in political action when doing so competes with time for their studies …” Further analysis identified engineering students as the lowest scoring on the first two bullets above of all the STEM fields included in their study. A common reason often given for this low engagement

332

T. Siller and G. Johnson

for engineer students is their intense curriculum that often leaves little time for these types of activities. As part of an informal study concerning students’ attitudes towards activism, we asked students in a first-year introduction to civil engineering course at our institution to view our fPET 2020 video presentation. After they viewed the presentation, students filled out a survey regarding their reaction to the materials. One main question we asked was whether students felt engineers should be activists. An overwhelming majority, 39 out of 43 respondents, answered yes. This was not structured as a formal research effort, but it did provide us with some confidence that these students agreed with our premise that engineers need to be activists in the future. In our survey we did not define the type of activities used by Morgan, et  al. although they were mentioned in the presentation. We did find an interesting trend in our students’ responses. Many of the students indicated that their support for engineering activism is associated, or maybe limited to, topics closely associated with their career goals of being engineers: specifically environmental issues and sustainability. Some students explicitly stated this as a limitation to their support. Based on the limited results of our informal study, along with the work of Morgan et al. we draw a couple of conclusions: • Engineering students struggle to find the time to engage in many of the traditional activist-type activities on college campuses, and • Engineers interest in activism exists but it may be limited to the contexts related to their careers: environmentalism and sustainability.

24.5.3 Engineering Curriculum From the 1880s to the mid 1970s, the undergraduate engineering curriculum gradually changed from crafts and skills courses (such as machine shop, foundry work, electric motors, irrigation, surveying, etc.) to an entire curriculum based on mathematics, science and increasingly, the engineering sciences. Calculus was introduced and the science and engineering sciences courses became calculus and differential equation focused. Throughout this period, design played a lesser or even non-­ existent role in the curriculum. Also, during this period, the accreditation process typically required that one-eighth of the curriculum be humanities and social science courses but with little guidance or few rules on what counted toward this requirement. In the early 1970s, the National Science Foundation began to focus on engineering curriculum changes to incorporate more formal design methods. First year engineering courses that had previously focused on what is engineering and what are the included disciplines were augmented to include a simple design project to get students actively involved in teams and to learn simplified design methodologies. At the fourth year, engineering design electives were replaced with a capstone design project usually lasting an entire academic year. Many colleges and schools of

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

333

engineering added additional design courses throughout the 4-year program to create a design-across-the-curriculum program. At the same time, universities began to require a more comprehensive approach to the humanities component by creating university core course requirements. No longer were students allowed to just fill in the humanities and social science electives in a slap-dash approach. Content categories were established, and students were required to select from a pre-specified list of courses to meet categorical constraints. As well, in-depth requirements were introduced so that students could no longer meet the requirements by taking only introductory level courses in humanities and social sciences. By the late twentieth century, graduates of 4-year undergraduate engineering programs had a strong background in mathematics, physical sciences, the engineering sciences including a capstone design project and a meaningful selection of humanities and social science courses. These graduates were highly sought after by industry and government. Those graduates seeking further study could also proceed into M.Sc. and Ph.D. engineering programs. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, engineering students at schools and colleges of engineering that offered humanitarian engineering (Mitcham & Muñoz, 2010) minors, with careful selection of humanities and social science courses plus usually a couple of additional courses could complete a humanitarian engineering minor. Many of these students combined the humanitarian engineering minor with an Engineers Without Borders project or an EPICS project in community development. Such a background provided new career opportunities to engineering graduates; they could now work for international aid organizations or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Around this same time, Goldberg (2009) advocated for the value of philosophy to the engineering profession, but goes on to warn that any transdisciplinary approach, akin to Sørensen’s appropriation mode, will be short lived. His prediction seems prescient as there is little evidence of philosophy making significant inroads within engineering education. As described earlier in the chapter, many of the challenges facing our times are concerned with the fact that we live in an unsustainable state. Addressing sustainability issues in engineering programs demands a new focus on the engineering sciences courses and the capstone design project. Engineering faculty need to (1) introduce materials and energy reduction, (2) materials and embodied energy reuse, (3) and materials and energy recycling into their courses in a meaningful way that illustrates the demand to decrease non-renewable resource and energy usage. Recently an example related to reuse of foundations was added to a senior elective course on foundation engineering. This example is based on the second concept above: materials and embodied energy reuse. A shift from analyzing and designing new foundations, to analyzing and designing by reusing foundations (Butcher et al., 2006) addressing sustainability issues was easily integrated into the class. Traditional design and analysis content was maintained along with this sustainable approach. This approach allowed for the sharing of our values around sustainability while remaining faithful to traditional content. A goal is to provide future engineers with ideas to actively promote later in their careers.

334

T. Siller and G. Johnson

Incorporating sustainability values can be done with little change to the organization of the curriculum, that is, we only need to adopt a sustainable approach to current course structure. In a similar vein, the discussion of values and an activist emphasis is also only a change in philosophy rather than requiring new courses in the engineering curriculum. Many undergraduate faculty members would state that the engineering curriculum is full and additions to the curriculum require deletions of content to off-set the additions. A curriculum that encourages activism starts with a change in mindset of current engineering faculty--a philosophical shift. Referring back to Prince’s coaching approach (Prince, 2008), faculty can teach the same content as before but not in a neutral manner devoid of values. Engineering by its very nature is a value-ladened profession. Sharing one’s values does not mean requiring them! In our courses we regularly share our motivations and values with students but encourage students to develop their own value systems. The key is to model the role our values play in engineering work. For example, design is a standard part of the engineering curriculum. This is a topic that can be taught in a manner that emphasizes a value-laden philosophy. Figure 24.1 illustrates how the authors have modified a common design process, the outer boxes, by embedding boxes in the

Fig. 24.1  Modified design process. (Siller & Johnson, 2018)

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

335

center which express our values around just technology (Siller & Johnson, 2018). This figure has been used in our design classes, highlighting traditional design methods and facilitates answering Karwat’s (2020) two questions discussed above: What is the real problem? And is an engineering solution required? Like the example above, the goal is to provide students with the ability to actively change engineering practice, while at the same time developing their own value systems.

24.5.4 Public Versus Private Good One of the growing views of education is that it represents a private good, not a public good. A valueless engineering education system reinforces this mentality. By separating the technical from the social (the public), we turn education’s focus on the individual engineer and not the greater needs of society. This has the potential to reduce the role of engineers to being technical instruments to be used by society. While we do not advocate for the type of social engineering as espoused by Taylor, we do believe that engineers should play an active role in answering the questions: “What is the real problem, and does this problem ‘require’ an engineering solution?” (Karwat, 2020) Engineers need to engage in the first question of problem definition (Downey, 2005; Siller et  al., 2018; Goldberg, 2009). El-Zein and Hedemann argue that “a focus on problem solving, brings with it epistemological and political biases which limit the ability of engineers to reflect on their knowledge acquisition and problem definition processes, and therefore to tackle problems effectively.” These biases they mention are implicit values in the engineering education system which prioritizes problem solving over problem definition. They go further and indicate that this hampers engineers’ ability to contribute to the public good: “…the profession’s attempts to maintain relevance in the 21st century will falter unless engineers clearly enunciate the “public good” that they are mandated to build, reinforce or protect.” To reinforce the mission of the “public good” that engineering should maintain will require a value-ladened approach to education. Engineering design goes far beyond the application of scientific principles. Design must be informed by the current values of society, and regarding a more sustainable future, by more future-­ focused, sustainable values. As discussed earlier, these new values are already being expressed in the growth of sustainable rating systems, which also incorporate values of equity, inclusion, and diversity. ASCE recently promulgated a new policy statement that includes a commitment to: “Promoting accountability and the use of best practices for diversity, equity, and inclusion in leadership, engagement, communications, and partnerships;” (ASCE, 2020) along with its new Body of Knowledge (ASCE, 2019) that also includes diversity and inclusion. Considering this shift in the philosophy of engineering towards being more explicitly engaged with societal issues that we promote the idea of engineering activism.

336

T. Siller and G. Johnson

24.6 Discussion and Conclusions Why should engineers be activists in their professional lives? First, engineers play a critical role in the building of the physical aspect of society, the “…unacknowledged legislators of the world.” (Mitcham, 2014). It is also clear that the physical side of society is intimately tied to the political and social aspects of society. This interconnectedness demands a shared responsibility towards the future. It is unethical for engineers to act in a manner that ignores this connection. To change the manner of the development of the built environment requires a societal commitment to change and this commitment must be founded on a better understanding of the role of technology. Engineers, as experts regarding technology, must help shape society’s understanding and future use of technology. A second driving force is the need to create a more sustainable future. The environment has been damaged in many ways that compromise the futures of all lifeforms on the planet. Further damage needs to be avoided and existing damage needs to be mitigated. Efforts to avoid future damage include, for example, innovation in renewable energy along with encouraging reducing society’s demand for more energy. There are parallel efforts to mitigate existing damage such as carbon sequestration efforts. While both of these approaches are critical, some trajectories of damage are beyond immediate remediation and require a third approach: adaption (Diller & Barnes, 1994). Technology and engineers play a critical role in all three of these efforts, but their contribution must be in partnership with all segments of society. This requires engineers to be active in their engagement within this partnership.

24.7 Summary The Earth and human society face a growing list of catastrophic threats including climate change and its impact; economic and racial inequities and inequalities; global pollution of the land, air, and sea; economic stagnation and decline; warfare and terrorism; new pandemics; social and environmental injustice; and environmental degradation including loss of wilderness and biodiversity. The current SARS-­ CoV-­2 pandemic highlights how fragile civilization is to disruption from crises. Many of these threats appear beyond the capacity of engineering but engineering should play a role and be a stakeholder in each. Confronting these challenges will require engineers with a different mindset. To us, the role of education is learning how to live (Maxwell, 2019)—how to realize what is of value in life, yet science and technology, two core disciplines within engineering education, are traditionally taught value free (van de Poel, 2013) because it is thought that values have no role to play in knowledge and knowledge acquisition. As long as engineers called themselves applied scientists, they could justify valueless teaching, and they did. But engineers are not applied scientists. The artefacts and interventions that engineers create get embedded in society and

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

337

society is not valueless. As well, value free teaching is a value and instructs students that values are not important. Therefore, engineering education fails to support learning how to live. We must help our students develop their values and to take their places in society. Our conviction is that what we need now are engineers who believe in, and take on, the role of activists. Why? Because the world needs activist engineers who bring the passion and commitment to change to effect change in these most challenging times. If engineers remain content to let society define problems for engineers to ‘solve,’ then engineers become the ultimate tool of society. And as is the case with all tools, their real value is in how they are used. We contend that engineers must decide for themselves how to be used by society, and not let society make that decision. Activists, on the other hand, actively pursue change. Therefore an activist philosophy -believing in advocating for change, not just implementing change -will help bring new values to the engineering profession.

References 2020. Forum on Philosophy, Engineering and Technology [Online]. Available: https://philosophyengineering.com/fpet2020-­cover-­1 [Accessed]. ASCE. (2019). Civil engineering body of knowledge: Preparing the future civil engineer. ASCE. ASCE. (2020). Policy Statement 417 – Justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE. Benfadhel, K. (2021). unikorn.org. Available: https://www.unikorn.org/4-­reasons-­why-­you-­ should-­be-­an-­activist/ [Accessed 12 May 2021]. Bork, R.  H. (1996). Slouching towards Gomorrah: Modern liberalism and American decline. Regan Books. Butcher, A. P., Powell, J. J. M., & Skinner, H. D. (Eds.). (2006). Reuse of foundations for urban sites: A best practice handbook. IHS BRE Press. Cech, E. A. (2014). Culture of disengagement in engineering education? Science, Technology, & Human Values, 39, 31. Cech, E. A., & Sherick, H. M. (2015). Depoliticization and the structure of engineering education. In S. H. Christensen, C. Didier, A. Jamison, M. Meganck, C. Mitcham, & B. Newberry (Eds.), International perspectives on engineering education and practice in context, volume 1. Springer International Publishing. COME ON UP. Philosophy of Activism [Online]. Pennslyvania State University. Available: https:// sites.psu.edu/comeonup/philosophy-­of-­activism/ [Accessed 18 May 2021]. Davies, D., Banfield, T., & Sheahan, R. (1976). The humane technologist. Oxford University Press. Diller, K. R., & Barnes, J. W. (1994). Adaptation of total quality methods to the administration of an academic engineering department. Journal of Engineering Education, 83, 249–254. Douglas, D., Papadopoulos, G. M., & Boutelle, J. (2010). Citizen engineer. Prentice Hall. Downey, G. (2005). Are engineers losing control of technology?: From ‘problem solving’ to ‘problem definition and solution’ in engineering education. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83, 583–595. Drexel University. (2021). Peace engineering M.S.  Degree [Online]. Available: https://drexel. edu/engineering/academics/areas-­of-­study-­programs/peace-­engineering/masters-­program/ [Accessed May 2021]. EWB. (2021). Available: https://www.colorado.edu/ewb/ [Accessed May 2021]. Florman, S. C. (1976). The existential pleasures of engineering. St. Martin’s Press.

338

T. Siller and G. Johnson

Fritzsche, A. (2020). Open labs as Islands of reason in the digital age. In A. Fritzsche, J. M. Jonas, A. Roth, & K. M. Möslein (Eds.), Innovating in the Open Lab: The new potential for interactive value creation across organizational boundaries. De Gruyter Oldenbourg. Goldberg, D. E. (2009). Why philosophy? Why now? Engineering responds to the crisis of a creative era. Springer Netherlands. IFEES. (2021). Peace Engineering [Online]. Available: https://www.ifees.net/peace-­engineering [Accessed May 2021]. Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. (2021). Envision: Rating system for sustainable infrastructure. Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. International Living Future Institute. (2020). Living building challenge 4.0 [Online]. Available: https://living-­future.org/lbc4/ [Accessed 9 February 2020]. Jamison, A. (2003). The making of green knowledge: the contribution from activism. Futures: The Journal of Policy, Planning and Futures Studies, 35, 703–716. Johnston, S. F., Gostelow, J. P., & King, W. J. (2000). Engineering & society: Challenges of professional practice. Prentice Hall, Inc. Karwat, D. M. A. (2020). Self-reflection for activist engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, 1329–1352. Karwat, D. M. A., Eagle, W. E., Wooldridge, M. S., & Princen, T. E. (2013). Activist engineering: Changing current engineering practice through innovative praxis. EESD 2013. Karwat, D. M. A., Eagle, W. E., Wooldridge, M. S., & Princen, T. E. (2015). Activist engineering: Changing engineering practice by deploying praxis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21, 227–239. Klein, J. T. (2012). A taxonomy of interdisciplarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press. Læssøe, J. (2017). Environmental activism. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory. Springer Singapore. Layton, E. T. (1971). The revolt of the engineers; social responsibility and the American engineering profession. Press of Case Western Reserve University. Maxwell, N. (2019). Science and enlightenment: Two great problems of learning. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Mitcham, C. (1998). The importance of philosophy to engineering. Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía, 17, 27–47. Mitcham, C. (2014). The true grand challenge for engineering: Self-knowledge. Issues in Science and Technology, 31, 19. Mitcham, C., & Muñoz, D. R. (2010). Humanitarian engineering, San Rafael, Calif. (1537 Fourth Street, San Rafael, CA 94901 USA), Morgan & Claypool. Morgan, D. L., Zilvinskis, J., & Dugan, B. (2019). Opening the activism and postsecondary education black box: Relating high-impact practices and student identity with activist behaviors. Journal of Political Science Education, 1–24. Neely, A., Fell, S., & Fritzsche, A. (2018). Manufacturing with a big M – The grand challenges of engineering in digital societies from the perspective of the institute for manufacturing at Cambridge University. In A. Fritzsche & S. J. Oks (Eds.), The future of engineering: Philosophical foundations, ethical problems and application cases. Springer International Publishing. Oakes, W., Drummond, M., & Zoltowski, C. (2015). EPICS: Meeting outcomes with multidisciplinary student teams. In Proceedings of 2015 Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA15) Conference, McMaster University (p. 10). Prince, G.  S. (2008). Teach them to challenge authority: Educating for healthy societies. Continuum. Siller, T., & Johnson, G. (2018). Just technology: The quest for cultural, economic, environmental, and technical sustainability. Morgan & Claypool. Siller, T., Johnson, G., & Korte, R. (2018). Engineering as problem solving: A need for a different apporach. fPET 2018.

24  Engineers Should Be Activists

339

Sørensen, K. (2009). The Role of Social Science in Engineering. Spencer, H. (2018). The study of sociology. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. United Nations. (2015). Sustainable development goals [Online]. United Nations. Available: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ [Accessed 2 September 2018]. Van de Poel, I. (2013). Translating values into design requirements. Springer Netherlands. Vesilind, P. A. (Ed.). (2013). Peace Engineering: When Personal Values and Engineering Careers Converge. Lakeshore Press. Zoltowski, C. B., & Oakes, W. C. (2014). Learning by Doing: Reflections of the EPICS Program. International Journal for Service Learning in Engineering, 1–32.