Some distinctions


Technology, Invention and Engineering have close connections but are not the same. This entry discusses the relationship and explores how the three are related to culture and civilization. The specific issue of Western technology and technology as a Chinese phenomenon are introduced. Some additional reflections related to this topic can be read at my earlier blog.





At first technology in China seems to be regarded in the same way as it is in the United States. I do not believe this is the case and will attempt to clarify this view. To do so will require a series of entries. To begin I will offer a thesis about the global nature of technology.

The case to be made here is focused in this manner. First, it is clear that engineering education did not always need to be global and indeed engineering skill and accomplishment could, in the not so distant past, be viewed as a national treasure to be guarded and protected carefully. Engineering expertise was proprietary knowledge, so to speak, and not to be shared with competitors. I contend that this view is no longer tenable. Second, I am not going to speak about what I take to be the obvious good associated with engineers having broad cultural knowledge of the sort enhanced by humanities education. Rather I want to argue that engineering itself, the hard technology and not the social institutions that support it, at this point in the evolution of knowledge, is inherently global. I will argue this despite the local origins of innovative solutions to problems.

Some preliminary distinctions need to be made. Consider the following terms: information, data, fact, technique, understanding and knowledge. Science strictly speaking means knowledge. Engineers use all of these terms, sometimes interchangeably. For our purpose let us group information, data and fact together on one side and understanding and knowledge together on the other. Technique can stand in between. We should further distinguish technique from technology and engineering. Technique refers particularly to the art or process of an action, often the specific motion required. Engineering is the application of technique to a task or problem. One engineers a bridge across a river employing techniques of welding, riveting, etc. Technology synthesizes technique and reason (logos) and addresses reality in a way that simultaneously interprets and modifies.

Engineering is an activity that, like invention, can be performed solo. Although the knowledge and skill-base required to carry out large scale and highly complex projects mitigates against solo performance it is still possible for such work to be done completely locally. In fact, the local character of engineering is an aspect that must not be overlooked. The problems engineers face are very largely determined by local factors such as geography, climate, society, economy, politics and so on. Engineering solutions that do not account adequately for local determinants are rarely satisfactory. The reason why all bridges in the world are not the same, despite being based upon universal physical laws and mathematical principles, is the necessity to accommodate these local determinants. The question is this: If engineering consists in the application of universal physical laws and mathematical principles (knowledge or science) to local circumstances, why need engineers care about how things are done elsewhere? There are various answers but I will mention only three.

1 .Standardization of parts and materials.
2. Skills of workers must travel.
3. Innovation.

For economic reasons, unless a community has unlimited wealth and no need or desire to connect infrastructure to the outside world, the first two points already imply the necessary extension of engineering practice beyond localities. However it is the third point I want to address, especially in the light of globalization.

If necessity is the mother of invention then competition and the sheer drive to be original are the parents of innovation. In this case we have a three-tier hierarchy with engineering occupying the bottom rung. Engineering is problem solving and a good solution may well stand the test of time. Invention creates something new, out of necessity, due to the inadequacy or absence of existing engineering solutions. Innovation results from the almost theological drive to create and perfect. Innovation incorporates invention just as invention absorbs engineering. Innovation, supported by modern technology, possesses world-changing power and thus perpetuates the need for further engineering, invention and innovation. At this point we live in an age of innovation meaning that change is permanent and the goal of perfection continually recedes. Exacerbated by ecological dynamics the cycle of innovation continues to accelerate.

Innovation tends to change the way tasks are carried out, pushing older processes into obsolescence. Older processes may be preferred for aesthetic reasons and in some cases may even be superior to the innovations that succeed them, but they are nevertheless rendered obsolescent. An example is the replacement by digital audio of the analogue phonograph recording and the electronic tube amplifier. For reasons such as these innovation has become an imperative. The rapidity of communication and the ease, reliability and speed of transportation have left no corner of the globe untouched by the forces of obsolescence brought on by innovative activity.

Yet forced obsolescence and the imperative of innovation are not the only tendencies making engineering necessarily global. It is also compelled by the revolution in technology that is not only changing the face of the world but its soul as well. The Internet will serve both as an example and metaphor for the larger situation. The processes of modern technology are such that every new technique stands as critique of not only the replaced technique but of all other technique. Technology is the rationalization of technique through dialogical exchange. A new technique calls for the assessment of itself according to the standards it is meant to attain and in comparison to the attained results of other techniques. The yardstick of comparison measures relative efficiency. The review of technique and all technical processes in this rationalized environment weaves an implicit web of techniques. We can thus imagine technology as a web of techniques, each particular technique defining its own topos, i.e., its own position, attitude, duration and dimension and each in relation, sometimes direct but more often mediated, to other technique-nodes. The activation of any technique resonates throughout the web. The extent to which techniques improve the strength and integrity of the entire web predicts the success and longevity of each particular technique. It is easy to understand how the Internet is both example par excellence of technology and a metaphor for the abstract interactions of the discursive network of technology itself. Given the immediacy of electronic communications the web of technology is no longer limited by space or time and persists as an enduring feature of the world. All engineering activity takes place within this web and is tested by it.
[The full text from which the the above comments are excerpted is part of a presentation to the UCIEE in February, 2005, at their eighth annual congress in Kingston, Jamaica. It may be read in its entirety at HaroldSjursen.org .]

In this way engineering is an interdependent, global enterprise. When we consider engineering in a national context, such as that of China, the first and usual consideration is how it benefits the economy. However, when one puts engineering into the context of technology then fundamental cultural and civilizational issues must be considered.

Such issues in the Chinese context will be addressed in the next entry.

Posted: Sun - December 19, 2004 at 10:10 AM          

©