Chapter 1 The Ignorance of Engineers and How They Know It

 Part I Reflections on Practice

Abstract 

An engineer begins the design process by identifying a problem, which highlights what they don't know and points them towards a goal. To create a solution, the engineer must acquire and apply knowledge about the methods and tools required to achieve this goal. They must also understand the values that underpin the goal and be prepared to adjust the goal if these values demand it. This approach is not just based on theoretical and practical knowledge but also involves goal-oriented, reflective decision-making.

1.1 Introduction

Walter G. Vincenti's book delves into how engineers solve problems as an epistemological issue, but it doesn't fully address that problem-solving starts from a place of ignorance or lack of knowledge. This is the starting point because if we had the necessary knowledge, we wouldn't have a problem in the first place. Recent studies have explored 'ignorance,' treating it not just as a lack of knowledge but as an important field in itself, yet they often overlook 'technology ignorance' and usually discuss it only in terms of uncertainty or manipulation.

This chapter suggests that there are four types of ignorance in engineering:

• Ignorance defines the problem initiating the design process.
• Creativity in problem-solving is unpredictable and therefore a form of ignorance.
• Communicating about what is not known is crucial in research and development.
• Unforeseen consequences of technology must be addressed through technology assessment.

Understanding ignorance as an epistemological issue means looking at the conditions that allow us to identify and solve problems. This involves recognizing the limits of our knowledge, understanding the social context and values that influence problem-solving, and managing the complexity of systems that can introduce new forms of ignorance. Addressing ignorance in engineering is not just an academic exercise but a critical challenge with ethical implications and potential consequences for human survival. It's about navigating the balance between recognizing the unpredictability in complex systems and making sufficient simplifications for practical solutions.

1.2 Knowledge and Ignorance

Ignorance, as a state of not knowing, is inherently human and always personal. Reflecting on ignorance dates back to ancient thinkers like Socrates and has been a topic throughout history. Recently, ignorance management has become a part of knowledge and risk management theories, but its application to technology is limited since technology encompasses more than just economic factors.

To discuss ignorance from an epistemological standpoint, we must first define it. While epistemology traditionally focuses on knowledge, ignorance is more than just a gap in knowledge; it's a specific kind of gap that must be understood within its own right. Ignorance shouldn't be analyzed solely based on its social origins; cognitive aspects like doubt and trust are also crucial. Sociologists might view knowledge as consensus within society, but from a philosophical perspective, it should involve at least intersubjective agreement.

In technology, there are four corresponding types of knowledge and ignorance:

• Factual ignorance (not knowing facts)
• Theoretical ignorance (not understanding reasons)
• Practical ignorance (lack of ability to perform)
• Normative ignorance (blindness to norms and values)

However, these simplifications can be misleading in engineering because both knowledge and the lack thereof are states of consciousness. Some forms of ignorance can be 'useful' if acknowledged and managed correctly.

Ignorance must be considered in engineering research and development since it's rooted in the problems engineers aim to solve, which are often driven by societal needs and thus have socio-cultural origins. Smithson categorizes ignorance into different types, two of which are significant for engineering: one related to the external world and the other to how people manage their ignorance.

Ultimately, an engineer's ignorance is not irrelevant or erroneous but is a meta-knowledge—a knowledge about what they do not know—which can be structured as a problem or a question. This form of ignorance has both structure and content and necessitates analyzing the cognitive presuppositions and epistemological conditions to address it effectively.

1.3 Ignorance as Knowledge of the Fundamental Limits of Knowledge

Historically, science and technology have encountered fundamental questions that reveal insurmountable limits to knowledge, encapsulated by Emil du Bois-Reymond's phrase "Ignoramus et ignorabimus," meaning "We do not know and will not know." Examples include the impossibility of certain mathematical proofs, the limitations imposed by physical laws, and the unpredictability of complex systems.

For engineering, this inherent ignorance is critical when dealing with complex systems where predictions cannot be precisely made due to sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Such complexity is fundamental in fields like biotechnology, communication technology, and in forecasting the societal impacts of new technologies.

This situation is further complicated by the inclusion of norms and values, which influence the evaluation of technological solutions and their societal and environmental impact. These norms and values have no absolute rational foundation, as they are shaped by cultural and historical contexts.

Therefore, in engineering and beyond, we must recognize the existence of "Ignorabimus," acknowledging that some aspects of knowledge, whether due to logical, mathematical, physical, or ethical foundational limitations, are inherently beyond our grasp. This understanding necessitates a new approach to managing ignorance that extends beyond economic considerations and incorporates cultural and historical awareness.

1.4 Ignorance as Knowledge of a Problem to Be Solved

In technology and engineering, ignorance is understood as the recognition of a problem that needs solving. It implies a goal or aim yet to be achieved, which requires specific types of knowledge:

• Knowledge of the means appropriate for achieving a goal.
• Knowledge on how to acquire and use those means.
• Understanding of the values that underpin the goal.
• Ability to adjust the goal in consideration of those values if needed.

This "problem-solving knowledge" is central to the practice of engineering. Ignorance, then, is not a simple lack of information but a gap in functional understanding necessary to transform a current state into a desired outcome. Addressing this ignorance demands new combinations of existing knowledge or entirely new creative solutions.

The challenge is knowing what is sought when starting from ignorance. It involves a cognitive process of formulating problems and possible solutions, demanding heuristic and creative thinking.

Regarding the ability to perform a task, the corresponding ignorance suggests a need for learning or organization. Knowledge creation in engineering assumes the ability to learn and innovate.

The growing importance of understanding values in technology reflects an intertwining of normative and epistemological problems, such as predicting new technology's societal impacts. Ignorance here includes a lack of knowledge about potential outcomes and an understanding of the values involved.

Aiming to achieve 'better ends' in technology is not fixed; it is a dynamic process influenced by changing values and needs. Ignorance in this sense is an "open structure" where knowledge of value hierarchies is essential to adapt goals to fulfill equivalent needs when circumstances change.

Considering all these elements, we see that engineering ignorance requires a deeper level of cognitive and philosophical understanding. It presupposes the ability to imagine possibilities, consider norms and values, and think teleologically about means and ends.

Engineers' ignorance involves a reflective judgment that goes beyond mere application of universal laws; it is about finding specific, actualizable solutions. This reflective judgment encompasses not only knowledge categories and moral principles but also the intentional technique, distinguishing between natural objects and artifacts.

Thus, engineers' ignorance is an epistemological problem that spans a broad spectrum of reflection, demanding an openness to new ideas, learning, and innovation, which are fundamental to the development and creative evolution of technology.

1.5 Conclusion

The engineer's ignorance is a structured and content-rich form of meta-knowledge. It defines problems and directs towards goals, formulating questions about achieving those goals within the framework of existing technical and ethical knowledge.

Two key aspects of this ignorance are underlined by the concept of "Ignorabimus":

• Creative Unpredictability: Creative solutions cannot be forecasted.
• Complexity and Unpredictability: The outcomes of complex technological projects, often explored through simulations, cannot be precisely predicted.

Engineering requires knowledge, action, and creativity, and this type of ignorance is neither an error nor irrelevant. Instead, it's a necessary condition for innovation and careful decision-making in the face of complexity, guided by ethical considerations and life experience. Thus, seasoned engineers are invaluable.

This issue encompasses both the nature of knowledge and the preconditions for the possibility of knowledge, where free will plays a central role. Reflective thinking, as suggested by Kant, is vital—imagining possibilities and necessities, and considering norms and values to inform goal-oriented reasoning. Beyond Kantian philosophy, engineers need to interpret facts, assign functions, and understand values and needs, which ties back to life experience and the phenomenological aspects of living with technology. Hence, the engineer's ignorance is both a fascinating epistemological problem and one of the fundamental aspects of human existence.