An Engineer's Ignorance and How He Knows It

Hans Poser TU Berlin fPET-2010 Golden, CO 1

Hans Poser (Technische Universität Berlin)

An Engineer’s Ignorance and How He Knows It

1. Introduction

2. Knowledge and ignorance

3. Ignorance as knowledge of knowledge limits

4. Ignorance as knowledge of a problem to be solved

5. Kinds of ignorance in engineering

6. The transformation of technological knowledge problems into

value problems as a transformation of the structure of ignorance


1. Introduction

Why is it important to analyse the engineer’s ignorance? 1. Ignorance is the starting point of each design and development:

“There is a problem!”

2. Problem solving often needs creativity, which excludes predictions –

a hard case of ignorance.

3. R & D departments have to communicate on ignorance as problems.

4. Unknown possible consequences of technology – i.e. hard cases of

ignorance – have to be evaluated by means of methods of TA.


Ignorance as an epistemological question means

asking for the conditions of possibility of ignorance, i.e.:

What are the conditions, which allow to conclude

from ignorance as a non-knowledge,

what the problem is, which has to be solved.


2. Knowledge and ignorance

Types of knowledge of an engineer

• Know that as fact knowledge,

• Know why as theoretical and causal knowledge,

• Know how as practical action knowledge, and

• Know wherefore as normative value knowledge.


Types of knowledge of an engineer:

• Know that as fact knowledge,

• Know why as theoretical and causal knowledge,

• Know how as practical action knowledge, and

• Know wherefore as normative value knowledge.

Corresponding forms of ignorance seem to be:

• Unawareness concerning facts

• Nescience concerning theoretical reasons

• Disability to achieve something

• Blindness or non-knowledge concerning norms and values.

But this is inadequate concerning the engineer’s ignorance!


Kinds of ignorance due to Smithson:

S1 Ignorance as encountered in the external non-social world.

S2 Ignorance as emergent, constructed, and imposed by agents,

at least partly socially constructed.

S3 Managing under ignorance:

How people think and act in uncertain environments.

S4 Managing ignorance: How people think about ignorance and how they act on it. Result: For engineers, S1 and S4 are important -

S1 concerning R & D, S4 concerning TA


An engineer’s ignorance has a typical structure

depending on epistemological connections:

An engineer’s ignorance

• is a knowledge of non-knowledge, i.e. a meta-knowledge

• has a content,

• leads to a problem,

• and can be formulated as a question.

Result: An engineer’s ignorance has a structure and a content


3. Ignorance as a knowledge of fundamental limits of knowledge

IGNORABIMUS: Ignorance as a knowledge of fundamental limits of knowledge

• no complete axiomatization of mathematics – i.e. of technology, too

• no perpetuum mobile – i.e. we need energy

• no entrance to the region

o inside the uncertainty relation – important for nanotechnology –

o outside the light cone – important for signal transmission

• no prognosis in complex systems without complexity reduction

(knowledge by an abdication of knowledge)

• no criteria for the adequateness of complexity reduction

• no absolute or rational foundation of norms and values

Result: There are inevitable kinds of IGNORABIMUS


4. Ignorance as a problem to be solved

An engineer’s ignorance means: There is a problem to be solved.

A problem to be solved means: There is an aim to be reached.

Therefore the engineer needs as a problem solving knowledge

• a knowledge concerning means for an aim as a functional compliance,

• a knowledge how to gain and to use such a means,

• a knowledge concerning values behind the aim.

• a knowledge how to modify the aim in the light of values, if there is no

adequate means at hand to reach the originally intended aim.

Epistemological remarks:

- Means, ends, functions can’t be observed - they are teleological interpretations.

- An artefact is materialized knowledge and instantiation of values – which

demands a hermeneutic interpretation.

- Ignorance fixes the direction of the aim, not a specific end.


Engineer’s ignorance means: There is a problem to be solved.

A problem to be solved means: There is an end to be reached.

The problems represent an ignorance as questions:

• What are the reproducible effects (functions) as a means to the intended aim?

• What to do (to learn, to organize) to use these means?

• Which are the norms and values to be respected?

• Which are the more general values behind to modify the aim adequately?

Result: The problem solving knowledge is part of the ignorance structure.

It constitutes the content of the ignorance.

This warrants to communicate on ignorance.


Object level

Ignorance

⇑⇑⇑⇑

⇓⇓⇓⇓

problem

⇑⇑⇑⇑

⇓⇓⇓⇓

question

⇓⇓⇓⇓

solution

Knowledge content

Knowledge of non-knowledge

knowledge of - ignorabimus - facts - causes

narrowing down:

interpreted as - aims, means, functions - values, needs

specification: - methods - creativity

actualisation: know how

Epistemological preconditions

Reflection

imagination thinking in possibilities (theoretical reasoning)

thinking in means and ends (teleological reasoning)

thinking in norms and values (practical reasoning)

abilities: - hermeneutic ability - ability to learn - creativity

presupposition: - free will - life experience


5. Kinds of ignorance in engineering

I. Classical civil engineering –

a. The ignorance leads to questions,

for which classical methods of problem solving are at hand


START RESEACH & DEVELOPMENT AIM SETTING SOCIOTECHNOLOGICAL IDENTIFICATION Existence of an NO actual system? YES PLANNING INTEGRATION OF THE ACTUAL SYSTEM ACTING PRODUCTION OF THE ACTUAL SYSTEM CHECK PLANNING OF AN ACTUAL SYSTEM Success? NO YES

STOP Process-structure of techno-genesis (Günter Ropohl, 2009, p. 262)



a. The ignorance leads to questions,

for which classical methods of problem solving are at hand

Result:

The ignorance structure leads to sequences of questions as cases of

ignorance,

tentative and controlled answers (trial and error) including

- evaluations of the means

- evaluations of the sub-means and sub-aims

The approach corresponds to Smithson’s S1-type



b. New problems of ignorance:

- Creativity needed for new solutions: predictions are impossible:

IGNORABIMUS concerning the content of future creativity

- Missing basic knowledge in the area of nanotechnology


II. Biotechnology

a. Classical forms (e.g. beer production) follow classical methods as above


Biofacts as living beings

- are growing – results take time (if required: generations)

- are complex autopoietic systems –

prognoses for manipulated systems are highly problematic

- live in an ecological environment – ramifications are unknown


III. Information technology

a. Classical tasks (e.g. telephone production and installation)

follow classical methods as above


Information

• is neither matter nor knowledge; why needs its manipulation artefacts?

• transforms society; but how?

• means power; how to get a balance of it?


Result:

Kinds of ignorance:

Classical case: Adoption of heuristic methods to the special situation

Need of new solutions: Creativity

Need of basic theoretical knowledge: New research

Missing knowledge in a moral perspective: Moral reasoning

Ignorabimus concerning forecast in complex systems: Parameter reduction

The new technologies lead to new forms of ignorance:

Ignorance management - Smithson’s S4-type - is the task of TA


6. The transformation of technological knowledge problems into value problems

as a transformation of the structure of ignorance

Enlargement of engineer’s ignorance:

1. From the very beginning of planning and developing, the engineer has to

include the whole area of technological, economic, social, environmental

values and their tension.

This implies:

Contents and structure of the engineer’s ignorance have been extended,

since they have to include values as elements explicitly: They are part of

the problem constitution.


Values of TA as a structuring element of engineer’s ignorance: VDI Guideline 3780

Individual development

Society quality

Welfare (whole society)

Profitableness

( (individual case)

Funktionality Safety

Health

Environment quality

Common instrumental relatioships

Common competitive relationships


Enlargement of engineer’s ignorance:

2. To minimise risks and dangers, feasibility studies are used

to select the best scenario for actualisation.

This depends on complexity reduction –

otherwise predictions would be impossible.

This implies:

Complexity reduction is no elimination of ignorance, but the introduction

of a new type of it, since there are no criteria for the reliability of the

problem reduction.


Conclusion I

The engineer’s ignorance has a structure and a content:

• It is a kind of meta-knowledge (knowing the non-knowledge),

• it characterizes a problem (knowing the direction of an aim),

• it leads to a question (asking for means to an end),

• it has as a background technological and normative knowledge.

•

The engineer’s ignorance is characterized by an Ignorabimus:

• Creative solutions are never predictable.

• Complex developments are never predictable.


Conclusion II

Elements of Ignorance

Missing knowledge as solution epistemic condition I adaptation of given methods heuristic imagination know how teleological reasoning reflective judgement II new method development creativity III basic theoretical knowledge

know why research theoretical rationality - in nanosciences empirical and - in biosciences theoretical reasoning - in social sciences social epistemology

IV consequences in a moral ethical reasoning practical rationality

perspective know wherefore

V complex system parameter reduction theoretical and combination of I – IV in feasibility studies practical rationality, to avoid Ignorabimus reflective judgement


Technology

An Engineer's Ignorance and How He Knows It