8 ms·

I think I agree with your sentiment, but the mindset can be dangerous. Engineering - if viewed most generally - is simply a pragmatic way of looking at the wor

I think I agree with your sentiment, but the mindset can be dangerous. Engineering - if viewed most generally - is simply a pragmatic way of looking at the world, with an eye for improvement. If you use this broad definition, I think there are people who are try to create actionable change, and others who simply are greedy or uninterested. Its dangerous though to put yourself on a pedestal (I assume you are an engineer)... I have I heard the same comment said about entrepreneurs, and my stomach turns a little from hubris...

gaius 18y ago
There is a sort of government like that, it's called technocracy, "scientific government". That is where bureacracy comes from, you know, nowadays it's a term of contempt but once, it was the pinnacle of scientific management and government. The EU is a good example of a technocracy, while there is an elected component, all the real power is in the hands of appointed officials. China is another technocracy. Judge for yourself how well that works.
- nazgulnarsil 18y ago
  if technocracy was the same as bureaucracy there wouldn't be separate names for it.
  - gaius 18y ago
    Bureaucracy is the mechanism. Technocracy is belief in government by the bureaucratic class.
    - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
      I disagree, you can have a technocratic democracy, a technocratic oligarchy, technocratic monarchy etc. technocracy is just a form of meritocracy where the the definition of merit has been more strictly defined. I think it fails to work when the metric by which technical expertise is defined is easily manipulated. Since power is involved everyone is going to constantly be looking for ways in.
nazgulnarsil 18y ago
It's not myself I'm putting on a pedestal, rather engineers in general. I think that a single engineer in charge can of course be disastrous. But a general policy of engineers as decision makers seems pretty win-win.

gaius 18y ago

There is a sort of government like that, it's called technocracy, "scientific government". That is where bureacracy comes from, you know, nowadays it's a term of contempt but once, it was the pinnacle of scientific management and government. The EU is a good example of a technocracy, while there is an elected component, all the real power is in the hands of appointed officials. China is another technocracy. Judge for yourself how well that works.

nazgulnarsil 18y ago
if technocracy was the same as bureaucracy there wouldn't be separate names for it.
- gaius 18y ago
  Bureaucracy is the mechanism. Technocracy is belief in government by the bureaucratic class.
  - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
    I disagree, you can have a technocratic democracy, a technocratic oligarchy, technocratic monarchy etc. technocracy is just a form of meritocracy where the the definition of merit has been more strictly defined. I think it fails to work when the metric by which technical expertise is defined is easily manipulated. Since power is involved everyone is going to constantly be looking for ways in.

nazgulnarsil 18y ago

It's not myself I'm putting on a pedestal, rather engineers in general. I think that a single engineer in charge can of course be disastrous. But a general policy of engineers as decision makers seems pretty win-win.