Abstract
An examination of the difficulties in identifying the conditions for asserting that something is a context reveals the problem of not having a principle of selection for contexts. In this chapter it is proposed that rather than talk about engineering in context, we look to a broader understanding of what is involved in an engineering project, replacing “context” with “process” or perhaps “environment”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See Butterfield (1931).
References
Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Butterfield, H. (1931). The whig interpretation of history. New York: Norton, 1965.
Christensen, S. H., Delahousse, B., & Meganck, M. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering in context. Aarhus: Academica.
Pitt, J. (2007). Seeing nature; origins of scientific observation. In J. Gayon, R. Burian, & M.-C. Lorne (Eds.), Conceptions de la Science: Hier, Aujourd’Hui et Demain. Hommage à Marjorie Grene (pp. 272–289). Brussels: Ousia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pitt, J.C. (2015). Context Versus Processes. In: Christensen, S., Didier, C., Jamison, A., Meganck, M., Mitcham, C., Newberry, B. (eds) Engineering Identities, Epistemologies and Values. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16172-3_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16172-3_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16171-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16172-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)