Book Review : An Engineer Extols Virtues of a Humanistic Outlook

The Civilized Engineer by Samuel C. Florman (St. Martin’s: $15.95)

There are not many books about engineering that contain a quote from Edith Hamilton on the fall of Rome:

“The final reason for Rome’s defeat was the failure of mind and spirit to meet the challenge of new and great events. Material development outstripped human development; the Dark Ages took possession of Europe and classical antiquity ended.”

Nor are there many books about engineering that extol a broad liberal education and assert that the values embodied by literature and the arts must be applied to hard science and technology:

“There is clearly a need for more engineers with richer experience in writing, reading, speaking, and thinking in broad humanistic terms.”

Nor are there many books about engineering that confront head-on the inherent contradictions of life, the unresolvable tensions that pull thinking people in two or more directions at the same time:

‘Guns or Plowshares?’

“Should engineers follow their conscience? Of course. Must they subordinate personal views for the sake of organizational efficiency and democratic order? Also of course. Is engineering an arm of industry? Certainly. Is engineering central to the regulatory function? Again certainly. Do we want industrial development or pastoral tranquillity? Both. Do we want guns or plowshares? Plowshares, but it isn’t that simple. Are female engineers the same as male engineers or are they different? Yes.”

In short, there aren’t many books about engineering like Samuel C. Florman’s “The Civilized Engineer” except for Florman’s earlier books, particularly “The Existential Pleasures of Engineering,” in which this working civil engineer began trying to span the two cultures, a program that he continues and embellishes in his current work.

Florman’s effort is altogether commendable, and the results make interesting reading, though I suspect that they are more interesting to humanists than to scientists. For despite the eloquence of Florman’s plea, it is clear that the gap between the two cultures is very deep and cannot easily be bridged.

It is a gap not just of training but of temperament. It is a gap that seems largely impervious to education, training or cajolery. There are not many poets who were persuaded to appreciate the beauty of science, and I have not found many scientists who were persuaded to appreciate the beauty of poetry. In general, people cannot be induced to be interested in what they are not interersted in.

A True Polymath

Many people are good at something, but it is unusual to be good at many things. The Flormans of the world, true polymaths, are few and far between.

It is not surprising that all efforts to increase the liberal arts component of engineering education meet great resistance from within the engineering profession, and that is so not just because there is so much technical material to be mastered that there isn’t much time left for anything else.

It is because people with the scientific frame of mind tend to scoff at what they consider the soft-headedness of the arts. In mathematics, math students will tell you, there is only one right answer. In literature, anything goes.

Florman notes that when colleges have added courses like “Technology and Human Values” in an effort to humanize their engineering programs, the courses tend to be more attractive to liberal arts students than to engineering students, who consider them irrelevant. I suspect that the same is true of Florman’s books, though there are no doubt a handful of engineers like him who recognize that reality is many-faceted and that truth must embrace as many of the facets as possible.

Fear of Science

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t disagree with Florman, and I wish the program that he envisions could be achieved. The world would be a better place, and we wouldn’t live with so much of the pervasive fear of science and technology as two-edged swords.

But, alas, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride, and I haven’t noticed many beggars riding lately. Yes, it would be wonderful indeed if the world were a better place, if everyone understood everything--or at least something; if science produced only good and could not be misused; if virtue were rewarded and evil were punished, and if hunger, poverty, ignorance and disease were eliminated.

Alas, there is no evidence that any of these things is going to happen, just as there is no evidence that the Samuel Flormans of the world will ever be more than a small minority. And more’s the pity.

It is encouraging to read a book by an engineer who sees things so clearly and who writes so well. But his book is more a cry of the heart than a call to action. Mind you, there’s nothing wrong with that. It probably applies to most writing.

But no one should forget that in any competition between an individual and the world, it is prudent to bet on the world.

Alas.