#science vs engineering

[prokopetz]

Mad scientist whose practice of deviant science is confined entirely to the realm of pure theory, and who arrogantly dismisses all those so-called mad "scientists" who are out there actually building death rays and such as mere mad engineers.

[juniejuniejune]

BONUS: Emily Williams on her psychosexuality and exploring gender via science and engineering (GRRL031B)

Welcome to Grrl on Grrl’s very first BONUS EPISODE, featuring deleted clips from Emily Williams’ interview (which you can listen to here)! In this bonus episode, we’ll talk about Emily’s changing psychosexuality pre- and post-transition, how science can help or hinder the exploration of gender and sexuality, and general science talk.

Thank you to Emily Williams for getting very personal with me.…

View On WordPress

[towardsagentlerworld]

Science is finding out facts about the world. Engineering, in contrast, is the technique of using science to produce tools we can consistently use in the world. Engineering produces things that have useful effects. ...The distinction is, I think fairly clear when we talk about physics. In particular, we understand the science of physics quite well, at least on every-day scales. And our practice of the engineering of physics is also quite well-developed... But people get much more confused when we move over to, say, psychology, or sociology, or nutrition. Researchers are doing a lot of science on these subjects, and doing good work. So there’s a ton of papers out there saying that eggs are good, or eggs are bad, or eggs are good for you but only until next Monday or whatever. And people have, often, one of two reactions to this situation. The first is to read one study and say “See, here’s the scientific study. It says eggs are bad for you. Why are you still eating eggs? Are you denying the science?” And the second reaction is to say that obviously the scientists can’t agree, and so we don’t know anything and maybe the whole scientific approach is flawed. But the real situation is that we’re struggling to develop a science of nutrition. And that shit is hard. We’ve worked hard, and we know some things. But we don’t really have enough information to do engineering, to say “Okay, to optimize cardiovascular health you need to cut your simple carbs by 7%, eat an extra 10g of monounsaturated fats every day, and eat 200g of protein every Wednesday” or whatever. We just don’t know enough. ...A lot of “lifehacks” boil down to “We read a study, and based on this study here are three simple things you can do to X.” A study is science, not engineering. Sometimes helpful, but easy to overinterpret. Don’t take any one study too seriously, and if what you’re doing works, don’t totally overhaul it because you read a study.

jadagul on the difference between science and engineering