[SystemSafety] Engineering depends on making arguments (was Re: Fwd: Measurement + Control)

[Les Chambers]

Michael
I couldn't agree more. Two months ago a man called me with a problem. He was trying to sell a 
software product to a bank. The bank wanted independent validation that the product actually 
performed all the functions he claimed. He had no functionalional specification so I could make 
no argument that it did. No argument - no sale. 
Cheers
Les

> > Engineering is not about making "arguments."
> 
> At one level, the statement is trivially true.  Engineering is (by 
> definition) about constructing practical products.  The desired end result 
> is, for example, a bridge, not the designs and analyses of the bridge.
> 
> But at another level, the statement is false.  Producing the desired end 
> product necessarily requires specification, design, analysis, and associated 
> activities.  These activities in turn necessarily produce results, which are 
> usually embodied in documents.  These documents necessarily contain many 
> arguments.  Some of these arguments may be explicit (for example, 
> calculations about the load that a particular truss must support).  Some of 
> these arguments may be implicit (for example, the implicit argument 
> underlying a decision to adopt a particular design as sufficiently safe based 
> on the results of a thorough hazard analysis).  Whether implicit or explicit, 
> arguments permeate every aspect of engineering.
> 
> Arguments are not the end product of engineering, as they are of philosophy.  
> But without arguments, there is no engineering.
> 
> -- 
> 
> C. Michael Holloway
> 
> Disclaimer: My opinions are mine alone. Give neither blame nor credit to my 
> employer for them.
> 
> //



--
Les Chambers
les at chambers.com.au
+61 (0)412 648 992