Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Is that a threat? This strikes me as slathering a thick layer of politics onto engineering. Remember Gamergate?
Maybe instead of 'exploiting' and 'exposing' just design specifications?
I hold R. B. Fuller's engineering philosophy in higher regard. Quoth the DDG:
|
No, not a threat. More like a concern, maybe almost a fear, about what engineering introduces into human life if it does not have a critical practice. "Critical" here has a somewhat particular meaning that, while not political in the narrower sense of party politics or government, is nonetheless about power in social and economic life. It is a different perspective than what Fuller seems to be about. Critical perspectives would not be looking for a singular "planetary" context with prescriptive implications, as referenced in one of your links re: Fuller. That would be because of assumptions embedded in the definition of the context. Similarly, "common sense" would not be a prescriptive rhetorical figure because of how notions of common sense are cultural and constructed, even though they seem natural to us.
By exploit, I think they mean a pathway for software hacking. But I am not sure.
I find this working group interesting, but I do not post it here to endorse it or promote it. I would say though, that the emergent field Fuller seemed to be about would be a field of activity these "critical engineers" are also interested in. Your identification of the overlapping field of interest between the two is neat.