[0xbadcafebee]

Engineering started out as just some dudes who built things from gut feeling. After a whole lot of people died from poorly built things, they decided to figure out how to know ahead of time if it would kill people or not. They had to use math and science to figure that part out.

Funny enough that happened with software too. People just build shit without any method to prove that it will not fall down / crash. They throw some code together, poke at it until it does something they wanted, and call that "stable". There is no science involved. There's some mathy bits called "computer science" / "software algorithms", but most software is not a math problem.

Software engineering should really be called "Software Craftsmanship". We haven't achieved real engineering with software yet.

[slfnflctd]

You have a point, but it is also true that some software is far more rigorously tested than other software. There are categories where it absolutely is both scientific and real engineering.

I fully agree that the vast majority is not, though.

[AdieuToLogic]

This is such an unbelievably dismissive assertion, I don't even know where to start.

To suggest, nay, explicitly state:

  Engineering started out as just some dudes who built things 
  from gut feeling.

  After a whole lot of people died from poorly built things, 
  they decided to figure out how to know ahead of time if it 
  would kill people or not.

Is to demean those who made modern life possible. Say what you want about software developers and I would likely agree with much of the criticism.

Not so the premise set forth above regarding engineering professions in general.

[0xbadcafebee]

Surely you already know the history of professional engineers, then? How it's only a little over 118 years old? Mostly originating from the fact that it was charlatans claiming to be engineers, building things that ended up killing people, that inspired the need for a professional license?

"The people who made modern life possible" were not professional engineers, often barely amateurs. Artistocrat polymaths who delved into cutting edge philosophy. Blacksmith craftsmen developing new engines by trial and error. A new englander who failed to study law at Yale, landed in the American South, and developed a modification of an Indian device for separating seed from cotton plants.

In the literal historical sense, "engineering" was just the building of cannons in the 14th century. Since thousands of years before, up until now, there has always been a combination of the practice of building things with some kind of "science" (which itself didn't exist until a few hundred years ago) to try to estimate the result of an expensive, dangerous project.

But these are not the people who made modern life people. Lots, and lots, and lots of people made modern life possible. Not just builders and mathematicians. Receptionists. Interns. Factory workers. Farmers. Bankers. Sailors. Welders. Soldiers. So many professions, and people, whose backs and spirits were bent or broken, to give us the world we have today. Engineers don't deserve any more credit than anyone else - especially considering how much was built before their professions were even established. Science is a process, and math is a tool, that is very useful, and even critical. But without the rest it's just numbers on paper.

[AdieuToLogic]

> Surely you already know the history of professional engineers, then? How it's only a little over 118 years old? Mostly originating from the fact that it was charlatans claiming to be engineers, building things that ended up killing people, that inspired the need for a professional license?

I did not qualify with "professional" as you have, which is disingenuous. If the historical record of what can be considered "engineering" is of import, consider:

  The first recorded engineer
  
  Hey, why not ask? Surely it’s related to understanding the 
  origin of the word engineering? Right? Whatever we’ve asked 
  the question now. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the 
  first recorded “engineer” was Imhotep. He happened to be 
  the builder of the Step Pyramid at Ṣaqqārah, Egypt.
  
  This is thought to have been erected around 2550 BC. Of 
  course, that is recorded history but we know from 
  archeological evidence that humans have been 
  making/building stuff, fires, buildings and all sorts of 
  things for a very long time.
  
  The importance of Imhotep is that he is the first 
  “recorded” engineer if you like.[0]

> But these are not the people who made modern life people[sic]. Lots, and lots, and lots of people made modern life possible.

Of course this is the case. No one skill category can claim credit for all societal advancement.

But all of this is a distraction from what you originally wrote:

  Engineering started out as just some dudes who built things 
  from gut feeling.

  After a whole lot of people died from poorly built things, 
  they decided to figure out how to know ahead of time if it 
  would kill people or not.

These are your words, not mine. And to which I replied:

  This is such an unbelievably dismissive assertion ...

What I wrote has nothing to do with "Engineers don't deserve any more credit than anyone else ..."

It has everything to do with categorizing efforts to solve difficult problems as unserious haphazard undertakings which ultimately led to; "they decided to figure out how to know ahead of time if it would kill people or not" (again, your words not mine).

0 - https://interestingengineering.com/culture/the-origin-of-the...

[icsa]

Software Engineering is only about 60 years old - i.e. the term has existed. At the point in the history of civil engineering, they didn't even know what a right angle was. Civil engineers were able to provide much utility before the underlying theory was available. I do wonder about the safety of structures at the time.

[AdieuToLogic]

> Software Engineering is only about 60 years old - i.e. the term has existed.

Perhaps as a documented term, but the practice is closer to roughly 75+ years. Still, IMHO there is a difference between those who are Software Engineers and those whom claim to be so.

> At the point in the history of civil engineering, they didn't even know what a right angle was.

I strongly disagree with this premise, as right angles were well defined since at least ancient Greece (see Pythagorean theorem[0]).

> Civil engineers were able to provide much utility before the underlying theory was available.

Eschewing the formal title of Civil Engineer and considering those whom performed the role before the title existed, I agree. I do humbly suggest that by the point in history to where Civil Engineering was officially recognized, a significant amount of the necessary mathematical and materials science was available.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem

[Henchman21]

Total aside here:

What about modern life is so great that we should laud its authors?

Medical advances and generally a longer life is what comes to mind. But much of life is empty of meaning and devoid of purpose; this seems rife within the Western world. Living a longer life in hell isn’t something I would have chosen.

[signatoremo]

> But much of life is empty of meaning and devoid of purpose

Maybe life is empty to you. You can't speak for other people.

You also have no idea if pre-modern life was full of meaning and purpose. I'm sure someone from that time bemoaning the same.

The people before modern time were much less well off. They had to work a lot harder to put food on the table. I imagine they didn't have a lot of time to wonder about the meaning of life.