The Book I Read: ‘The Existential Pleasures of Engineering’ by Samuel C. Florman
The stereotypical image of an engineer is one of a logical, pragmatic and rough-hewn thinker who says more with their work than with their words. While times have changed and engineering has opened itself up as a discipline to a greater variety of voices, at its heart engineering is concerned with results and functionality, not theory and eloquence.
Samuel C. Florman’s The Existential Pleasures of Engineering is an excellent counter to prevailing notions of what it means to be an engineer in the modern world. Written in the 1970s, the themes of the book are as important and relevant today as they were when it was first published. The book explores the responsibilities and popular perception of engineers in society, as well as overarching ethics and ideologies that permeate the different engineerings en masse.
Florman, a civil engineer based in New York State, is consistently eloquent throughout, and generous in references to world literature, popular culture, mythology and religion.
The first third to half of the book is spent describing non-engineering views of engineering as a whole. In retrospect, Florman may seem defensive in his descriptions of the public’s attacks on engineering. He writes of a rather popular disinterest and even disgust with the whole of engineering, with many opponents writing that engineering and engineers cause more problems than they solve, or that they are the complicit hands in unsustainable, dangerous and degrading business objectives. Images of dams and other megaprojects gone wrong, environmental wrongdoing, callous and arrogant methodologies that put profit before people and equitability are a few examples that they point to.
These themes are not foreign in the modern era, where there has been a backlash to the innovations in artificial intelligence and other software-based technologies. Florman’s writing about engineering’s detractors in the era that the book was written seem quaint in comparison. Quaint in the sense that the detractors he wrote about were critiquing the wrong thing. Instead of criticizing the ways that big business functions and funnels talent to its coffers, they focus on the highlights — things like high profile disasters, engineering failures or moments of particular neglect. Indeed, it seems that placing the blame on engineers or engineering itself would be premature. I would argue that this is the case now.
Florman also writes of the engineering spirit, which is a very noble one according to his words. The will to bend the shape and form of the earth towards some greater end, to make an impression that says this place is better because I, the engineer, have wrought something onto it, is a compelling narrative. I have to say he is right here. Even detractors of engineering in the abstract cannot deny that engineers, by virtue of the demanding and unique work that they do, are a very special kind of person. In this sense, engineering is a beautiful expression of the human condition, rather than a job, a series of steps or tasks, an industry or the motives of a few powerful people.
Don’t knock it ’til you tried it. If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. That kind of thing.
Throughout the book, Florman describes the detractors and anti-technologists. It’s hard to have sympathy for these folks, who criticize the hard working and noble engineers. Engineers are unassuming, hard working, creative and no nonsense, alongside being of predominantly lower and middle classes. Anti-technologists on the other hand, have the freedom to criticize works without understanding them. While Florman doesn’t express this frustration so strongly, it is a prevailing one in engineering and engineering-sympathetic circles. Again, I agree with the sentiment here. Don’t knock it ’til you tried it. If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. That kind of thing.
Towards the end of this book, in an additional chapter, Florman writes about the tragic view as a strong characteristic of the engineer. One that braces for the worse, is resourceful in the face of adversity, and one that does not place blame on the outside but uses the resources from within to tackle problems. As opposed to the expectations laid out by certain religious sentiments or Hollywood cinema, this “tragic” view of the engineer becomes something like their saving grace. It’s hard not to look at these kinds of traits admirably. After all, aren’t these the kinds of attitudes that prepare one for success?
Concluding Thoughts
I was surprised by the amount of references to the humanities and comparisons to art and artists that were present in this book. It also brought a very detailed psychological profile of “the engineer” to bear, with a level of care and detail that one would expect from a doctor writing about patient care, or a teacher writing about how they work with and mentor young students. It brings sensitivity and a kind of dignity to a personality and profession known for its unpretentious nature.
Some things are different since this book was first published, though. Engineers have become exalted members of society, whereas before they were unassuming. Of the world’s richest people, many of them are engineers or are deeply embedded in that kind of work, which is much more than 40 or 50 years ago. Some things have remained the same, however, such as the critical role that engineers play in society. It is a particular and fundamental kind of responsibility compared to other disciplines, according to Florman. Again, I have to say that I agree with him. Engineering forms the bedrock of modern life and promises further innovations. How it is used and interpreted is up to less mechanical affairs like policy, ethics and communication.
While Florman acknowledges the importance of engineering, he cautions against value judgments that weight it as greater than pursuits like poetry or law. It is a great net that works together, currents swimming from all ends to new destinations. And I believe that this magnanimous spirit is what will give engineering needed depth and continued relevance as we battle even greater challenges as human beings on this planet.
