Chapter 1: The Essence of Engineering Without Numbers

Can we truly conceptualize and create without relying on numerical data? This question might seem peculiar, given the rigorous training in science, technology, and mathematics required for engineers. Nevertheless, there are instances where engineering must proceed without numerical references. This situation can generate discomfort among engineers.

At the initial stages of concept design, we often find ourselves with little more than a suspicion or a vague idea. Observations and clues may lead to hunches, but more often than not, we start with a blank slate—void of any substantial information.

Securing financial resources typically follows convincing stakeholders of the viability of our ideas. In these early moments, we lack clarity about the problem at hand, the needs of the customer, the potential solutions, and the technologies necessary to bring those solutions to life.

To advance, we must gather evidence that substantiates these unknowns. While possessing a full suite of engineering skills might lead us to assume we can dive straight into calculations, there's a significant issue: numbers require funding.

The moment we enter laboratories, hangars, wind tunnels, or libraries, we begin depleting funds in pursuit of those critical data points. Sure, we could make rough estimates about dimensions, performance, and capabilities, perhaps scribbling them down casually. Yet, if the concept we’re exploring is particularly revolutionary, those estimates might be wildly inaccurate.

As we combine these approximations, errors accumulate, leading to growing uncertainty—this poses a challenge when competing for financial backing. Disruptive innovations vie for the same pool of funding as all other proposals, necessitating a compelling argument to secure resources over others.

If our case relies on shaky estimates built upon additional shaky estimates, it doesn’t take much to bring that argument crashing down. Instead, we need to construct our pitch on binary reasoning. An argument must be clear-cut: something either exists or it does not. It should be grounded in well-established truths that resonate with the audience.

Section 1.1: Crafting a Strong Argument

The strength of our argument relies on universally accepted facts, avoiding any ambiguity. If someone challenges our stance, they must navigate through solid evidence rather than vague estimates.

In crafting such arguments, we often find ourselves leaning towards a rhetorical approach rather than relying solely on the numerical data that may be lacking in a new concept. This approach can resemble a legal argument more than a scientific proposition.

This shift may come as a surprise. When we rely on persuasive language as our evidence, engineering discussions can become rather verbose. However, precision remains crucial, and the choice of words must be deliberate. Interestingly, those who excel in this area may not fit the typical engineering mold.

Engineering education, with its strong emphasis on technical skills, tends to favor those proficient in mathematics. Conversely, individuals with a natural talent for rhetoric may often be overlooked, leading them to explore different fields.

Subsection 1.1.1: Engaging Students in Rhetorical Analysis

In my experience presenting this topic to school students, those who excel in articulating their ideas tend to generate the most innovative concepts. Without any reliance on mathematics, the design process is approached entirely through rhetoric.

If you’re interested, you can explore this workshop through an AI that I trained to present this material.

Chapter 2: The Challenge of Filtering Talent

Through numerous presentations, I’ve observed that students with a flair for language often contribute the most compelling ideas. These individuals, who can weave together arguments with creativity, might not fit the conventional engineer’s profile.

I often ponder how an educational system that prioritizes mathematics may inadvertently filter out those who could become exceptional engineering designers—individuals capable of crafting persuasive arguments with finesse.

Ultimately, while innovation is inherently challenging, there exists a structured approach to tackle complex problems effectively.