Nuh uh. Science answers why. Engineering answers how.
Science depends on a cause-effect relationship. “Why” is a causation question. Each of the sciences looks for underlying causes and see observations as effects of causes.
Engineering is “how”. How do I put this together? Does it work? GREAT! Why does building a bridge work this way? Who cares – it works! Engineering and science tend to be married a lot but they don’t need each other.
It’s only post 1950s that engineering was placed as subservient to science.
Meteorologists absolutely _do_ tell you why a hurricane is forming.
It’s a chain of hows that becomes an answer to a why.
There’s other ways to answer a “why” such as religious, which I don’t count as relevant.
But if you want to compare:
a) Religion: Why? [whatever sounds good to them]
b) Sciences: Why? [chain of hows moving back in time to a causation]
Why : for what purpose, cause or reason.
Anecdote: Nephew when in 4h grade. Forced into a group activity on robotics. Did well – his gruop got a prize -but I was sad he didn’t like it.
But – his rants were priceless.
“Why do they keep saying STEM? This is ENGINEERING, not Science. It’s not Technology. It’s not Math. It’s ENGINEERING. ”
I got to hear that rant of his a few times and it was all his own although it sounds like something I might say. He knew the differences and hated mushed together things.
“The how, provided by science, answers the why, provided by philosophy or religion or whatever you like.”
Ok, so you’re kicking it into “philosophy of science” now? That’s a dimension “up” and away, invisible to most who do sciences.
You’re at the “demarcation problem” zone and perhaps beyond into the political conflict thesis zone. I’m nowhere near that zone. Too messy and fighty.
So, why are scientists marching?
Funding can funnel into zones outside of demarcated zone, into pseudo-sciences and outright fictions.
This is indeed a philosophy problem at this point but one with pragmatic consequences.
I was a systems analyst for a pharmaceutcal company for a few years. It’s a bridge position, part engineering and part business. Hence, I know why they march.
[I was also systems engineer for what I worked on, producing products that were turnkey and maintained through their lifecycle. But I had to be nimble and agile to fit business requirements and I was a team of one, coordinating ad-hoc groups to suit the needs of the project at hand. Pain in the ass but I mostly liked it]
It’s messy when politics deigns funding should go to pseudo-science and changes that pseudo-science into a science for political and funding reasons.
Florida: 2015. My Gov Rick Scott put a gag order on certain scientific terms.
“climate change” and “global warming.” are two.
What’s the demarcation in Florida in climate science? Messy.
I agree that the reality will exist whatever the words chosen yet also, words construct our filters of reality and as gaining direct non-sensory and non-instrumental access to reality is a problematic affair at best, we have to contend with the filters.
But if you have an exclusive pass to Direct Insight, do tell. There’s a group of seekers in a rural village in India just looking for their latest guru. Like Saffron?