A Belief to Be Seen: The Divide Between Engineering and Medicine
Ideally, two of the more important
of today’s industries would do well to collaborate – if not immediately – for
the sake of entrepreneurship, innovation, and discovery for the good of
society. While this belief is seemingly apparent, it isn’t at all inherent,
especially between the greatest of offenders: medical professionals and
engineers. From electrical to agricultural (with possible, though momentary
exception towards biomedical engineers), and from surgeons to practitioners on
the side of medicine, there exists a major difference of ideals that creates a
significant rift in the way medical innovation and use is brought about, an
issue that not only exists due in thanks to reasons of ethics and expense, but
as well processes of industry, use-inspiration, and immediacy therein. The
issue lies not in that the two disciplines are fundamentally different, rather
that the differences consistently affect their necessary collaboration. With
the rising use and acceptance of technology as an inherent medium to both
generations now and to come, the issue extends to the point where the apparent
disconnect takes center stage.
A
significant point first lies in how the two professions are even brought about –
the education of one is, of course, very much different from the other. While
an engineer may simply earn a bachelors, all the way to a Ph.D., a medical
professional (in this case, earning the professional title of “doctor")
requires, at least in the United States and a number of other countries, a
bachelors and four plus years of medical school. The additional training is
made that much more obvious by the different approaches made by both fields,
and in fact, many engineers who don’t seek an advanced degree are whisked
straight away into industry with little bearing in the field of medicine. But, among
those engineers appointed for research-like endeavors, the state of the
education given to professionals of both fields, although a significant flaw,
may not be the greatest to blame for the lack of conscious effort to properly
collaborate.
Perhaps
what lies to be easiest to blame exists in the perception of all those involved
and affected by medicine today. This is to say that despite the ethics and
constraints that engineers research and create technology towards, whether that
be artificial limbs, organs, or transplant materials, there still exists and
element of use and an extra set of ethical standards that doctors and surgeons
are made to use. The efforts of both engineers and scientists in today’s world
and its economy, citizenship and entitlement therein opposes and loses the
product of these innovations long before they can reach the operating table.
Lars,
ReplyDeleteYour first paragraph defines what the central issue of medical professionals and engineers not collaborating that you will discuss in your paper which I found clear and concise. I especially liked “The issue lies not in that the two disciplines are fundamentally different, rather that the differences consistently affect their necessary collaboration. With the rising use and acceptance of technology as an inherent medium to both generations now and to come, the issue extends to the point where the apparent disconnect takes center stage.” thesis statement and how you integrated the statements at the beginning of the intro for the need of engineer and medical collaboration. However, the only parts I found that seemed to make the sentences drag on was the parenthesis inserts such as (with possible, though momentary exception towards biomedical engineers), and -if not immediately – instead of making one long sentence you might want to divide them into separate sentences to make it more clear and flow better.
I like how your paragraph after the intro focused on education since that is where the road to a profession starts. I thought everything you included was relevant and useful information to prove your topic but you might want to also include how prestigious getting into medical or engineering schools are and the requirements that have to be met to do so. Otherwise, there is not anything else I would change about the paragraph just the few additions.
For the third ethics paragraph, I believe you focused too much on medical and biomedical engineers specifically. You should keep the information you have but add more on the ethics of say chemical engineers (on not making hazardous toxic chemicals or illegal drugs), mechanical engineers (making weapons) etc. I don’t know exactly how you would pull that together to the medical ethics, but perhaps say they both have stressful jobs though doctors are more directly related to responsibilities of the death of patients while engineers can indirectly affect lives.
Good start! I can not wait to read your essay and see what you come up with!
Joana Sipe
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSorry I accidentally posted the same thing twice thats why the second one is deleted! -Joana
ReplyDeleteLars,
ReplyDeleteI think you have a really strong start with a lot of key points that you reached. In your first paragraph, where you used the parentheses, I wonder if you could use commas instead. I think the parentheses have a tendency to throw the reader for a loop because it takes you to side thought. That might help with the rhythm of the paper.
As Joana pointed out, you did focus a lot on the medical side in your third paragraph. But instead of removing that, could you just add in more points from different stakeholders? I think that you have an awesome start and that your paper will be really interesting to read!
- Laura