Tag Archives: intuition

Episode 29 — Intuition

intuitionWe discuss how engineers use and develop their intuitive senses.

  • “The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
 — Albert Einstein
  • We are looking for individuals willing to appear as guests on this podcast, sharing insights and stories from their engineering journeys. If you are so inclined, you can contact us by emailing a message to admin –at– theengineeringcommomons dot com.
  • The manner in which people perceive and interact with the world is often assessed using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).
  • Citation: M. H. McCaulley, E. S. Godleski, C. F. Yokomoto, L. Harrisberger and E. D. Sloan, Applications of psychological type in engineering education, Engineering Education, 73, 5, (1983) pp.394–400.
  • According to McCaulley (1983, not 1990), the majority of engineering students are introverted (I, 56%) rather than extroverted (E, 44%), sensing (S, 53%) rather than intuitive (N, 47%), thinking (T, 74%) rather than feeling (F, 36%), and judging (J, 61%) rather than perceptive (P, 39%).
  • Showing his advanced age and terminal lack of hipness, Jeff makes a reference to former Tonight Show host Johnny Carson, who left TV in 1992 and passed away nearly a decade ago.
  • Citation: T. P. O’Brien, L. E. Bernold and D. Akroyd, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Academic Achievement in Engineering Education, Int. J. Engng Ed., Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 311–315, 1998.
  • According to O’Brien et al. (1998), the only preference from the Myers-Briggs assessment that has a statistical influence on academic grades is that of being an intuitor (N) rather than a sensor (S).
  • A majority of engineering professors are intuitors (N), while most engineering students are sensors (S). See R. M. Felder and L. K. Silverman, Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education, Engr. Education, 78(7), 674–681 (1988).
  • Percentage of intuitors by discipline: Physics (63%), Geological (62%), Aerospace (60%), Metallurgical (54%), Mining (40%), Mechanical (39%), Industrial (39%), and Civil (31%). See prior citation: O’Brien et al., 1998.
  • Jeff references an article titled, How many lightbulbs does it take to change an engineer? It suggests that, when introducing change into an engineering organization, one should give engineers time to assimilate the reasons (for the I), give them a model for change (for the N), provide concrete evidence (for the S), offer a reason for change (for the T), and present a clear process for change (for the J).
  • The group seems to agree that the best way to learn a subject is to teach it to someone else.
  • Carmen cites an article titled, Are Young Engineers Unprepared?
  • A discussion ensues concerning the need for computer models to match experimental data.

Thanks to Leo Grübler for the photo titled “bauchgefühl.” Podcast theme music provided by Paul Stevenson