Vol.2 No.4 2010

53/68

Interview : Restoration of engineering and Synthesiology−283−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.2 No.4 (2010) The rising prices of resources and energy such as that which occurred last year seems to have moved into the background because of the American economic troubles. For society, however, there is an increasing realization that these trends will not change. The way to overcome the social limitations of resources, energy, and the global environment and at the same time create a society where people can live comfortably and securely are the root of the innovations demanded by society.The fourth phase of the Science and Technology Basic Plan is now starting. The expectations for science and technology have increased and society is making large investments. The technology policy makers are strongly voicing the opinion that the effect of this investment must be made visible to ensure such investments are used to promote industry and the corresponding benefits are returned to the society. This, of course, is a just demand. Yet going back to the level of researchers, they cannot respond to such a demand as long as they believe a “breakthrough is innovation.” The researchers may feel, “I worked so hard to discover or invent this wonderful thing,” but may be unable to fill the gap between the contemporary capabilities of Japanese industry and the state of the art discoveries; society is incapable of utilizing the results. From another perspective, there may be other companies in the world that possess the ability and mindset to use such state-of-the-art discoveries, and the results obtained in Japan may be utilized in other countries, and that would be a problem.I think the word “innovation” is used to emphasize the fact that we must reconsider how and where a boost can be given to society, going back all the way to the level of individual researchers in order to use the taxpayer’s money for the benefit of Japan.(Ono)This point is something that I can sympathize with from the standpoint as an editor of Synthesiology. I think “going back all the way to the level of individual researchers” is very important.(Nagai)The “innovations” talked about by industry and society, and in technological policymaking are different, but there is shared expectation that various breakthroughs will come together into a new direction and give rise to a paradigm shift. For Japan, how do we obtain the necessary resources and energy? We need direction so that we are welcomed and do not become a burden to the world, and we must have firm sense of direction. In that sense, engineering must be at the vanguard, but it is in this sense that it is regretful that we must talk about the “drift away from science” and the “farewell to engineering faculties.”Let us define “engineering” as “the science of problem solving” (Ono)Regarding Japanese engineering, we had excellent technology but it was lost somewhere along the way. When you say “restoration of engineering,” what do you think is engineering? Do you think there is a science unique to kogaku (engineering) that is neither technology nor science?(Nagai)There is a four-character word ka gaku gi jutsu, which is translated “science and technology,” and it is quite difficult to define. I think we must consider kagaku (science) and gijutsu(technology) separately to seek definitions that are valid today, and then redefine the kagaku gijutsu. Some people say “Japanese ambiguity” is good, but ambiguous guiding principles may lead us to failure. (Ono)First, we must define the words clearly. (Nagai)Kogaku is plainly “engineering” in English. However, some people say kogaku is “science and technology and engineering” or “the science of engineering.” Although I understand these points of view, I believe that “kogaku is the science of problem solving.”Dr. Kotobu NagaiDr. Akira Ono

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です