You obviously don't include mathematics in this, but it is a form of deductive reasoning as far away from science as the arts are.
I disagree strongly with this. To reduce mathematics (and philosophy in your next sentence) to not-a-science, just because it's based on deductive reasoning is doing it a major disservice.
It is especially because of its deductiveness that mathematics is such a valuable tool for science. It answers the fundamental question "assuming A, what can we prove to be true about A' and A''?". Without that deductive proof, many inductive scientific theories could not even be formulated, let alone disproven.
And then you go on stating that engineering is applying validated knowledge to solve real world problems. Do you realize that much of that validation of said knowledge has been done through mathematical models? That the only reason we have certainty in engineering is because of the deductive rigour of mathematics?
Mathematics & philosophy aren’t sciences because there are no hypotheses, experiments, and results; it’s just thinking and logic.
It’s still incredibly valuable and the basis of many good things.
I would also add that engineering isn’t only working with existing scientific knowledge; we were building steam trains and optimizing them long before we started doing scientific thermodynamics.
Science and math are definitely good friends and so I'm sure lots of analogies between the two could be made, but I believe the comment was getting at the epistemological difference between 'proven' (the happy state in mathematics) and 'not contradicted by experimental evidence' (the happy state in science).
I disagree strongly with this. To reduce mathematics (and philosophy in your next sentence) to not-a-science, just because it's based on deductive reasoning is doing it a major disservice.
It is especially because of its deductiveness that mathematics is such a valuable tool for science. It answers the fundamental question "assuming A, what can we prove to be true about A' and A''?". Without that deductive proof, many inductive scientific theories could not even be formulated, let alone disproven.
And then you go on stating that engineering is applying validated knowledge to solve real world problems. Do you realize that much of that validation of said knowledge has been done through mathematical models? That the only reason we have certainty in engineering is because of the deductive rigour of mathematics?