Canadian Iron Ring Ceremony Under Review 17

[SAITAETGrad]

This was the inflection point:

Link

Commentary:

Link

Under Review:

Link

Engineers Canada:

Link

I don't understand the philosophy. If the current ritual is not inclusive enough, what ritual would be?

It is a ring intended to be worn on a hand. For those without hands should they see themselves as excluded?

These are not rhetorical questions. I'd like to understand.

 

[Craig_H]

I'm ashamed to admit that the first I heard of Kipling's less than savoury ideals was in the Engineers Canada critique (which I read a few weeks ago). That quote you show IRstuff is quite alarming to read in light of Canada's history or cultural genocide towards indigenous people.

In short, I see no harm in the principle of tweaking the ceremony to make it appeal to the broad audience of new engineers. The fundamental goal of imparting a sense of responsibility and community on engineers should not be lost.

 

[IRstuff]

True, but Kipling was still a product of his times and a long history of "betterment" of indigenous peoples dating all the way back to the forced religious conversion of natives by the conquistadors and their attendant priests. And certainly, given his tenure in the US, the notion of Manifest Destiny further influencing Kipling would not be surprising.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[Sparweb]

We keep referring to it in the discussion, but not making explicit what we're talking about. So...

Exhibit A:

Note:
This print drops the last line, which went:
Upon Honour and Cold Iron, God helping me, these things I purpose to abide.

 

[Sparweb]

Exhibit B:

 

[Sparweb]

IMO the biggest flaw is the stultified text, especially the first oath in Exhibit A.
I'm not sure I could keep a straight face if I had to deliver that speech to a crowd.

I would rather adapt the text of the province's code of ethics and make that into an meaningful oath, rather than the instruction manual that it tends to be nowadays. One can inspire respect and duty without invoking either God or other deity, and yet be just as meaningful to people of faith who feel that bond.

 

[geotechguy1]

For clarity there is much more to the Iron Ring ceremony than just those four paragraphs

 

[SAITAETGrad]

For clarity there is much more to the Iron Ring ceremony than just those four paragraphs

Not really...the complaints stem from the fact it was designed by Christian white men far more than the content.

Of course those attacking the ritual are exactly what they accuse Kipling thereof. They feel they are morally superior and see themselves as building a "better world" through their intolerance. I don't see a moral improvement. It is at best a sideward substitution.

One can inspire respect and duty without invoking either God or other deity, and yet be just as meaningful to people of faith who feel that bond.

Interesting take. So those of faith can make a substitution so that those who do not have any faith can be saved from the indignity of considering anything outside themselves. Why is that everything in the world must conform to that world view when it is so intolerant of any consideration of any other world view?

Again - those w/o hands. How do you guys square that issue? Or do you follow your thought process to the ultimate conclusion that no possible ritual would meet your criteria?

 

[IRstuff]

Why is that everything in the world must conform to that world view when it is so intolerant of any consideration of any other world view?

The issue is why a secular engineering organization must force non-Christians and non-believers to swear a Christian oath. Who is imposing their world view on whom?

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[SAITAETGrad]

The issue is why a secular engineering organization must force non-Christians and non-believers to swear a Christian oath. Who is imposing their world view on whom?

A few things:

1. Nobody is forced to participate. The Iron Ring has nothing to do with the regulated practice of engineering in Canada. Many people wear the Iron Ring who have never been registered as an engineer and many people who are registered as an engineer have never done the oath.

2. All that is referenced to is a "Maker" in the oath. There is no specific religion. If you believe the "Maker" is mathematics or randomization or the collected matter of the universe or Vishnu or all of humanity past, present or future - it matters not. The claim that it is a "Christian Oath" is false. The actual issue appears to be that the ritual was developed by people prescribed by the mob to be Christians and therefore the ritual is tainted by their wrong-think.

3. Regardless if you think the origin of the ritual is tainted or not - the reality is any mob imposed revision is itself going to be tainted by the sins of today. Again, it is a parallel move. You are simply replacing one taint with another.

 

[Sparweb]

We seem to be on a path of escalation.

 

[dik]

I think you are correct, Sparweb... and who knows what the next iteration will be... over the years, I've had a few people comment about not wearing an iron ring... I've mentioned that I'm an engineer and they have observed no iron ring. It's almost that they expect engineers to wear one.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[lucky555]

I know the ring and ceremony as being from an era (1920's) where many people were falsely claiming to be engineers. So a lot of buildings and structures collapsing. The ring showed you are bonafide.
When I graduated we were all really proud to get our iron rings.

After 29 years, I can't say I agree with the ceremony, in that it cloaks engineers in failure, makes us the fall guys when you have anyone that can call themselves an "engineering manager" ordering EIT's and other engineers to skimp on the design. I dislike the chant about being a humble failure when it should be about strength and success and giving the bird to the man pushing engineers to create bad designs. I've worked for many laymen, technologists etc as "engineering managers" where it's a constant battle to roll out something safe and as usual, the engineer is the responsible member. As I keep saying 'engineers have all of the responsibility yet none of the authority'. This needs to change.

I don't wear the ring when using power tools, it can get snagged. The old rings were stamped but new ones CNC machined which seem not as elegant looking.