Solid Geometry and Industrial Drawing

Abstract

The belief that English is the main tool of communication in industry or commerce is almost as uncertain as the one that technical studies, more than any other studies, need liberalising. Circular 323, with all its worthy emphasis on breadth and liberality and communication, is sadly out of touch with our industrial life in devoting only three lines to drawing. It is a pity that so many of our educational policy makers and administrators fail to realise that a very large part of technical education, from the study of radar to training in stenotyping, is devoted to overcoming the many inadequacies of language as a means of communication. Technical developments since Bell and Marconi have taken us far beyond the natural powers with which nature endowed us. We can communicate in time and space not only with each other but also with our physical surroundings and universe in ways undreamed of before the development of the necessary equipment and techniques. Apart from the question of communication, most technical ideas cannot be expressed adequately in speech or in writing but require drawings or symbols. If a list of means of communication of technical ideas were compiled in order of importance and frequency of use, it is probable that English language would be far down on it and that drawing would be at the top. This is not to say that standards of language used either for precise technical or aesthetic literary purposes should be neglected.

Citation

Macqueen, W.M. (1959), "Solid Geometry and Industrial Drawing", Education + Training, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 31-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb001546