There might be something like all truly monumental engineering breakthroughs depended on something like a "scientific" breakthrough. Something like Faraday and Maxwell figuring out theories of electromagnetism is actually a bigger deal than Edison(/others) figuring out the lightbulb, the radio, etc. There are cases of lauded people who are a little more ambiguous on the science/engineer dichotomy. Turing? Shannon? Tesla? Shockley et al with the transistor seems kind of like an engineering breakthrough, and seems there could be love for that. I wonder if Feynman gets more recognition because as an educator we got a lot more of the philosophy underlying his work. Just rambling here.
TRIZ is an engineering discipline that has something called the five levels of innovation, which talks about this:
1. You solve a problem by using a common solution in your own speciality.
2. You solve a problem using a common solution i your own industry.
3. You solve a problem using a common solution found in other industries.
4. You solve a problem using a solution built on first principles (e.g. little known scientific principles.)
5. You solve a problem by discovering a new principle/scientific rule.
In light of reading Hazard's Shortform Feed -- which I really enjoy -- based on Raemon's Shortform feed, I'm making my own. There be thoughts here. Hopefully, this will also get me posting more.