I think they had more abstract sciences in mind. Engineering is a very practical, applied science.
Engineering can be as elegant and artistic as any other study.
Why does it have a utilitarian reputation?
Just because engineers have got to have utility in their results elese they don't get paid?
Beatuty is where you see it , an elegant program , a highly streamlined vehicle, a tiny electrical device laid into a grid of millions of tiny transistors that store an encliclopedia in less volume than a grain of rice, an alloyed crystal casts an x-ray shadow of diffraction patterns , a jet engine on afterburner produces a plume of incandesant flame with a row of sharp mach diamonds, a lattice of struts defines a space of strength,etc, etc...
Aaah, yes it is a beautifull universe , and every bit we understand it better opens new beauty , every time we refine or invent a new sensor we see more of it and new beautys never before known are opened.
HOw is it forgotten that the old masters of painting had to be masters of the best chemestry of their day? That grand sculpture is possible only with good understanding of geometry and structural strength?
Whence comes this false division between the esoteric and the practical? one enables the other and the subtraction of one destroys the other.
