Did you just pick a formal logic debate with a philosopher? I disagree with your interpretation of the language used. The comment was authoritative in tone generally, and this line said (in my estimation) that the argument was "if someone is an engineer, they are not a philosopher". Even worse, there's a suggestion that this philosophical work shouldn't burden those "least qualified to perform it". Leaving the philosophy to "better men" is how we justify evils committed by underlings and evokes thoughts of the Nuremberg trials. Every person should come to terms with the moral implications of their actions.

In any case, one doesn't need a philosophy degree to do philosophy, and many of the great engineers and scientists of history had a great deal to say with regard to the moral implications of their work.

Even today, engineers at many of the big tech companies are objecting to some work their companies are doing. Many others choose not to work for companies whose mission they disagree with.

No formal logic debate here; I was explaining colloquial use.