"recent Tesla and Uber incidents because of this attitude."
That is not what I'm talking about; that's software engineers operating in non-software fields without taking in the appropriate expertise. There's nothing special about software there, excepting perhaps that because software is everywhere our field has greater exposure to that mistake, but I've read all sorts of stories where people didn't respect the expertise of people who came before them and made grave errors as a result. That's not even limited to engineering. (In fact it's a well-known common mistake of youth across the board....)
Ironically, the automotive industry is actually the one I had in mind when I wrote that, because I live in Michigan, and personally know some automotive engineers, both on the design and testing sides. We've had several conversations over the years as to how their design processes have changed now that they can plug designs into the computers and do thing like finite element analysis in the computer before they build anything physically. In the 1980s, booking the crash chamber was really hard, because it was in constant use. Now it's easy to get into. They can't close it, because the real automotive engineers know they need the validation of reality, but they do many fewer crash tests than they used to.
Because of the introduction of more of this software into their process, they're doing a lot less of the up-front planning that you might think they are doing, which they used to do, in favor of more exploratory engineering and experimentation in the computer before making anything physical. And you can see the results in modern cars... if you know how to look, anyhow. A lot of it is invisible to the end consumer [1], and some of the engineering gains get somewhat eaten up by additional requirements for safety and such, but a modern car is not just "sorta nicer than they used to be", they are orders of magnitude more sophisticated than they were 30 or 40 years ago, and a lot of that is a direct impact of the fact that they are now able to adopt more software-engineering-like processes into some parts of their engineering. If it weren't for that power, we'd never have cost-effective cars that also meet the safety and emissions requirements.
[1]: "This car is quieter on the road because this strut is here instead of 1.5 cm closer to the front, which is why it has this weird bend in it." Not even an exaggeration. If you look around, you'll also see these weird bits of gluey stuff stuck to a piece of metal or something that doesn't seem to even be gluing something. Those are often for noise or vibration. Some of them are empirically discovered during testing, some during simulation. There's all kinds of little details like that that you don't notice if you don't know what you're looking for.