Physis,
Ah, now I'm beginning to understand your point of view. You appear to be concerned about a person coming into direct contact with an ungrounded conductor.
You're absolutely right, an equipment grounding system won't do any good there, because there isn't any equipment in the picture. A GFCI will reduce the chance of shock or electrocution in your scenario--contact with a hot wire.
But I'm talking about a situation involving a piece of utilization equipment, specifically a cooktop.
I'm talking about the normal use of the cooktop, where due to the appliance design, there is virtually no chance of a person coming into direct contact with an ungrounded conductor.
What the equipment grounding system is designed to do is keep the case, frame, or other normally non-current carrying metallic parts of the tool or appliance (or whatever) at ground potential.
Unless you're working on the wiring, or there's serious damage to the appliance, you aren't going to come into contact with an ungrounded condictor. You are however, very likely going to come into contact with the metal case of a drill, or the frame or case of a washing machine, or the like. That's why those things are grounded--that is, connected to the EGC.
If your objective is to reduce the chance of injury from contacting an ungrounded conductor, then GFCI-protection is the way to go. I'm not arguing against GFCI protection of receptacle outlets as required by the Code.
I just think the chances of the homeowner or appliance user contacting an ungrounded conductor on a hard-wired appliance circuit are essentially nil, and therefore (IF the cooktop were being used as listed) there'd be no benefit to using a GFCI.
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this. I do appreciate your perspective, and have learned from it.
Cheers,
Cliff
