Why Engineers?

Unable to open the link, MiceElf.

www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/materials/papers/2007-10.pdf

The link has about 81 readable pages!
I dont intend to read the whole lot. Which pages are the important ones please?

There seem to be some contradictory elements to this thread - - - and why not?

I could not open the link. But a bit of lazy Saturday afternoon lateral thinking led me to wonder also - why engineers? Is there a sub-text here?

I will try again to open the link, am prepared to read 80 pages if it grabs my attention - - - otherwise, well, I'd rather have a lazy Saturday evening stretching ahead lounging on the sofa and watching Strictly Come Dancing and Edwina in the Jungle, along with

I had to accept Adobe pdf or something to be able to download it.
I will give you the link and see if it works that way.

www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/materials/papers/2007-10.pdf

I opened it OK, but didn't find it fascinating enough to read all the way through.

Perhaps someone could summarise the conclusion the paper came to, if any.

I've only skip read bits of it, but it seems they're discounting the conclusion that everyone jumps to: engineers skills are useful. Instead they're putting it down to the combination of two factors:

Firstly, the overrepresentation of engineers occurs in North Africa and the Middle East, but not in the West, so they proposing that educated engineers become frustrated and disillusioned in economies that have fewer opportunities for their skills.

Secondly, they note that engineers (in America at least) are significantly more prone to extreme right wing views.

The second point strikes me as question-begging. "Why are engineers terrorists" and "why are engineers right wing extremists" seem to be two variations of the same unanswered question, but I haven't read the paper in detail to see if the authors offer an answer.

Maybe those who go in for engineering are people who like things to be planned and joined-up, and these are the same types who become fundamentalists (in any ideology or religion) ? Maybe those who go for degrees in some other subjects are more liberal (arts faculty?) or more conventional (lawyers?) in their outlook?

It did say somewhere in the (long and full of possibly unconnected statistics) article that it was recommended that the recruits to go after most were the intelligent and highly educated and motivated ones, and those who were likely to become leaders. Are engineers more likely to become leaders? Medicine seems to contain a lot of Islamic activists too, are they more likely to be recruited?

As a lifetime engineer, I doubt that many engineers become leaders. In my experience engineers are not good at interpersonal skills, they tend to be introverted and centered on their projects. I was a senior production engineer, I much prefered working either alone or in a team, not in any lead role.

I wondered if there is a sub-text here that may be horrific to some - but any response would be welcome.

I have been led to believe, perhaps wrongly, that "engineer" in gay sub-text dialogues may refer to "queer" (i.e. gay). Can this paper be read with this in mind? If so, does this alternative reading introduce another debate?

Rubbish!

what on Earth have you been reading.

I doubt it onmyown.

If engineers are centered on projects, that would perhaps suggest an intensity, which could fit an extremist.
And I should imagine that there are certain countries where engineers are going to end up being frustrated.

This may be a difficult thread to debate, what with pompa being an engineer!

Debate away, don't worry about me, I am neither n extremist or gay. I would also say that IMO, engineers are rarely political animals.
As an engineer, what frustrated me, accountants.

An interesting answer, soontobe.

I am just trying out being devil's advocate or iconoclastic here.

I have no direct involvement in this kind of subtext or alternative dialogue, but I was (unwillingly) introduced to it in recent years, and retain an interest in its possible applications.

An interesting answer, soontobe.

I am just trying out being devil's advocate or iconoclastic here.

I have no direct involvement in this kind of subtext or alternative dialogue, but I was (unwillingly) introduced to it in recent years, and retain an interest in its possible applications.

Why would there be fewer opportunities for advancement for engineers in Muslim countries than for other professions? Why would say, lawyers or doctors, or any other profession, have more life chances?

I can't comment on Muslim countries, but in the UK most large businesses are controlled by investors and in turn accountants, profit rules.

I think this is a pertinent quote:

"engineers’ political leanings could be the result of their anti-intellectual vocational education that instead of producing a sceptical frame of mind, trains engineers to use rather than to produce knowledge.........Hayek made a strong case for the peculiarity of the engineering mentality, which in his view is the result of an education which does not train them to understand individuals and their world as the outcome of a social process in which spontaneous behaviours and interactions play a significant part. Rather, it fosters on them a script in which a strict ‘rational’ control of processes plays the key role: this would make them on the one hand less adept at dealing with the confusing causality of the social and political realms and the compromise and circumspection that these entail, and on the other hand inclined to think that societies should operate orderly akin to well-functioning machines"

This is basically the same argument that is used to explain why people with Asperger's Syndrome have a particular liking and talent for engineering, but people on the ASD spectrum have no more tendency toward crime than the general population.

It reminds me of the doctor who, when I told him I'm an engineer, also said that engineers are all neurotics who can't cope with conflicting information.

In my experience, there are a lot of non-engineers who have a misconception of what engineering is.

Interesting post, crun, thank you.

pompa DH is (well, was) an engineer and is also a natural leader and was in his career. However, he does get frustrated with people who are not interested in the physics/mechanics of how things work; I am not sure if this is typical of engineers. He is also good at DIY - perhaps that comes with a practical background.
We also have a very highly qualified female engineer in the family, but I'm not sure what her DIY skills are like!

Perhaps engineers see the world in shades of black and white, right or wrong? After all, engineering has to be precise or catastrophe could occur.

I was going to say shades of black and white and no shades of grey but I thought it would start you all off.

pompa As an engineer, what frustrated me, accountants. You sound like DH
We also have accountants in the family.
We are a mixed bunch.

"trains engineers to use rather than to produce knowledge".

I would agree with that statement, however if we consider some of our great engineers like Brunell or Watt, the novel way in which they used and combined the materials and technology of the day to produce new products and projects was truly outstanding.