Why Engineers?

"It is also the way I tackle most of lifes problems."

Here's an example: A few years ago I noticed a Xanthelasma in the mirror when I was shaving, so I thought it wold be a good idea to cut the amount of fat in my diet. At this point most people would immediately pounce on the usual suspects: junk food etc. and cut down on those, but to me that's irrational, and an example of what I meant by fixing the problem before you know what it is.

What I did was sit down with a wad of till receipts, and tot up what I was eating, and how much fat it contained. That was interesting, the biggest sources of fat turned out to be milk, marge, and cheese. I found that by switching to skimmed milk, low fat marge, and cutting out cheese I could get twice the reduction in fat that I would have achieved if I had gone through removing all the "junk" foodstuffs. Not only that, but it was more convenient because it didn't involve any great upheaval in my eating habits.

Within a year the Xanthelasma had gone.

Crun, very well put.

" they analyse a problem, form a hypothesis, devise a means of testing the hypothesis, and then devise a solution and test that. Then if the solution doesn't work, the process repeats. They also have to innovate and be creative, finding new solutions to problems"

That is exactly how I see an engineer's role. It is also the way I tackle most of lifes problems.

Later in my career I moved into IT, designing manufacturing software systems, whilst I no longer got my hands dirty, this was as much engineering as I had ever done.

!

You're obviously very good at it then, soontobe!

I have had a think. Still dont think that I do.

Oh we do, we do lie to ourselves. The problem is to recognise it and deal with it. Nothing is more difficult than being honest about oneself to oneself.

They don't know they are lying to themselves. If they did they would know they were doing it, and then it would be impossible to believe it. Usually it is because they don't want to accept the truth, so they can't see it. There are none so blind as those who won't see.

You may think you never lie to yourself, but you probably do, or have done at some point. Not a big lie, perhaps.

Unless you are a product of a virtual reality application, and don't have imagination built in to lie with. (Or Mr Spock in Star Trek?)

DH works/worked in the offshore energy industry. I would point out, that in the days of job adverts appearing in newspapers the DT was the main publication of choice for companies advertising for engineers. DH always bought it when he was wanting to move on.

Up until a few years ago, I had no idea that people lie to themselves.

I cant see the point of that.

For anyone who isn't familiar with what an engineer does, there are some similarities with a doctor: they analyse a problem, form a hypothesis, devise a means of testing the hypothesis, and then devise a solution and test that. Then if the solution doesn't work, the process repeats. They also have to innovate and be creative, finding new solutions to problems. The conspicuous differences are that doctors don't have to design a human in the first place, the design of humans never changes, and engineers can't get away with blaming the patient.

I think this last point is significant, engineers are less prone to denial because they know that they can't get away with it. To quote Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman at the shuttle enquiry:

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."

So many of the population are given to what's-bad-is-false arguments from consequence: the seals must be OK, because cancelling the launch is politically embarrassing.

Engineers are realistic not idealistic, I know that if the radios I design don't work when they start rolling off the production line there's very limited scope for denial, this contrasts with the non "black and white" nature of the issues in many other walks of life. Simple issues can sometimes be made complicated than they are by denial (politician's insistence that economic growth is sustainable, for example).

I think this is at the root of much of what makes people so ambivalent toward science, it has a nasty habit of disproving peoples pet prejudices, but science is about accepting the evidence irrespective of whether it suits (and about changing your mind when the evidence warrants it).

The evolution of denial is quite interesting.

I don't know where flicketyb's husband works, but my experience of the other engineers in our lab was much more like pompa's.

It's interesting to note that Gambetta's paper doesn't appear to have been peer reviewed or accepted for publication, nor does it appear on his list of publications on his web page.

I'm not sure but wasn't it the other way round soontobe?

I often think that the troubles in Ireland became a lot less, in the years when their economy became a lot better.

"As I said economic growth and an open and stable political system in these countries is the best defence against terrorism."

So right, Flickety!

There were several countries, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and yes,*Eloethan*, I think you are right, Iran. In these countries the technically qualified generally are in employment so less likely to become jihadist.

The report did also make the point that in the USA, although the majority of followers of extreme right wing libertarian millenarian groups tended to be the poor and dispossessed, there had been examples where the begetter and leader of these groups was an engineer, but it seemed to be talking only of one or two individual in a few groups, which shows the tendency for some engineers to look for simple answers to difficult problems in all cultures It is only in Islamic cultures does this reach a level where engineers as a whole are over represented in what are terrorist groups with a large number of adherents and followers.

Disadvantaged youth has always been attracted to violent and society challenging movements, whether it is fascism or terrorism. The gang culture among young men of Afro-Caribbean origin is a response to a poor education system and racism that makes it more difficult for them than their contemporaries to get work. In a wider context anti-immigration movements are motivated about fears of economic destabilisation driving wages down and unemployment up.

As I said economic growth and an open and stable political system in these countries is the best defence against terrorism.

FlicketyB Alpha+ for that. As the OP I unrealistically thought that interested forum members would read the entire paper. Doh. So thank you for that brilliant abstract.

Also, thinking about it, didn't the findings suggest that engineers in other more affluent countries with, presumably, more opportunities for employment, were also found to be more likely to belong to extreme right wing groups? So I'm not sure if the frustration arising from the lack of good jobs in less wealthy countries is the entire reason for extremism.

I do agree though that the opportunities arising from inward investment are likely to help in deterring extremism.

That's a jolly good analysis FlicketyB - thank you.

Weren't there two countries - Iran and somewhere else - where the findings were different?

This post is a long summary of a very interesting paper.

The reports findings can be summarised essentially as saying.

1) It has been shown that, world wide engineers tend to be more politically the the right than the majority of all graduates. Anecdotal evidence from DH, who is an engineer and who veers towards the political centre left, is that, generally, engineers are politically 'to the right of Genghis Khan' and only ever read the Daily Telegraph.

2) In the Middle East, engineering: together with medicine and natural sciences are seen as prestigious subjects and have high entry requirements. Enrolling for an engineering degree is a strong sign of above-average talent and ambition and unlike most other selection processes in the region, university admission to demanding subjects seems to be based on merit.

3) However, there are very high levels of unemployment in the Middle Eastern countries that provide these technically educated engineers. So, many engineers having worked and studied hard for their degrees find themselves going back home with the prestige of their degree but still unemployed and financially dependent on their families.

The exceptions to this broad generalisation are Saudi Arabia and Singapore. It can be suggested that, in Saudi, engineers in a country where many workers are immigrants and barred from professional employment are generally in well paid jobs. In Singapore, a highly advanced country with much demand for well educated workers, most graduates get jobs without difficulty.

Put this together with the information that most jihadists from western countries are those who for one reason or another have struggled to make their way in western society and are more likely to be drifters, converts to Islam (often while in prison) or with an addiction background. Once again, probably because job opportunities for graduate engineers mean that few are unemployed.

4) Many right wing extremist groups and fascists attract engineers. Both Mussolini and Hitler, initially, had strong support from technical and heavy industry and its professionals because they made things run well and efficiently. It was also noted that while the majority of Americans attracted to extreme right-wing, apocalyptic groups are mainly the poorly educated and dispossessed, a significant number of group leaders are engineers.

5) Islam itself shares a number of features found in all extreme right. These include a corporatist and mechanistic view of the ideal society. Modern Islamism sees itself as preserving the integrity of the existing social order.

Extremist Islamist propaganda rejects Western pluralism and argues for a unified, ordered society ruled by a strong Islamic leader, in which an authoritative division of labour is created between men and women, Muslims and non-Muslims, political leaders and their flock. The fear of social chaos is a feature of Islamist thought.

Furthermore, Islamic extremism shares many characteristics of right-wing extremism. One, which they call “monism”, is the tendency to see everything in black and white terms so that they repress all difference and dissent and ban the expression of opposing views

A second feature, “simplism”, the tendency to see simple single remedies for multi-factored activities and problems, which in turn is closely related to seeing history as shaped by the clash between good and evil, and conspiratorially ascribing the forces of evil to one identifiable foe.

The third feature, call “preservatism”, is typical only of the right. Unlike left-wing extremism which aims at broadening the lines of power and privilege, "preservatism" aims to restore a lost, often mythical order of privileges and authority, and emerges as a backlash against displacement or status deprivation in a period of sharp social change. It is an underlying craving for a lost order, its match with the radical Islamic ideology is undeniable: the theme of returning to the order of the prophet’s early community is omnipresent in most salafist and jihadist ideology.

Research is also quoted that shows that Engineers are four times more religious and conservative than social scientists and three times more so than people in the arts and humanities. The subjects at the top of the religious-conservative scale are, once again, exactly the same as we have in our jihadist sample.

CONCLUSIONS
So we have a group of highly able, highly educated socially and financially aspirant men who having, academically, hit the peaks, then find themselves condemned to unemployment and loss of status.

Coming from a conservatively religious society, and, possibly, with a mind set that looks for simple (mechanical?) answers to life's problems, extremist Islamic ideology provides an answer to their economic and personal problems.

Research shows that in societies where men like this can find economic success they are not attracted to jihadism. In these societies it is the poor, uneducated and dispossessed that look to jihadism for an nswer to life's problems

IF YOU HAVE GOT THIS FAR
The answer to jihadism, is not repression and increased security, it is economic growth to provide work and status for those who will otherwise turn to jihadism. This develops best in countries that are also politically liberal, democratic and open

In other words it is foreign aid and foreign investment used to encourage political freedom and economic growth that is the answer to jihadism.

But if engineers were not open to new or challenging ideas we would not have had the Bristol suspension bridge, the Channel tunnel, all the wonderful innovative bridges, buildings, tunnels around the world.

This research must have taken absolutely ages to do, not least analysing the material in order to prepare the report.

I'm not all together sure what an engineer does but I guess it is more about implementing what they know rather than analysing or questioning current knowledge. Presumably the suggestion is that this tendency makes them less open to new or challenging ideas and more likely to accept current beliefs and practices.

I haven't read it in enough detail to say I understand exactly what possible conclusions can be drawn from it, but even if it were to show a significant correlation between engineers and extremism, how can the findings be acted upon? Perhaps an education system which did not see the "Arts" and the "Sciences" as mutually exclusive would enable the more balanced development of different areas of the brain and less rigid, more creative thought processes.

I can't say that I had noticed the prevalence until I saw this thread. However, I had noticed quite a high number of doctors, medical students and would-be medical students who have been mentioned in the press. So highly intelligent people who, I would have thought, would not see everything in shades of black or white.
Puzzling.

It looks an interesting paper, quite a hefty read though. I'm surprised that they didn't look at the psychological angle, they are of course sociologists!

I'm with Crun and Rosequartz, I'd noticed the prevalence of engineers amongst extremists and had pondered that perhaps they understood things and systems rather than people and also that this meant they liked things to be right or wrong with no shades of grey.

Could the reason be simply that cultural forces among Middle Eastern communities mean that young men are more likely to study engineering or medicine (quite a few doctors and medical students are present among jihadis) than in other comparative communities.

So, while we may think there are a disproportionate number of engineers among the terrorists, because a smaller proportion of students in this country and other western countries study engineering, for Middle Eastern students this is proportionate because a bigger proportion of them study engineering anyway.

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

I would agree with that statement

Only up to a point, a necessary prerequisite for fixing a problem is the ability to analyse and correctly identify it.

Janeainsworth: "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.."

I think many engineers would have the same view of sociologists from the University of Oxford, as these exalted beings appear to have of the humble, easily indoctrinated engineer.

This is what I was driving at when I said “there are a lot of non-engineers who have a misconception of what engineering is.” There seem to be sociologists with an inability to tell the difference between what’s true and what they’d like to be true.

Inetellectual Impostures by Sokal and Bricmont is very funny, a good read if you have time. It all started after Sokal wrote a gibberish paper in sociologists lingo, and managed to get the hoax published in a peer reviewed academic journal.

rosequartz
"But who works it out in the first place? Surely it must be engineers?"

Most so called inventions are not eureka moments, rather they are the clever utilisation of existing concepts and materials in a way that had not been thought of before. Like evolution, ideas are constantly developed and improved (or sometimes not) over time. The wheel > F! car is an example of progressive development over time.