"Engineering" and Religion

[idea]

Instead of science and religion, I wanted to instead talk about engineering.

First, let's see if we can come to an agreement on the difference between engineers and scientists:

Scientists - have harder times finding a job after college, and generally end up working as teachers, or in government funded institutions (national labs, etc.) - have to be supported by tax payers, because their products do not support themselves (generally). Tend to be more theoretical /philosophical / non-applied/ non-practical studies. Scientists generally spend less time in a lab, and more time in a book - Ivory tower observers and speculators.

Engineers - Easier time finding jobs, more commonly work for privately owned companies that can support themselves because they actually make something that people use and will pay $ for. Engineers work in the real world, etc. etc.

Some jokes to elaborate the differences:

"A scientist can discover a new star, but he cannot make one. He would have to ask an engineer to do that." — Gordon L. Glegg, British Engineer, 1969.

A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer go to lunch one day. On the way back, they pass an open office an observe that there is a fire starting in the corner of the room.

The mathematician looks around, observes that there is a fire extinguisher on the wall and walks on. He is satisfied that the problem has a solution.

The physicist grabs his pocket calculator, estimates the size of the room, the amount of combustible material, etc, checks the tag on the fire extinguisher to see what size fire it can handle, and after some calculation, he too walks on. He has confirmed that the problem solution is at hand.

The engineer grabs the fire extinguisher and puts out the fire while the other two are fooling around.

This is the difference between the mathematician, the physicist, and the engineer.

The engineerer has a concrete problem and seeks a suitable solution.
The scientist usually has a concrete solution and seeks a suitable problem...

Engineers ask how something works
Scientists ask why something works

In any event, I think the engineering approach to religion (ie, take an idea, apply it, then see the results), is better than the scientific approach to religion (ie, take an idea, don't actually apply it, and then argue ad-nauseam about what they refuse to apply)...

 

[Caladan]

Who are the scientists you're talking about? which filed do they practice?
Seems to me that plenty of scientists practice engineering: nanotechnology, fuel cells and biomedical engineering, to name three. Science, engineering, technology... they all go together.

 

[idea]

Who are the scientists you're talking about? which filed do they practice?
Seems to me that plenty of scientists practice engineering: nanotechnology, fuel cells and biomedical engineering, to name three.

Just general trends - random google:

average scientist salary is 75K, average engineer sal is 86K
Scientist Salary | Indeed.com

or this:
Difference Between a Scientist and Engineer, Page 3
"Scientists discover what it was, Engineers CREATE what it was not."
"Scientists get PhDs; Engineers get jobs"
etc. etc.

 

[Caladan]

Just general trends - random google:

average scientist salary is 75K, average engineer sal is 86K
Scientist Salary | Indeed.com

According to your link medical doctors also make less than engineers, ergo?

 

[idea]

According to your link medical doctors also make less than engineers, ergo?

That's surprising - non-the-less, the point is, scientists are scientists because they don't apply their supposed knowledge. (If they applied it, they would be called engineers, not scientists), hence, there are fundamental problems associated with being a scientist (namely, not applying knowledge).

 

[Quintessence]

I think that this dichotomy between scientists and engineers doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. There are a large number of scientists who operate in applied areas of their fields. The discipline I specialize in certainly isn't 'ivory tower' science - it's all about what is hands-on and practical to apply out there in the world. Scientists can be engaged in either theoretical, groundwork research or in practical research and development. It really depends on what you want to do with it, and there are plenty of options for both.

 

[Caladan]

That's surprising - non-the-less, the point is, scientists are scientists because they don't apply their supposed knowledge. (If they applied it, they would be called engineers, not scientists),

Scientists can practice engineering, and engineers can apply science. Unlike your religious beliefs, the world is not neatly divided into black and white.

 

[idea]

I think that this dichotomy between scientists and engineers doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. There are a large number of scientists who operate in applied areas of their fields. The discipline I specialize in certainly isn't 'ivory tower' science - it's all about what is hands-on and practical to apply out there in the world. Scientists can be engaged in either theoretical, groundwork research or in practical research and development. It really depends on what you want to do with it, and there are plenty of options for both.

Yes, most scientists are forced to become engineers in the end.

I just find the whole "science vs. religion" dichotomy amusing... why not "music vs. religion" or "Art vs. religion" or "accountants vs. religion" or even "engineers vs. religion", no other discipline has taken it upon themselves to wage war on the religious crowd.

the world is not neatly divided into black and white.

If there is no difference between the two, then why use different names for the two disciplines? If it was all the same, there would only be one name.

Engineers think that equations approximate the real world.
Scientists think that the real world approximates equations.
Mathematicians are unable to make the connection.

 

[Quintessence]

That's just not how I see engineers. It's not how my dictionary does either. And it's probably not how those employment surveys define it.

False dichotomies are false.

Scientist => a person of expertise in a physical or natural scientist
Engineer => a person who designs/builds/maintains machines or public works (most engineers are also scientists in their field; engineers are basically a very niche-specific type of applied science)

 

[Caladan]

If there is no difference between the two, then why use different names for the two disciplines? If it was all the same, there would only be one name.

I don't know, why are there different labels for the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit if God is One?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Interestingly My middle brother took a BA in Engineering at Cambridge. (They do not do BSc degrees.)
He took his PhD in Psychology ( visual perception) For a time working on the American space programme.
He was a research scientist all his life.
My Eldest brother went to Faraday house, and studied Electrical engineering and also worked as a scientist with Rolls Roys working on advanced ceramic materials, And later at BICC working mainly on fibre cables. Recording a number of patents.

My grandfather also studied at Faraday house , graduating in 1903. In a long career he invented numerous electrical transmission devices including the anti magnetic mine buoyant cable. and worked for the admiralty on the invention of ASDIC and other secret projects in both world wars. He ended his life as Deputy chairman of BICC and as its research director. he was a fellow of both the English and American Institutes of electrical engineering. He was president of the British ice hockey association , from before we won the world ice hockey cup, until his death in 1956

All of the above were scientists and engineers.

 

[Sculelos]

To me Science is the study of engineering. If it doesn't work in some sort of way what is the point? If you can't learn anything from what you are studying then their is no point to study what you are looking at.

Lot's of people call scientist quacks but due to extensive knowledge many scientist can and do easily become engineers when it becomes important for them to do so.

Science is observation. Engineering is applying science to make something specific.

Science vs Religion is comparing apples to apples. Both Science and Religion are the study of observations and both should be grounded in logical thought and observation. Now many people don't believe in what actually exist if it's hard to explain but they would rather believe in things that are not real. I see this all the time when certain things are plainly proven yet people will still refuse to believe plain evidence and instead believe their own jacked up stuff.

 

[idea]

Scientist => a person of expertise in a physical or natural scientist
Engineer => a person who designs/builds/maintains machines or public works (most engineers are also scientists in their field; engineers are basically a very niche-specific type of applied science)

That's funny, as I would define an "expert" as someone who has real-world "experience".

I like this definition better: scientist - definition of scientist by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
sci·en·tist (s

n-t

st)n. A person having expert knowledge of one or more sciences, especially a natural or physical science.

that they have knowledge - not wisdom, not expertise, just knowledge...

 

[idea]

I don't know, why are there different labels for the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit if God is One?

I don't believe in the trinity , so I guess you'd have to ask someone who does.

 

[idea]

Science vs Religion is comparing apples to apples. Both Science and Religion are the study of observations and both should be grounded in logical thought and observation. Now many people don't believe in what actually exist if it's hard to explain but they would rather believe in things that are not real. I see this all the time when certain things are plainly proven yet people will still refuse to believe plain evidence and instead believe their own jacked up stuff.

I believe religion is hard to explain (why people get advanced degrees in it, discuss it at length, etc.), that it has to be experienced (not taught) to be understood, and that the experience comes through application, and that you have to have faith, before you are willing to go through the complicated hard process of applying it.

Example: Like someone trying to explain to an alien what salt tastes like - you can describe the chemical formula, look at it through a microscope, measure it's weight, test how strong it is, all the material properties - but you will never know what it tastes like unless you actually put it in your own mouth, and without using it in food and eating it, you would be missing the whole point of what salt is. I see scientists as those who don't put the salt in their mouth.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some observations from a recovering engineer:
- Scientists are often engineers who took a different path leading to the same destination.
- An engineer is someone who can do with $1 what would take another person $5 to do. The meaning behind this might not be obvious to those who aren't design engineers. Inventors & tinkerers can often do anything an engineer can do, given enuf time & resources. But the engineer has intellectual tools & training to do it more efficiently (avoiding more of the trial & error stuff).
- An engineer will often improve something until it no longer works. (I've seen it happen.)
- A design engineer who is really good won't know what all of his goals at the start of a project. Often, you don't know where you're going til you get there, since you can't see all the possibilities & problems ahead of time. One must be flexible & aware of larger issues at all times. This perspective served me & my clients well.
- Never put a marketing department near the engineering department. All our talk of problems will scare normal folk. (I saw this happen.)
- The engineer has the easiest job in the world, next to a groundskeeper. Sure, sure, the technical problems can be difficult, but one may focus on narrow issues. This is easier than running a business, where one must wear many different hats....a vexing & nerve wracking thingie.
- An engineer is never done. All designs are inadequate, & waiting to be replaced by something better....or better yet, eliminated altogether.
- I've never seen religion help an engineer in his/her work.
- Women are less likely to become engineers. They tend to be more normal & well adjusted.
- You can tell if an engineer is an extrovert. He looks at your shoes instead of his own when he talks to you.

 

[idea]

Some observations from a recovering engineer:

Frubals! Spoken like a true engineer. (Although I happen to be a female engineer, exception to the norm though... there were few female engineers at my school, we used to say it was the school where "the odds are good, but the goods are odd"... there was another saying, our school was a place "where the men are men, and so are the women."

 

[Revoltingest]

Frubals! Spoken like a true engineer. (Although I happen to be a female engineer, exception to the norm though... there were few female engineers at my school, we used to say it was the school where "the odds are good, but the goods are odd"... there was another saying, our school was a place "where the men are men, and so are the women."

Hah! Brilliant!

 

[Sunstone]

At one point in my university career, I lived on a dorm floor of 83 men, about 75 of whom were studying engineering. I learned many fascinating things about engineers, including that they were usually lousy at getting dates for themselves, that they tended to have little or no curiosity about subjects outside of their major, and that they were nevertheless most often pretty decent people.

I eventually concluded that, if the world were comprised solely of engineers, (1) the trains would be super-fast and run on time, but (2) scientific progress would come almost to a halt because no one would be asking the big questions that so often lead to fundamental scientific research, (3) and the human race would go extinct because people would not know how to ask for a date. But (4) we'd be pretty decent people right up to the end.

 

[Sunstone]

More seriously, the varying ways scientists and engineers most typically approach problems seem to be rather complementary to me, rather than at odds with each other. The two groups in many cases fuel each other.