Do technical degrees limit you?

Student Lounge College Life
141

<p>I hope the members of this board see what level of people we are dealing with.</p>

<p>Monkeyking just made this statement:</p>

<p>“Scientists/mathematicians/Engineers without a foundation in liberal arts makes them just tools - they lose what makes them human, and are just plugged into a machine that makes them go till one day they age and drop dead, having lived a life in the dark - namely a true limitation and waste of human life and potential.”</p>

<p>So now Engineers, doctors, and scientists are a waste of human life?</p>

<p>My dad is an engineer that just designed a water treatment facility, I guess he’s a waste of human life? My wife is a nurse, who works in Labor and Delivery, she helps to safely bring in human life everyday, I guess she is a waste of life too?</p>

142

<p>And technical majors are? the majority don’t go on to be scientists or researchers. ` Schaden</p>

<p>As a discipline, yes. Science and technological advancement is what helps solve world problems and help move society forward.</p>

143

<p>

</p>

<p>I fail to see a logical argument there. You sound more like a rhetorician, not an engineer who should supposedly be guided by the laws of logic and reason.</p>

<p>Science/engineering/math have the possibility to solve ‘some’ world problems. But sorry, no problem can be solved by science/engineering/math unless the liberal arts and social sciences are applied. Because all the problems are social and based out of the social sciences and humanities, not based out of the sciences.</p>

<p>Our modern world is already extremely technological advanced. We have the possibility to do whatever we want to, with only a few fanciful limitations still in place that don’t affect us too much right now [but that I personally very very much hope become a reality one day - space colonization/transportation, terraforming, etc]. </p>

<p>

These technological advancements have not solved problems because a tool’s, which all creations of engineers, mathematicians, and scientists are, positive or negative affect is in the hands of the user. A knife can be used as a valuable tool for cutting food, etc or could be used as a anti-social weapon, depending on user. A car can be used to make regular social transportation easier, or could be used to make escape from crimes one committed, to kidnap, to hurt people, etc. A computer can be used to rapidly speed up society’s activities and connection, or be used to cause social havoc.</p>

<p>The study of the social sciences and humanities are to ensure that the intentions of the user are most in tune with social-benefit. The engineers/mathematicians/scientists provide the tools, but remember we are the human race and we are the ones who choose what to do with them.</p>

<p>I remember now a quote from Carl Sagan, the great scientist, in a broadcast after the Cold War shortly before his death: “Will we use these tools to destroy ourselves…or carry us to the stars? It’s up to us.” Carl Sagan’s quote sums up my thoughts perfectly.</p>

144

<p>

</p>

<p>I really doubt your an engineer, because you have absolutely no logical or reasonable arguments and no ability to accept truth. You are an illustration of what I’m talking about - a tool who in the end will just put out your technical contribution (and likely not contribute anything really of note in the form of a new invention or such) without respect or care for humanity or any real intellectual development. I feel really sorry for you.</p>

<p>And note that I never said how common these type of ‘negative’ engineers are. I have lots of engineers as friends and many of them are great people who are well-grounded in the liberal arts and will make great and wise contributions to society where they can. I’m saying that we should avoid the type of engineer who knows nothing about humanity and doesn’t care about humanity.</p>

145

<p>I really doubt your an engineer, because you have absolutely no logical or reasonable arguments and no ability to accept truth. You are an illustration of what I’m talking about - a tool who in the end will just put out your technical contribution (and likely not contribute anything really of note in the form of a new invention or such) without respect or care for humanity or any real intellectual development. I feel really sorry for you. ~ Monkeyking</p>

<hr>

<p>And I really doubt you know how to read.</p>

<p>Because if you did, you will see that I never said I was an engineer. I said my father was. Perhaps your Liberal Arts major isn’t preparing you to read the details as well as you thought.</p>

<p>P.S. I said it a dozen times, I was a Poli Sci major. I now do criminal/homeland security analysis.</p>

146

<p>

</p>

<p>Ah that explains the prevalence of personal attacks and rhetoric rather than logical argument. You assume I’m going to waste my precious time reading all of the 150+ posts in this thread rather than just those in the beginning and immediate vicinity of where I’m posting? </p>

<p>How about you actually respond to my arguments instead of constant personal attacks? Clearly you are not interested in finding what is right, but rather in just either ■■■■■■■■, boosting your self-esteem, or some other absurd reason. Or perhaps you are just afraid because you know I’m correct.</p>

<p>I have great respect for the sciences and believe we need to devote much more effort, especially at the secondary level, to such. However I believe if we sacrifice the liberal arts and humanities, whatever progress is made will be diluted.</p>

147

<p>

</p>

<p>See, and aren’t you fulfilling a valuable function there? Would a only-educated-in-engineering engineer with no knowledge of the training in your work be able to do the same [without getting a good amount of training first]? Aren’t you working to solve social problems that aren’t solvable through simply equations and scientific advancement?</p>

148

<p>How about you actually respond to my arguments instead of constant personal attacks? Clearly you are not interested in finding what is right, but rather in just either ■■■■■■■■, boosting your self-esteem, or some other absurd reason. Or perhaps you are just afraid because you know I’m correct. ~ Monkeyking</p>

<p>I’m not going to be polite with someone who makes such rude and absurd comments like “engineers are a waste of life”, a profession that my father has performed for decades or insults other scientific minds who possess a skill (like my wife, nursing).</p>

<p>So basically, you can shove it. Because this post showed your colors.</p>

<hr>

<p>“Scientists/mathematicians/Engineers without a foundation in liberal arts makes them just tools - they lose what makes them human, and are just plugged into a machine that makes them go till one day they age and drop dead, having lived a life in the dark - namely a true limitation and waste of human life and potential.”</p>

149

<p>See, and aren’t you fulfilling a valuable function there? Would a only-educated-in-engineering engineer with no knowledge of the training in your work be able to do the same [without getting a good amount of training first]? Aren’t you working to solve social problems that aren’t solvable through simply equations and scientific advancement? ~ Monkeyking</p>

<hr>

<p>An engineer could easily do my job. However, not true in reverse.</p>

<p>Most of my job is statistical analysis/applied statistic. Investigative/Security/Crime analyst don’t just sit in a room together and try and figure out how to solve world problems. We take data, formulate it and process it into a succinct form that can be used to apply solutions.</p>

<p>Realistically, anyone who is a decent writer or can do statistics could do my job. It’s mostly statistics, computer skills and writing.</p>

150

<p>

</p>

<p>True colors? That I’m reasonable and not an equation-worshiping person like you? </p>

<p>And I never said engineers and those in the sciences are a waste of life. I said those without cultivation or anything that makes them more human and in touch with humanity than just a moving tool have wasted their potential as a human. </p>

<p>In my opinion, the ideal person ought to be educated in both a general foundation of many fields, and then along with a ‘focus’ field that gives them their grounding and future path in society. However many such ‘distribution requirements’ today at universities are seen by people as wastes of time and usually aren’t very good in stimulating interest either, though some schools with core currics. do it well [Columbia, Chicago, etc].</p>

151

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ll concede my point to you there. Many jobs that liberal arts majors can do are jobs engineers can do as well, but not vice versa. However, the role people like you fill is just as vital for inter-human relations as say a beginning engineer - each field has its part to play.</p>

152

<p>BigeastBeast–“A technical degree such as engineering can get you ANY job a liberal arts degree can.”</p>

<p>Pretty sweeping generalization there…</p>

<p>Ever ask a chemical/civil/mechanical/CS engineer to edit a publication or write a press release? In English? Or research and write up some local history? Again, in English. Not to mention jobs that require knowledge of foreign languages. No math/science required, sorry.</p>

<p>I can think of LOTS of jobs that can’t be done by your average technical major. Not to say that some people don’t have both types of skills.</p>

153

<p>Look at the employment and average salary of the technical degrees versus liberal arts. Intuition would indicate that the technical degrees are going to perform more favorably.</p>

<p>As one who has a technical degree, I certainly understand those that make the point that some of these technically educated folks cannot write or prepare a presentation, etc. But, we have also observed people with liberal arts degrees who lack in comparable areas. This is really about the individual and their ability to be generally educated and also specialize in some area that improves potential employability. </p>

<p>Also, my son is 3rd year engineering major and has very strong opinions about non- technical majors. However, some of the attitude could be engineer camaraderie but they snicker at other majors in particular the business majors. He noted that the engineering majors regularly out perform other majors. </p>

<p>In an ivory tower sense the LA degree is fine, but when you have to go out in the real world and earn a living, the technically educated person appears to outperform the non-technical person. JMHO.</p>

154

<br>

<br>

<p>Yes. I’ve written books, press releases, customer communications, etc. But I picked up my first engineering job with a BA and went for my MS later on.</p>

<p>My brother-in-law is a pretty smart guy. BS from MIT and MS from Stanford. He also knows more about classical literature, music (father played in the Boston Symphony Orchestra), the arts and science subjects better than anyone else that I personally know. He can talk to all kinds of people switching the level of his conversation to match that of the person that he’s talking to. He reminds me of the polymath types from the 1700s to the mid-1900s. Engineers can learn how to write.</p>

<p>I think that it would be easier for an engineer to get an MA than an LA major to get
an MS in an engineering discipline. Though I did do the latter but I took a non-traditional route.</p>

155

<p>From the “technical degree holder who can quote Proust” anecdotes trending here, I’m reading this:</p>

<p>Technical degree holders can read up and educate themselves about lib artsy stuff during their free time, should that be their interest. (eg: history, philosophy, art critique)</p>

<p>A lib arts degree holder could read about engineering circuits if they are interested too, but understanding it will be so much harder because they lack the LAB experience to do learn circuits hands-on.</p>

<p>I’m not going into technical degrees being ‘just plain harder’ and whatnot to learn, that is subjective I guess.</p>

156

<p>I use to work for an energy company.</p>

<p>I was one of the few people in the whole office who wasn’t some sort of engineer or scientist. Let me tell you, those engineers and scientists communicated just fine. In fact, I found them to be some of the most articulate and well-versed people I have ever worked with. More so than my current co-workers, that are mainly drawn from various Liberal Arts disciplines.</p>

<p>Furthermore, the writing they put forward was impressive. Albeit not narrative, but very very technical.</p>

<p>As far “editing or writing press releases”, that isn’t really a big deal. Lots of that stuff just gets dictated through admin staff after the bullet points are settled upon.</p>

<p>I’m not buying the argument that technical majors can’t write or communicate. Do english majors probably have the STRONGEST writing skills? Sure, probably. But when it comes to basic office administration functions that people deal with everyday, their skills seem to be more than acceptable. Let’s also not forget that most schools requiring some sort of writing courses embedded into their curriculum and you can pick up writing skills through any elective courses or picking up a minor that beefs-up that skills. </p>

<p>Let’s also not forget that if a technical major is lacking in a certain area such as writing, those skills can always be acquired easily. Every community college offers writing courses, business writing, ect. It’s not really a hard skill to pick up. Not if you just want to get yourself up to appropriate business expectations.</p>

<p>As far as communication skills, those are really individual and not something you pick up in school. Lots of my co-workers are LA majors, and I consider them socially ■■■■■■■■. I mean, how often does art history, philosophy or psychology come up in a work place? Everyday communication is just about interpersonal skills, that most people acquire growing up and through social environments.</p>

<p>Another thing I don’t understand is why people keep saying LA majors of “problem solving skills” and technical majors don’t. If you take engineering as an example, the entire field is based on just that - solving problems. It takes much more aptitude to solve an environmental problem when drilling a natural gas well than it does making a schedule or shifting staff (a common business problem).</p>

<p>It seems like people are under the impression that LA majors get hired to solve serious issues, hunger, war, ect. No, they don’t. There might be a handful of think tanks out there that do that sort of work, but that’s the extreme exception, not the rule. Plus those “think tankers” all mostly have PHD’s and years of expertise in a given subject.</p>

157

<p>I think it’s a lot easier to be an engineer and a fine writer than an excellent writer and a decent engineer.</p>

158

<p>This is turning into a rehash of an old argument that won’t get settled anytime soon, esp. as there are quite good anecdotal exceptions on both sides. And those are the easiest to find employment–the ones who have good skills in both areas and can do anything!</p>

<p>I will echo the above poster and say I think it’s easier to pick up liberal arts through reading than to “pick up” math or engineering skills.</p>

159

<p>To give you an idea of how skills can be acquired, here is my situation.</p>

<p>Coming out of college, my only real “hard skill” was research - which is great, but it doesn’t blow people out of their seats either. I was lucky and landed my first job rather quickly, mainly due to a relative that had a hook-up.</p>

<p>Then, when I started looking for my next career I noticed that many job posting wanted analysts with GIS (Geographic Information Systems) experience, which I had none. However, I found a school online that offered GIS courses that included a minor certificate program. So I went and did it, and it helped me out tremendously during job interviews and really rounded my resume out.</p>

<p>A engineer or IT professional could easily do the same thing with writing. It’s not that difficult to build certain skills, as long as they aren’t a real expertise. Meaning, an English major working as a paralegal isn’t going to take some engineering courses and become an engineer, it just doesn’t work like that.</p>

160

<p>Out of curiosity, are we including math and the hard sciences–i.e. neurobiology, physics, astronomy etc.–along with ‘liberal arts’ in our discussion here? It would REALLY, REALLY help if we can clarify our terms. I get the hunch that most people mean ‘humanities and social sciences’ when the throw out the term LA, when in fact, that’s not the best technical def of liberal arts. We should be more precise. </p>

<p>While the quant-arts/humanities divide certain overlaps with the abstract/vocational divide, it is by no means a 1-to-1 mapping.</p>