Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Engineering degrees are > *. There are only two PROFESSIONAL undergraduate programs -- Engineering and Nursing. Engineering graduates are qualified to do anything any other major is qualified to do, AND their own profession. Business, law, medicine, communications, marketing, engineering ...
So yes, Engineering > ALL.
Engineering grads are glorified mechanics. Highly intelligent in a technical field, but often they'll be dumb as shit in anything outside their field.
not universal, of course.
Originally posted by: eLiu
That said, with a degree in math & aerospace engineering, I confidently feel like I could handle any of the following: physics, applied math, aero, civil, mechanical, nuclear, compsci, EE, and economics. Surely not as well as someone who spent 4+ yrs studying that stuff, but i think math/engy gave me a strong enough background/foundation to adapt to many other fields. But like biology/chem, any humanities, business, psych, theoretical math... fuck no.
Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Engineering degrees are > *. There are only two PROFESSIONAL undergraduate programs -- Engineering and Nursing. Engineering graduates are qualified to do anything any other major is qualified to do, AND their own profession. Business, law, medicine, communications, marketing, engineering ...
So yes, Engineering > ALL.
Engineering grads are glorified mechanics. Highly intelligent in a technical field, but often they'll be dumb as shit in anything outside their field.
not universal, of course.
I would tend to disagree, but whatever.
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
Originally posted by: Special K
I'm not sure what to say here, except that there are probably people in EE who enjoy their job, just as there are probably people in finance who hate it. It's a big world out there, and EE and finance are broad enough that I doubt everyone has the same experience.
Originally posted by: Farang
I'll be the first to admit liberal arts is easier, but that does not mean you don't learn anything
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Engineering degrees are > *. There are only two PROFESSIONAL undergraduate programs -- Engineering and Nursing. Engineering graduates are qualified to do anything any other major is qualified to do, AND their own profession. Business, law, medicine, communications, marketing, engineering ...
So yes, Engineering > ALL.
Engineering grads are glorified mechanics. Highly intelligent in a technical field, but often they'll be dumb as shit in anything outside their field.
not universal, of course.
If I had to choose which part of your post was more truthful, it'd be the bold section.
Highly intelligent people cannot be dumb as shit in outside fields. Engineers are good in law, finance, business, and fuck, even liberal arts and true arts. At least, the engineers I socialized with.
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: Farang
I'll be the first to admit liberal arts is easier, but that does not mean you don't learn anything
I do not subscribe to the ATOT mindset on engineering, that is, that every single human should be an engineer. It isn't practical in the least.
We need sorority girls to study French in college so they can be the hot French teacher in middle schools and high schools. We need uninformed high school seniors to majors such as biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, language studies, U.S. history, European history, and psychology. We need them to discontinue their educational career without pursuing graduate studies.
Why? Because we need educated teachers. We need an educated work-force. So many history majors end up sitting in a cubicle all day, doing work that they never intended to do, and we need those people doing that work.
The elitist cycling attorney from Texas.
Originally posted by: Babbles
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Engineering degrees are > *. There are only two PROFESSIONAL undergraduate programs -- Engineering and Nursing. Engineering graduates are qualified to do anything any other major is qualified to do, AND their own profession. Business, law, medicine, communications, marketing, engineering ...
So yes, Engineering > ALL.
Engineering grads are glorified mechanics. Highly intelligent in a technical field, but often they'll be dumb as shit in anything outside their field.
not universal, of course.
If I had to choose which part of your post was more truthful, it'd be the bold section.
Highly intelligent people cannot be dumb as shit in outside fields. Engineers are good in law, finance, business, and fuck, even liberal arts and true arts. At least, the engineers I socialized with.
I think you may have contradicted yourself. Your answer in a previous question was essentially that it genuinely depends on the person, not the degree. However you are now saying that it engineering is superior. So in your opinion it is the degree and not the person? Or the other way around? Which is it?
Anyhow, I think you may be wrong about people being dumb as shit in other fields. I wouldn't use those words, but after working ten years as a professional scientist I have seen crazy smart people turn somewhat stupid when they stepped outside their realm of expertise. Then again I have seen a few handful of people who were crazy good at everything they did. It is the person, not the degree.
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
Originally posted by: beer
I work at a tech company in silicon valley that makes certain categories of peripherals that are in pretty much every laptop of every person reading this, making, no matter what you compare it to, significantly more than the average EE doing significantly more interesting work. In other words, by how AT defines success, I've done fairly well, which is why I think my opinion that the "EE is god" opinion is a big pile of steaming horse-shit should carry at least some weight.
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
What an ignorant thing to say. It's entrepreneurs and financiers that allow ideas to go from paper/concept to shelf. They are the true talent and are very rare. You engineers are a dime a dozen.
Originally posted by: zerocool84
I'll be first to say it:
Cliffs
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: Babbles
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Engineering degrees are > *. There are only two PROFESSIONAL undergraduate programs -- Engineering and Nursing. Engineering graduates are qualified to do anything any other major is qualified to do, AND their own profession. Business, law, medicine, communications, marketing, engineering ...
So yes, Engineering > ALL.
Engineering grads are glorified mechanics. Highly intelligent in a technical field, but often they'll be dumb as shit in anything outside their field.
not universal, of course.
If I had to choose which part of your post was more truthful, it'd be the bold section.
Highly intelligent people cannot be dumb as shit in outside fields. Engineers are good in law, finance, business, and fuck, even liberal arts and true arts. At least, the engineers I socialized with.
I think you may have contradicted yourself. Your answer in a previous question was essentially that it genuinely depends on the person, not the degree. However you are now saying that it engineering is superior. So in your opinion it is the degree and not the person? Or the other way around? Which is it?
Anyhow, I think you may be wrong about people being dumb as shit in other fields. I wouldn't use those words, but after working ten years as a professional scientist I have seen crazy smart people turn somewhat stupid when they stepped outside their realm of expertise. Then again I have seen a few handful of people who were crazy good at everything they did. It is the person, not the degree.
I caught myself applying the generalization, and pinned on the bold part before submitting the post. I'm talking about intelligent people that happen to be engineers.
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
What an ignorant thing to say. It's entrepreneurs and financiers that allow ideas to go from paper/concept to shelf. They are the true talent and are very rare. You engineers are a dime a dozen.
Disagree. True talent in any field is very rare. You think that all finance or business majors become entrepreneurs and financiers? What about the "dime a dozen" auditors and accountants and middle-management?
Sure, investment is required for initial development in any field, but look at Intel. You have engineers driving the research and development. Financiers are not required when you have brilliant engineers taking "ideas ... from paper/concept to shelf."
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Safeway
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Veramocor
I think his argument in summary is that the United States in particular values 9salary wise) professions that may be easier than engineering and don't really produce anything like Finance or business.
What an ignorant thing to say. It's entrepreneurs and financiers that allow ideas to go from paper/concept to shelf. They are the true talent and are very rare. You engineers are a dime a dozen.
Disagree. True talent in any field is very rare. You think that all finance or business majors become entrepreneurs and financiers? What about the "dime a dozen" auditors and accountants and middle-management?
Sure, investment is required for initial development in any field, but look at Intel. You have engineers driving the research and development. Financiers are not required when you have brilliant engineers taking "ideas ... from paper/concept to shelf."
What part of "entrepreneurs and financiers" don't you understand? But of course a leech lawyer like you who brings net negative value to society wouldn't understand.
Financiers are absolutely required to take ideas to market. I don't give a shit if it's your grandmother giving you a $50k loan or a VC buying preferred stock, no financier = no product.
