2 ms·
The problem is that the line is not as clear as you'd think. Is someone who makes electronic circuits, but is mostly self-taught, an engineer? How about for sof
by lazaroclapp 11y ago
The problem is that the line is not as clear as you'd think. Is someone who makes electronic circuits, but is mostly self-taught, an engineer? How about for software? There is usually very little difference between the best self-taught programmers and the best engineering-school taught ones, up an including knowledge of calculus, algorithmic complexity analysis, ML/stats, etc. Finally, there are people like me who did a bachelors in CS inside a school of sciences, rather than a school of engineering, is 'Software Engineer' justified in the later case, but not the former? Why?
Also, this discussion is a bit like asking why you can be a Data "Scientist" without a Ph.D. and without peer-reviewed publications. In reality, most people understand the difference between a scientist working in neurobiology or particle physics, and a data scientist working on ads (a competent data scientist working on a private non-profit in epidemiology might actually be harder to classify, though). So, same goes as to the difference between a civil engineer and a software engineer.
Edit: If anything, I know a few UX designers that reject the engineer label, but only because it makes the process sound more mechanical compared to designer (in my understanding, both are about discovering and satisfying constrains, but constrains are more strongly defined and more externally enforced in engineering than design, even for software).
- nchelluri 11y agoI like the way you've stated this. While in general I am not fond of arguing semantics and don't often think it's worthwhile, in this case I would say it's warranted. When I think of "engineer", I think of P.Eng., and the licensing/accreditation that goes along with it has useful connotations to it. So I'd say while some of us devs might be doing engineering type of work, and may even be eligible for something like an P.Eng. license in their place of residence, they simply are not engineers, because they are not licensed. On the other side of that coin, I don't believe there is ever such a hard-and-fast rule that is applied to the word "scientist". As such, I don't believe that Ph.D. or getting published is required - what's required is instead to be someone who practices science.
- notalaser 11y agoIn certain parts of the world, including much of Europe, the question is less ambiguous than it seems. There are countries where this, for instance, has a very clear answer: > Is someone who makes electronic circuits, but is mostly self-taught, an engineer? If he's accredited by that country's authority on the matter (e.g. the Engineering Council in the UK), then yes. If not, no. Around here, you're only allowed to call yourself an engineer if you have a degree from a technical university. Sure, the company can give you any title they want (I mean, if they're allowed to give obnoxious titles like Senior JavaScript Ninja or whatever, surely they can call someone an engineer, too), but from a legal standpoint, that's null, with all the consequences that follow (e.g. legal documents that require an engineer's signature have to be signed by someone that the state agrees is an engineer, regardless of what the company thinks). Edit: FWIW, while I'm legally allowed to claim that glorious title (my diploma says "Instrumentation Engineering"), I tend to avoid it, too. My job has always been to program computers, and if I'll be able to do that until I retire, I will. Consequently, I see no reason to call myself anything other than a programmer. My employers disagree for paperwork reasons, so the paperwork they do says otherwise, but "programmer" is what I want everyone to call me. There is very little of true value to be found in a name; people who chase the title of engineer, rather than the engineering education, are missing the point.