3 ms·

This is true for the general population though. The only reason why the term exists is because other engineers expect it not to apply to engineers. Really the

by sbov 7y ago

This is true for the general population though. The only reason why the term exists is because other engineers expect it not to apply to engineers. Really the concept says more about us and our expectations of educated engineers rather than the engineers with bad opinions. You could even go so far as to say those wielding the term also fall under the term: outside of your expertise, you're assuming engineers shouldn't have bad opinions. There's evidence abound that this is wrong - engineers can have bad opinions just like the general population. Yet some still insist on calling it out as "special" despite presenting no studies showing they're more likely to have these bad opinions.

elliekelly 7y ago
You might find this study interesting[1]. The paper sensationalizes it a bit IMO by classifying people as "bullshitters" when it seems to me more like "overconfidence" in their knowledge. Quality of the study/headline aside, I do wonder if there's a selection bias for knowledge overconfidence in engineering as parent comment suggests. I would imagine people who make good engineers are the type who aren't intimidated by "knowledge gaps" and they assume (rightly or wrongly) that they'll be able to figure out a solution even where they have little or no expertise. [1] [PDF] http://ftp.iza.org/dp12282.pdf http://ftp.iza.org/dp12282.pdf
CharlesColeman 7y ago
> This is true for the general population though. Not really. Engineer's disease is specific to engineers, because at its core is the implicit belief that engineering (and science/math) is the ur-discipline whose mindset and techniques are universally applicable to all problems. That often comes with the attitude that other mindsets and techniques are inferior (e.g. those from the humanities in particular) and/or that engineers are more competent and can easily master needed parts of other disciplines when they choose (and thus the practitioners of those disciplines have little authority).

by sbov 7y ago

elliekelly 7y ago

You might find this study interesting[1]. The paper sensationalizes it a bit IMO by classifying people as "bullshitters" when it seems to me more like "overconfidence" in their knowledge. Quality of the study/headline aside, I do wonder if there's a selection bias for knowledge overconfidence in engineering as parent comment suggests. I would imagine people who make good engineers are the type who aren't intimidated by "knowledge gaps" and they assume (rightly or wrongly) that they'll be able to figure out a solution even where they have little or no expertise. [1] [PDF] http://ftp.iza.org/dp12282.pdf http://ftp.iza.org/dp12282.pdf

CharlesColeman 7y ago

> This is true for the general population though. Not really. Engineer's disease is specific to engineers, because at its core is the implicit belief that engineering (and science/math) is the ur-discipline whose mindset and techniques are universally applicable to all problems. That often comes with the attitude that other mindsets and techniques are inferior (e.g. those from the humanities in particular) and/or that engineers are more competent and can easily master needed parts of other disciplines when they choose (and thus the practitioners of those disciplines have little authority).