4 ms·

But that follows logically does it not as one is more difficult than the other? I think a more interesting comparison would be what has highest status between

• whatshisface 7y ago
  >one is more difficult than the other That in and of itself is a weird one. I used to think that physics was harder than sociology, because of the stereotype that physicists were smarter than sociologists. Then I realized that whatever it is that sociologists do, you could make it twice as hard by making them do twice as much, or by raising the quality standards twice as high. Likewise you could make physics the easiest science by altering the publication requirements to be, well, easier than every other science. It's not that studying the universe is harder in any objective way than studying sociology, it's that what counts as success is defined based on other people's success. To use doctors as an example, the standard for how good you have to be to practice would get lower if all humans were altered to be half as good at medicine. At the same time, med school for doctors is far harder than med school for nurses. I'm not sure what sets the hard-ness levels for these different fields, but the point is, we absolutely could have a society where nurses were driven twice as hard and had to be twice as smart as doctors, but for some reason that didn't happen.
  • cc81 7y ago
    But some things are inherently more difficult and that means a smaller part of the population are willing to put in the effort or are are smart enough. Nurses do different things than doctors and that means there are different requirements on their education. Just like a software engineer that creates simple internal CRUD applications for an Enterprise will have lower requirements than someone who works in R&D at a cutting edge field. One is easier than the other while both still give value and both are still important. One thing to note is that when it comes to for example doctors there are more young female doctors than young male doctors in Sweden these days so soon we will probably see a field were that is true for all age groups.
    • whatshisface 7y ago
      >Just like a software engineer that creates simple internal CRUD applications for an Enterprise will have lower requirements than someone who works in R&D at a cutting edge field. You're comparing the upper and lower ends of the same field, and I agree that it's clear enough why one is harder than the other. However, doctors and nurses do not simply have two versions of the same job. Using your example, suppose that every software developer was worse. Then, CRUD apps would be cutting edge R&D and enterprise applications would be, I don't know, Excel spreadsheets. If CRUD apps were cutting edge R&D, programming would be easier, and worse programmers would be able to keep their jobs. The field is easier because the people are worse, the people are worse because the field is easier. The question is, what starts this cycle?
      • Konnstann 7y ago
        While I may not grasp the full context of nursing vs medicine, when it comes to my healthcare I would expect my doctor to be able to perform the full extent of what my nurse could do, whereas the same could not be said of the reverse. Nursing is a tough job, with demanding hours, but I could get a nursing degree in 2 years, whereas I probably couldn't even get into med school, much less get through 4 years + residency. (I'm a biomedical Engineer, have most of the background). Also, your argument doesn't hold up. If every software developer was worse, it would be as difficult to get into because everyone is worse, not just current devs.