3 ms·
You know, before reading your post I never even questioned that I had a strongly scientific leaning in my mentality. Now I realize I'm much more of an explorato
by GrooveStomp 15y ago
You know, before reading your post I never even questioned that I had a strongly scientific leaning in my mentality.
Now I realize I'm much more of an exploratory engineer than a scientist.
Actually, now that I think about it, haven't there been a great number of scientific discoveries that were, according to your distinction, actually exploratory engineering? I would think that following all the side-effects and byproducts of rigorous scientific study would qualify as exploratory engineering, wouldn't they?
Anyway, interesting perspective. Particularly on point, as I just finished reading Cory Doctorow's "Makers".
- scott_s 15y agoI've put a lot of thought into it, since it's what I do. I never felt comfortable calling myself a "scientist" because I was doing more inventing than discovering. I think there are cases where the distinction between the two can be fuzzy, but I think it comes down to have you learned something about the universe and the things in it, or have you learned a better way to build something? Most of the time I've learned a better way to build something. CS theory people can claim more fundamental knowledge, but they fall more in the math camp than science. And make no mistake, I would be flattered to be called a scientist. But I have friends in physics and biochemistry. I know that there is a fundamental difference in our research. However, knowing how to design an experiment that will show what you want to show is required for both science and engineering research.