4 ms·

and then we have no engineers who can accomplish anything related to space exploration when time comes for humanity to explore beyond earth majorly? You are su

and then we have no engineers who can accomplish anything related to space exploration when time comes for humanity to explore beyond earth majorly? You are suggesting we weaken our foundations. A talent pool takes a lot of generations. No one can say America or some other country will do the space thingy, you go work on poor. Mind you, these so called engineers and other workers are free independant INDIANS, who can do whatever they want, join any field they want to, work towards goal they collectively set. There are many unproductive things, .. drugs/prostitution/trafficking has billions of $ involved each year. We would rather spend energy in making those people productive, if anything.

jlgreco 13y ago
There exists a strange notion that engineers have some form of responsibility that goes above and beyond what 'normal' people have. Anyone can do anything they like with their lives... unless they are an engineer, at which point they suddenly become obligated to work on charitable endeavors. Decide to write novels? "That's nice, what a nice career choice." Decide to write iphone applications? "How the hell can you sit there programming iphone applications when you could be using your intellect to fight hunger!? There are more important things than iphone apps!"
- saraid216 13y ago
  No, I've heard novelists get the same flak. And social justice activists, though I don't think I've ever heard privacy advocates take it. I was going to say I haven't heard bankers get it, but I think I recall a case or two.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Well, my perspective may be biased since I naturally associate more with engineers, but it seems to me that engineers take a disproportionate amount of this sort of flack. It seems to me that the general public thinks that engineers have an unusual high obligation or debt to society.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      > the general public Do you generally hear this sentiment from "the general public"? In my experience, it comes more from people who are disillusioned by their direct interactions with group X.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        I have heard it not necessarily often, but several times, from extended family members (there is one notable offender, my response to her is usually an exasperated comment about her not even having a job... holidays with the jlgreco family are interesting affairs...) and here it rather frequently online on places like reddit. It is like they think talent in any STEM field is something that society has gives to people on the condition that they use said talent to cure cancer and solve world hunger, and anybody not using their talent to do those things is failing to hold up their end of the bargain. People with skill in the humanities seem to be largely free of this judgement.
- rikacomet 13y ago
  Well a free man is free to even ignore his apparent responsibility. Which is the maximum case with children of successful people. Most of them never are able to come out of the shadow of their parents. Barely few have in the History. Akbar in India, Kublai Khan of Mongolia, etc. Anyways, nor you or I have the correct information, or any other basis enough to claim, that these engineers can be put to better use. WHo has that information? THE GOVT! So chances are that in all likeliness this is the most efficient use of that workforce.
- sanskritabelt 13y ago
  Didn't you ever read Spiderman comics? "To whom much is given, much is expected" -- Uncle Ben
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    This is exactly what I am talking about. Why do you think that "much was given" to the engineers of the world, but not to others? Engineers may be blessed with talents in engineering, but novelists are blessed with the gift of writing. Why should engineers be expected to engineer things for charitable causes anymore than writers should be expected to use their talents similarly? Engineering isn't some uniquely special skill; it is one of many. Yet it uniquely is singled out as being a skill that bequeaths the holder with some extra responsibility to society. Engineers don't owe the world any more than anybody else does. (And if you think they do, then why do non-engineers not owe it to the world to become engineers?)
  - rikacomet 13y ago
    Yes I have read, but in real life.. not everyone is able to accomplish what is expected of him/her. Its not just a matter of choice, but also circumstances.

jlgreco 13y ago

There exists a strange notion that engineers have some form of responsibility that goes above and beyond what 'normal' people have. Anyone can do anything they like with their lives... unless they are an engineer, at which point they suddenly become obligated to work on charitable endeavors. Decide to write novels? "That's nice, what a nice career choice." Decide to write iphone applications? "How the hell can you sit there programming iphone applications when you could be using your intellect to fight hunger!? There are more important things than iphone apps!"

saraid216 13y ago
No, I've heard novelists get the same flak. And social justice activists, though I don't think I've ever heard privacy advocates take it. I was going to say I haven't heard bankers get it, but I think I recall a case or two.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Well, my perspective may be biased since I naturally associate more with engineers, but it seems to me that engineers take a disproportionate amount of this sort of flack. It seems to me that the general public thinks that engineers have an unusual high obligation or debt to society.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > the general public Do you generally hear this sentiment from "the general public"? In my experience, it comes more from people who are disillusioned by their direct interactions with group X.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      I have heard it not necessarily often, but several times, from extended family members (there is one notable offender, my response to her is usually an exasperated comment about her not even having a job... holidays with the jlgreco family are interesting affairs...) and here it rather frequently online on places like reddit. It is like they think talent in any STEM field is something that society has gives to people on the condition that they use said talent to cure cancer and solve world hunger, and anybody not using their talent to do those things is failing to hold up their end of the bargain. People with skill in the humanities seem to be largely free of this judgement.
rikacomet 13y ago
Well a free man is free to even ignore his apparent responsibility. Which is the maximum case with children of successful people. Most of them never are able to come out of the shadow of their parents. Barely few have in the History. Akbar in India, Kublai Khan of Mongolia, etc. Anyways, nor you or I have the correct information, or any other basis enough to claim, that these engineers can be put to better use. WHo has that information? THE GOVT! So chances are that in all likeliness this is the most efficient use of that workforce.
sanskritabelt 13y ago
Didn't you ever read Spiderman comics? "To whom much is given, much is expected" -- Uncle Ben
- jlgreco 13y ago
  This is exactly what I am talking about. Why do you think that "much was given" to the engineers of the world, but not to others? Engineers may be blessed with talents in engineering, but novelists are blessed with the gift of writing. Why should engineers be expected to engineer things for charitable causes anymore than writers should be expected to use their talents similarly? Engineering isn't some uniquely special skill; it is one of many. Yet it uniquely is singled out as being a skill that bequeaths the holder with some extra responsibility to society. Engineers don't owe the world any more than anybody else does. (And if you think they do, then why do non-engineers not owe it to the world to become engineers?)
- rikacomet 13y ago
  Yes I have read, but in real life.. not everyone is able to accomplish what is expected of him/her. Its not just a matter of choice, but also circumstances.