4 ms·

I argue that mathematics and physics degrees are more valuable than engineering degrees. It prepares you for one of the most fundamental of skills for white co

• balls187 13y ago
  I don't know what engineering degrees they offer at your school, but pretty much every one of my classes was Math & Physics.
  • bobster15 13y ago
    A degree in math or physics requires much more math than that which engineers study. Likewise a degree in physics requires much more physics than engineers study.
    • balls187 13y ago
      Neither of which is an indication that they are better at engineers at critical thinking.
      • jeffbr13 13y ago
        I think the difference might be this, in undergraduate degrees: * Mathematics is entirely about proving arguments and solving problems within logical systems. * The 'hard sciences' (esp. physics) are about working within a theoretical (often mathematical) framework and testing it with experimentation. Contrast this to engineering disciplines, or even medicine, where the focus is on gaining knowledge which you can use to solve problems. It's problem-solving, but doesn't have much of the scientific method about it.
    • crazy1van 13y ago
      Nearly every engineering class I had was really a math class in disguise. Granted, it was often a very specialized, applied math class. Although in my experience at least by grad school, math students are usually in a very specialized field of mathematics as well...just a different one from engineers.
  • Bahamut 13y ago
    Not anywhere near as rigorous in engineering than the pure disciplines. "Discrete math" is often the baby version of "Elementary Number Theory"/"Introduction to Higher Mathematics" type of class for example. The Physics 101 type class engineers take is often the baby version of the general physics classes given to those who intend on or are considering becoming physics majors. Engineers almost never see anything like real analysis, abstract algebra, or topology unless they go to graduate school, and the challenges in working your mind around the concepts, language, and proofs founded on hard logic. Physicists often don't see those topics either (a good portion do though due to necessity), but physics tests problem solving ability at a level engineering doesn't typically match. Not to say that engineers are necessarily inferior - there is a foundation that I'd say most don't have though in comparison.
    • balls187 13y ago
      You failed to validate your claim that Physics and Math majors are better than Engineers at Critical thinking (to some degree where that makes them more valuable to companies). Further, the entry level physics & math classes at my school were the exact same classes that physic & math majors took. This clearly isn't universal, but you can't make a generalized statement that entry level physics & math classes are harder/better than they are for engineers. Physics 1,2,3 is Physics 1,2,3 (101,102,103 in uni numbers) I could insert some snark comment about if they were truly better at critical thinking, they would have pursued a degree that was more easily marketable, but that's besides the point. Engineers have skillsets that are in high demand, and that's why they're valuable degrees. Is critical thinking a part of that, probably. Is it as valuable from a Math/Physics major? We'll just let the market decide.
      • Bahamut 13y ago
        My comments were based on what I have seen out of most typical universities. Engineers were often given their own watered-down type of classes (some schools give them different numbers, others don't) - this was also true where I went to graduate school (which is a top 5 engineering school overall, sometimes ranked #1), the pure version of the classes, even calculus, were more rigorous than the engineering versions of the same - some of the engineers were aware of this, and some of the sharper ones opted instead for the versions of the classes geared towards the respective majors. I have taught both these types of classes as a TA for math & physics, and tutored for the same & am thus better qualified to speak of the differences quite frankly. Companies that hire pure talent often have went after top math & physics types, especially Wall Street - that's no secret, and this has been true for decades. They are extremely marketable degrees, and attractive to any company when combined with domain knowledge in other fields - to give some examples of some of the things that some of my peers are doing who possess those degrees, they include public policy, programming, data science, statistics, academia, teaching, economics, patent law, and finance. The versatility is what is valuable, not necessarily the domain knowledge of math or physics itself, although that could be helpful too (i.e. the NSA, the largest employer of mathematicians, who often train them as programmers afterwards). It doesn't hurt that they are usually amongst the top degrees to have in various charts, and related careers to those skills are similarly rated very high (e.g. statistician being #2). Engineering (most notably computer science) has had a surge as of the past decade due to the talent crunch and surge in innovation in software, but at the top, many companies still are very interested in more traditional candidates who show initiative since you can teach someone many things if the person is well grounded in fundamentals, but you cannot necessarily do the reverse as easily.
• bobster15 13y ago
  Unfortunately many employers don't think so. As a mathematician/physicists, you'd have to sell yourself as a engineer at the same time as convincing your employer that you're more qualified than someone with an engineering degree.
  • Bahamut 13y ago
    I've found that once I proved myself as a programmer, I've become a highly sought after engineer due to my extremely high ceiling - my education is heavy in math & physics (math & physics undergrad, math grad education). It does take some self-investment, but you have a flexibility not afforded by most disciplines - math & physics best prepares you more generally if you apply the lessons. I feel confident innovating/performing in many other aspects as well, but I chose software engineering & the developer crunch chose me.
  • zhemao 13y ago
    Employers rightly think so. There's a lot more to engineering than being good at math and problem solving. The "other stuff" that Bahamut so flippantly dismisses as easily self-taught involves a lot of domain knowledge and best practices. Engineering curricula also includes project-based courses in which you have to apply your knowledge to produce an actual product, sometimes working in a team with your peers. This builds a lot of the skills necessary to effectively tackle real-world engineering challenges and is not something that you would get from a math/physics degree.
• mathattack 13y ago
  At most US schools, Engineering is just Math, Physics, and perhaps Chemistry, with a lot of problem solving thrown on top. All good for critical thinking. And hard.
• zhemao 13y ago
  > It prepares you for one of the most fundamental of skills for white collar jobs: critical thinking Right, because they certainly don't teach that in engineering school.
  • pm90 13y ago
    Depends. While I haven't studied mechanical engineering myself, a lot of my friends who have, seem to have spent a lot of their time learning to use steam tables and working with lathes (something I personally would love to do, btw) instead of racking their brains to solve problems in physics/math. Personally, I think everyone should learn at least the basics of modern Algebra (not high school stuff, but: groups, semigroups etc.), Topology etc. (Note that I did not get an education in either Physics or Math, but am jealous of those who did)
    • zhemao 13y ago
      This probably differs from school-to-school. At my school most engineering majors had senior projects or capstone classes in which you had to apply the things you learned to produce working products.
      • jeffbr13 13y ago
        Applied projects and practicals are more along the 'working with lathes' line, forcing you to practice what you've learned. "Critical Thinking" (and its development) is perhaps more nebulous, but I imagine that it comes with extensive work on proofs and problem-solving in more abstract situations.
• avn2109 13y ago
  I am a Mechanical Engineer, and almost every Mathematics student and most Physics students that I know could do what I do. But I could very rarely succeed for a week in any of their lives. From this I can only conclude that they are smarter than me.