4 ms·
This is a bit frustrating - part of the premise is that people who are engineers somehow have a predilection towards extremism. Then they admit that that it's a
by makmanalp 12y ago
This is a bit frustrating - part of the premise is that people who are engineers somehow have a predilection towards extremism. Then they admit that that it's a tiny proportion of engineers overall.
Then they mention that it could be random effects - an extremist group that's strong in an engineering school would of course recruit more extremists, for example. But they dismiss that with "well we didn't notice that" and go head on with their personality argument. Similarly with a tech-based recruitment argument.
Then, they go on to "prove" how most engineers are right-wing conservative (which is a very American position) by looking at a study of 9000 Americans (what a non-representative sample) and finding that 57% self-identified as so. Then they stretch this conclusion to extremists everywhere.
They mention that engineering is a stepping stone profession in a lot of the middle east, that families encourage their kids to be some kind of engineer, because of better career opportunities. They also mention that there is a selective entry process and the title of "engineer" is an honorable one (which I think may be a bit exaggerated but whatever).
No mention of the fact that engineering is super broad and includes tons of subcategories and professions, and thus a larger cross-section of the population in general.
No mention that because of this broad variety of subfields, even though some programs have high entry requirements, the overall entry process can't be nearly as social-class selective as something like medicine, where you need money even to prep for entry.
No mention that an engineering education doesn't necessarily expose you to more progressive (or western-oriented if you want to be cynical) ideals like a law or humanities or social sciences degree does.
They just slap on their own narrative. This is shoddy work IMHO. How did this even pass peer review?
- HillRat 12y agoYeah, there's so much wrong with this paper that it ceases to be wrong and just enters a realm of academic Dadaism. It's basically impossible to even formulate a working hypothesis without having a deep understanding of the socioeconomic drivers and effects around educational attainment and post-graduate alienation. The idea that engineers are inherently radicalizable runs counter to the academic thinking on the subject -- the article is provocative, sure, but extraordinary claims &c....