# Engineering license? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 2, 2000, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746 "2000-09-02T04:15:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2000, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/21 "2000-09-19T21:24:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > > \*\*You all have covered it pretty well. I’ll add that Canada will not let any Americans that come into their country and call themselves “Engineers” unless you bring proof of an American PE license. > > > > I will admit that having gone through and got my license, and being legally able to approve and consult for the public, I do get a bit incensed at how carelessly the term “Engineer” is thrown onto job titles, such as “Computer Engineer”, “Customer Support Engineer”, “Maintenance Engineer”, and my least favorite, “Radio Studio Engineer”. Engineering in the US is a profession with no real self-identity it seems, and the law is far too lenient in allowing people to advertise themselves as “Engineers”. > > > > But I’m sure this is a GD, rather than a comment on Cecil’s column. > > > > Also, just curious, I wonder how many PE’s are on the board? > > > > Una Persson, PE \*\* > > But it sounds like you would advocate restricting the word ‘Engineer’ only to those who actually work in old fashioned, > plant management or damn building types of enterprises. Depending on what the product is, the work of a ‘customer service engineer’ might be much more sophisticated than just someone who looks up accounts. A computer ‘engineer’ may be > much more than someone who wheels a PC into a new cubicle > and installs MS-Word, though I agree that most system developers and analysts would themselves hesitate to refer to themselves as computer engineers. But it is true that > those who work on large scale software projects deal with the same sorts of constraints and conditions as those faced by engineers generally, and there seems to be a commonality of personality type. \*\* Whoops, that was supposed to be “dam building”, not “damn building”! ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2000, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/22 "2000-09-19T22:17:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > \*\*But it sounds like you would advocate restricting the word ‘Engineer’ only to those who actually work in old fashioned, plant management or damn building types of enterprises. Depending on what the product is, the work of a ‘customer service engineer’ might be much more sophisticated than just someone who looks up accounts. A computer ‘engineer’ may be much more than someone who wheels a PC into a new cubicle and installs MS-Word, though I agree that most system developers and analysts would themselves hesitate to refer to themselves as computer engineers. But it is true that those who work on large scale software projects deal with the same sorts of constraints and conditions as those faced by engineers generally, and there seems to be a commonality of personality type. \*\* No, I would restrict the word “Engineer” to those who 1) Have a 4-year degree or equivalent in **Engineering** , and 2) are licensed and thus legally recognized as an “engineer”. How does a “customer service engineer” deserve the title of “engineer”, regardless of how important, difficult, or vital their job is? I don’t see why people with no formal or practical education in engineering at all continue to pick titles that say “Engineer”. Is it due to low self-esteem about what they really do? If so, then **that’s really fucking pathetic**. And why? Because you gotta have pride in what you do, especially if you do a good job at it. Pride does not manifest from improperly taking a term and applying it to yourself, for the perceived “prestige” (and any real engineer out there knows that there is little, if not no, prestige in being an engineer in this Lawyer & Journalist focused society). This last weekend I sat behind a car with a bumper sticker reading “Union of Sheetmetal Engineers”. I know a person who is in that organization - there is no engineering experience required or needed - they are auto body repair people. And that’s great, those guys and gals are true artists of restoring cars to incredible conditions. They’re great. So why do they have to claim another title - a title already claimed by a State-recognized Profession - for what they do? How **dare** they advertise **implicitly** to the public that they have had equivalent education, equivalent prerequisite practical experience, and are legally licensed by the State to practice engineering and offer services to the public? My post above explains my views better I think re: a solution. And about train engineers. As self-righteous as my indignation may be, you have to recognize precedence. And before someone brings up a link to Websters or something - I know what the damn dictionary says, and I don’t think it applies here. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2000, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/23 "2000-09-19T23:08:06Z")
Overall, I agree with Anthracite, especially in that last post. Would those “customer service engineers” be so easily written off as harmless use of the word if they declared themselves “customer service doctors”? “Customer service attorneys”? Those terms (doctor, attorney) have a level of prestige _because_ they are restricted in usage, and only may be used by people who meet certain criteria. The word engineer should be the same. Why not be a technician, artisan, representative, specialist? ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2000, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/24 "2000-09-20T00:40:18Z")
Well, inspired by this thread, I am asking for backers in my inititative to have moderators renamed as “SDMB engineers.” 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/25 "2000-09-21T04:41:59Z")
And if people are trying to add prestige to their names, why on Earth would they call themselves “engineers”? Why not real scientists, who know how to add and subtract? _ducking and running_ ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/26 "2000-09-21T12:45:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chronos \* > \*\*And if people are trying to add prestige to their names, why on Earth would they call themselves “engineers”? Why not real scientists, who know how to add and subtract? > > _ducking and running_ \*\* As an Engineer, I know how to add and subtract. One plus one is pretty close to two. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Kyberneticist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dc4da7/32.png) [@Kyberneticist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyberneticist)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/27 "2000-09-21T14:48:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Chronos \* > > \*\*And if people are trying to add prestige to their names, why on Earth would they call themselves “engineers”? Why not real scientists, who know how to add and subtract? > > > > _ducking and running_ \*\* > > As an Engineer, I know how to add and subtract. One plus one is pretty close to two. 😉 \*\* A Math major, C.S. minor friend of mine (I’m a C.S. major, Math minor) told me why she got out of Physics/Engineering. “I was in one class and and the teacher said: ‘Now we are going to integrate over this function. Yes, it is discontinuous, but we are going to integrate over it anyway’!!!” I’m hoping it was a Physics class, and not an Engineering class, but you heathens are all alike… 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/28 "2000-09-21T17:27:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > > \*\*But it sounds like you would advocate restricting the word ‘Engineer’ only to those who actually work in old fashioned, plant management or damn building types of enterprises. Depending on what the product is, the work of a ‘customer service engineer’ might be much more sophisticated than just someone who looks up accounts. A computer ‘engineer’ may be much more than someone who wheels a PC into a new cubicle and installs MS-Word, though I agree that most system developers and analysts would themselves hesitate to refer to themselves as computer engineers. But it is true that those who work on large scale software projects deal with the same sorts of constraints and conditions as those faced by engineers generally, and there seems to be a commonality of personality type. \*\* > > No, I would restrict the word “Engineer” to those who 1) Have a 4-year degree or equivalent in **Engineering** , and 2) are licensed and thus legally recognized as an “engineer”. How does a “customer service engineer” deserve the title of “engineer”, regardless of how important, difficult, or vital their job is? > > I don’t see why people with no formal or practical education in engineering at all continue to pick titles that say “Engineer”. Is it due to low self-esteem about what they really do? If so, then **that’s really fucking pathetic**. > > And why? Because you gotta have pride in what you do, especially if you do a good job at it. Pride does not manifest from improperly taking a term and applying it to yourself, for the perceived “prestige” (and any real engineer out there knows that there is little, if not no, prestige in being an engineer in this Lawyer & Journalist focused society). > > This last weekend I sat behind a car with a bumper sticker reading “Union of Sheetmetal Engineers”. I know a person who is in that organization - there is no engineering experience required or needed - they are auto body repair people. > > And that’s great, those guys and gals are true artists of restoring cars to incredible conditions. They’re great. So why do they have to claim another title - a title already claimed by a State-recognized Profession - for what they do? How **dare** they advertise **implicitly** to the public that they have had equivalent education, equivalent prerequisite practical experience, and are legally licensed by the State to practice engineering and offer services to the public? > > My post above explains my views better I think re: a solution. And about train engineers. As self-righteous as my indignation may be, you have to recognize precedence. > > And before someone brings up a link to Websters or something - I know what the damn dictionary says, and I don’t think it applies here. \*\* It’s my understanding that in the aerospace area, customer service ‘engineers’ often actually ARE engineers, or at least they have an engineering degree. I would tend to string along with those who argue that having the degree is enough to call oneself an Engineer in everyday conversation. But if such an engineer REPRESENTED himself as such in a context where licensure came into play, such as signing off a public works design, then yes you’re right, that would be fraud. Anthracite, I sense that you’re getting a little huffy about the whole thing. I agree that it’s stupid for body work mechanics to call themselves ‘Engineers’, but remember that the purpose of licensure, to my mind at least, is to protect the public from incompetent practitioners and frauds. Sure we may chuckle at the above-mentioned ‘sheet metal engineers’, but in any PRACTICAL context of any kind, is ANYONE ever going to confuse an auto body-worker with an electrical engineer? Having said that, I for one have tremendous respect for engineers and the contribution they make to society. If I’d been better at math in school I would have gone into it myself. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/29 "2000-09-21T20:31:55Z")
My favorite example is an article I saw posted in the local discount warehouse store about one of their employees. This person, described as “mentally challenged” (God bless him), was performing well in his job, with the title of “Cart Retrieval Engineer”. I damn near cried. At least the currency can’t be debased any further than that. ElvisL1ves (engineer who doesn’t have or need a PE license in the aerospace world) ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/30 "2000-09-21T21:53:12Z")
“Cart Retrieval Engineer” - making better ways to retrieve carts? 😉 “Customer service engineer” for the aformentioned aerospace company - that sounds like an engineer who supports the technical questions for the customer service department. I agree that might be a valid title. Depends on the training/knowledge required and used for the job. Around here we have “Quality Engineers” who’s sole qualification is they were a data entry and records clerk for a while in the Quality Department, and have been instructed how to fill out certain documents. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/31 "2000-09-21T22:02:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Irishman \* > \*\*Overall, I agree with Anthracite, especially in that last post. > > Would those “customer service engineers” be so easily written off as harmless use of the word if they declared themselves “customer service doctors”? “Customer service attorneys”? Those terms (doctor, attorney) have a level of prestige _because_ they are restricted in usage, and only may be used by people who meet certain criteria. The word engineer should be the same. > \*\* These examples are ridiculous. The words ‘doctor’ and ‘attorney’ connote not only licenses, but also a body of work and knowledge. We all know, pretty much, what doctors and attorneys do. No one would call a CS rep ‘doctor’ or ‘attorney’ because they do not treat you or represent you before a judge. By the same token you’d never call a doctor a “physiological engineer”. But if a CS rep really needs to have training and experience similar to that of the engineers over in the design department, then who can deny that he is applying engineering knowledge on a daily basis in his work? And if he has a degree to boot, then how dare anyone deny him the title? Remember this refers only to a limited class of highly skilled CS workers, and not the people who answer you when you call the phone company about your bill. I’m not an engineer, I’m a programmer (no I don’t call myself a Softare Engineer). But I think perhaps the public has a clearer concept of what we programmers do, than they do of engineers’ work. Speaking as an outsider, I would say that a better strategy to improve the professional image of engineers would be to educate the public as to what you do, so they can have an accurate understanding of what engineering is. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/32 "2000-09-21T22:34:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > \*\*It’s my understanding that in the aerospace area, customer service ‘engineers’ often actually ARE engineers, or at least they have an engineering degree. > \*\* Unless I’m missing something here, your example is not contrary to my point of view. They have, as you say, an engineering degree - that satisfies one of the two major points of my qualification. The second thing is licensure - well, I said earlier that the two groups (PE’s and non-PE’s) should come together to settle on a better way of licensure such that degreed, trained engineers are the ones using that legal term to describe their profession. Note - I’m not arguing with degreed engineers. I’m arguing with people with no engineering degree who call themselves engineers. The licensure is a side issue, necessary IMO to help establish the identity of the profession. > [@](#): > > **Anthracite, I sense that you’re getting a little huffy about the whole thing.** I’ve explained my viewpoint. I’m sorry if you see it that way. > [@](#): > > **Sure we may chuckle at the above-mentioned ‘sheet metal engineers’, but in any PRACTICAL context of any kind, is ANYONE ever going to confuse an auto body-worker with an > electrical engineer?** No, but imagine a “sheet metal engineer” (a.k.a. body shop gal) being consulted on a building site because they need an expert in sheet metal construction. Or imagine a very skilled RC aircraft builder advertising themselves as an Aerospace Engineer. > [@](#): > > **These examples are ridiculous. The words ‘doctor’ and ‘attorney’ connote not only licenses, but also a body of > work and knowledge.** And Engineering is _not_ a body of work and knowledge? > [@](#): > > **We all know, pretty much, what doctors and attorneys do. No one would call a CS rep ‘doctor’ or ‘attorney’ because they do not treat you or represent you before a judge. By the same token you’d never call a doctor a “physiological engineer”.** Well, I cannot help that our Lawyercentric and Journalistcentric society openly mocks and denigrates my profession into near meaninglessness. Such that when I go to speak to students about what I do, NO ONE knows what the hell an engineer does. But they all know what doctors do, from watching _ER_ (my SO is a doctor - ER is so laughably unrealistic it should be on Mystery Science Theatre 3000), and they all know what lawyers do, from watching _Ally Mc Beal_ (yes, they do gymnastic routines in their unisex bathroom :rolleyes: ) > [@](#): > > **But if a CS rep really needs to have training and experience similar to that of the engineers over in the design department, then who can deny that he is applying engineering knowledge on a daily basis in his work? And if he has a degree to boot, then how dare anyone deny him the title?** I don’t believe I ever said an engineering degreed person was not an engineer. Refer please to my second post in this thread, where I would put these persons into category “2”, meaning that they could be licensed if they had to be or chose to. In your example here, I think you are missing my point. And “applying engineering knowledge” does NOT mean you are an engineer, professionally speaking. Any more than working as a nurse means you are a physician. Not to denigrate nurses at all - but nurses are nurses and physicians are physicians. And engineers are engineers, but liberal-arts educated “customer service engineers” are “customer service representatives”. That is the reality of life. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/33 "2000-09-21T23:21:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > > \*\*It’s my understanding that in the aerospace area, customer service ‘engineers’ often actually ARE engineers, or at least they have an engineering degree. > > \*\* > > Unless I’m missing something here, your example is not contrary to my point of view. They have, as you say, an engineering degree - that satisfies one of the two major points of my qualification. The second thing is licensure - well, I said earlier that the two groups (PE’s and non-PE’s) should come together to settle on a better way of licensure such that degreed, trained engineers are the ones using that legal term to describe their profession. > > Note - I’m not arguing with degreed engineers. I’m arguing with people with no engineering degree who call themselves engineers. The licensure is a side issue, necessary IMO to help establish the identity of the profession. > > > [@](#): > > > > **Anthracite, I sense that you’re getting a little huffy about the whole thing.** > > I’ve explained my viewpoint. I’m sorry if you see it that way. > > > [@](#): > > > > **Sure we may chuckle at the above-mentioned ‘sheet metal engineers’, but in any PRACTICAL context of any kind, is ANYONE ever going to confuse an auto body-worker with an > > electrical engineer?** > > > [@](#): > > > > No, but imagine a “sheet metal engineer” (a.k.a. body shop gal) being consulted on a building site because they need an expert in sheet metal construction. Or imagine a very skilled RC aircraft builder advertising themselves as an Aerospace Engineer. > > Well, I agree…but I can’t imagine that happening. Wouldn’t the client insist on seeing the “engineer’s” credentials? > > > [@](#): > > > > **These examples are ridiculous. The words ‘doctor’ and ‘attorney’ connote not only licenses, but also a body of > > work and knowledge.** > > > [@](#): > > > > And Engineering is _not_ a body of work and knowledge? > > Of course it is! I only suggested that the general public > probably has less understanding of the work of engineers than they do of other professions. I meant to imply that > this probably faciliates the kind of fakery and misrepresentation we do see among people like your sheetmetal people, sanitation engineers, etc. > > > [@](#): > > > > **We all know, pretty much, what doctors and attorneys do. No one would call a CS rep ‘doctor’ or ‘attorney’ because they do not treat you or represent you before a judge. By the same token you’d never call a doctor a “physiological engineer”.** > > Well, I cannot help that our Lawyercentric and Journalistcentric society openly mocks and denigrates my profession into near meaninglessness. Such that when I go to speak to students about what I do, NO ONE knows what the hell an engineer does. But they all know what doctors do, from watching _ER_ (my SO is a doctor - ER is so laughably unrealistic it should be on Mystery Science Theatre 3000), and they all know what lawyers do, from watching _Ally Mc Beal_ (yes, they do gymnastic routines in their unisex bathroom :rolleyes: ) > \*\* I agree that programs like Ally McBeal and ER present inaccurately the reality of those professional’s working lives, but in terms of the OBJECT of those professions, simply stated, I think they are reasonably accurate. > [@](#): > > **But if a CS rep really needs to have training and experience similar to that of the engineers over in the design department, then who can deny that he is applying engineering knowledge on a daily basis in his work? And if he has a degree to boot, then how dare anyone deny him the title?** > [@](#): > > I don’t believe I ever said an engineering degreed person was not an engineer. Refer please to my second post in this thread, where I would put these persons into category “2”, meaning that they could be licensed if they had to be or chose to. In your example here, I think you are missing my point. O.K., I did misunderstand. I thought Category 2, in your view, could ASPIRE to engineerhood by passing the exam, but by only having the degree they were not yet really engineers. > [@](#): > > And “applying engineering knowledge” does NOT mean you are an engineer, professionally speaking. Any more than working as a nurse means you are a physician. > > Not to denigrate nurses at all - but nurses are nurses and physicians are physicians. Nor would I call a nurse a doctor, but I don’t think you can draw the parallel too closely here. By ancient tradition, doctors and nurses bear their distinct titles based more or less on the amount of education they have. That’s just the way it is. But among engineers, it seems that there are competent engineers in the world with engineering degrees at all three levels. And that’s the way that is. > [@](#): > > And engineers are engineers, but liberal-arts educated “customer service engineers” are “customer service representatives”. That is the reality of life. \*\* And now I must get back to my programming…or whatever it is I think I do, since I haven’t got a degree in it! Guess I’ve been faking it for 14 years. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2000, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/34 "2000-09-21T23:53:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > \*\*And now I must get back to my programming…or whatever it is I think I do, since I haven’t got a degree in it! Guess I’ve been faking it for 14 years. \*\* Now who’s being huffy! If I haven’t mentioned it yet in another thread, I’ll do so now. Computer programmers IMO are in a peculiar set of circumstances, due to the relative newness of their field. I think as a profession it is in a state of serious flux. My situation with Engineering is also being seen in Computer Science as well - degreed and non-degreed CS people working side-by-side, each able to do an excellent job, for equal pay. Who is the programmer? Why did that person waste so much time in school getting his Masters in CS, when a High-School graduate makes the same or more? This is a situation actually happening where I work, and many degreed programmers are starting to get militant about it. (note that although I have written honestly more than 1.3 million lines of code in my career, I never refer to myself as a programmer. I was not trained or degreed as a programmer, and thus am not worthy of the title (and the higher pay) ) I think programming as a profession should also pursue a more strict regulation of the term programmer, to try and set standards for their profession as well. Doesn’t it irk you when a 14-year old HTML hack calls themselves a “programmer”? And can actually sell their services as one? ---
**Author:** ![Arjuna34](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Arjuna34](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arjuna34)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/35 "2000-09-22T05:37:05Z")
The public has only a vague idea of what an engineer is BECAUSE so many different types of people call themselves engineers. When asked what I do, I tell people I’m an “electrical engineer” instead of just “engineer”, partly to pin down that I mean a “real” engineer. BTW, I’ve got a four-year degree (and master’s degree) in electrical engineering, but no PE. Arjuna34 ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/36 "2000-09-22T12:22:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried \* > \*\*Well, inspired by this thread, I am asking for backers in my inititative to have moderators renamed as “SDMB engineers.” 😃 \*\* Maybe you can use this one: social engineer. Social engineering has a long and colorful history. I got 20000 hits off altavista–Tokyo Institute of Technology has a Social Engineering _Department_. O yeh– **Kyberneticist** , I integrate over discontinuous functions all the time, and I was a math major. ---
**Author:** ![Kyberneticist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dc4da7/32.png) [@Kyberneticist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyberneticist)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/37 "2000-09-22T14:35:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RM Mentock \* > > O yeh– **Kyberneticist** , I integrate over discontinuous functions all the time, and I was a math major. \*\* I’d be interested in seeing under what circumstances you could possibly justify that! 😮 ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/38 "2000-09-22T14:36:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by javaman \* > > \*\*And now I must get back to my programming…or whatever it is I think I do, since I haven’t got a degree in it! Guess I’ve been faking it for 14 years. \*\* > > Now who’s being huffy!. > > \*\* You nailed me, man. It was the toward the end of a long day. \*\* > [@](#): > > If I haven’t mentioned it yet in another thread, I’ll do so now. Computer programmers IMO are in a peculiar set of circumstances, due to the relative newness of their field. I think as a profession it is in a state of serious flux. My situation with Engineering is also being seen in Computer Science as well - degreed and non-degreed CS people working side-by-side, each able to do an excellent job, for equal pay. Who is the programmer? Why did that person waste so much time in school getting his Masters in CS, when a High-School graduate makes the same or more? > \*\* True…but I have rarely encountered the programmer who doesn’t have at least some sort of degree, though there are exceptions. I did know one very skilled programmer, and I don’t mean just a coder, who only had a high school education. He had a very high opinion of himself, but be that as it may, he was so good that if even if he was half as good as he SAID he was, then he was still very good indeed. In my case, I don’t have a CS degree, but I only got into the field by reason of the job I was in at the time, which required a different type of degree. I have a master’s degree in librarianship and was working as a subject indexer. I discovered that I liked building the system itself better than working on its content, and had the opportunity to switch over to programming. After that, with each job change, I moved further way from the library field. Actually I regret not having taken a degree in CS in the first place, since it would have been more appropriate in my case, but that’s more from the POV of personal fulfullment. I don’t consider myself any less of a programmer. I understand most of the underlying mathematical concepts, though I rarely have to use them. \*\* > [@](#): > > This is a situation actually happening where I work, and many degreed programmers are starting to get militant about it. (note that although I have written honestly more than 1.3 million lines of code in my career, I never refer to myself as a programmer. I was not trained or degreed as a programmer, and thus am not worthy of the title (and the higher pay) ) > > I think programming as a profession should also pursue a more strict regulation of the term programmer, to try and set standards for their profession as well. Doesn’t it irk you when a 14-year old HTML hack calls themselves a “programmer”? And can actually sell their services as one? \*\* It would depend on what the kid actually did. I don’t know HTML myself, but from what I’ve heard it’s really just a way of making web pages, and doesn’t involve a process of real analysis. So yeah, in that type of situation it does irk me. But if anyone at any age produces a truly elegant piece of code then I’d consider him a programmer. If he’s only 14 like in your example, then he’s probably already so focused that he will get a degree in CS or a related field. You’re right about terminology, and the programming field has suffered from this from the very beginning. Some sort of licensure procedure might well be in order, but I believe that such licensure should be based on testing, and not on what one studied in school. For programming, I can see where a hiring manager would want to limit newbie jobs to someone just out of a CS program, but for more experienced people it just doesn’t make that much difference. I’ve been hired more than once by people who said they wouldn’t consider a non-CS-degreed programmer for a trainee job, but obviously didn’t care about that wrt more experienced people with a track record. But I do agree with you pretty much wrt engineers. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/39 "2000-09-22T17:18:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyberneticist \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by RM Mentock \* > > > > O yeh– **Kyberneticist** , I integrate over discontinuous functions all the time, and I was a math major. \*\* > > I’d be interested in seeing under what circumstances you could possibly justify that! 😮 \*\* Well, you know, I was young and foolish. In the line at registration, and everybody’s pushing and shoving and someone wants to know what major and … oh The [Reimann integral](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannIntegral.html) may have some problems with it, but (that link to the contrary) integration of discontinuous functions are encountered in physics (the Dirac delta function) and engineering (the step function) all the time. The [Riemann-Stieltjes integral](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/StieltjesIntegral.html) handles such discontinuities easily, and the [Lebesgue integral](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LebesgueIntegral.html) will allow integration even over totally discontinuous functions (nowhere continuous, like f(x)=1 if x is irrational, and f(x)=0 if x is rational). The Stieltjes and Lebesgue definitions are usually encountered in higher level math analysis classes. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2000, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746/40 "2000-09-22T17:47:36Z")
Anthracite, I meant to ask you about the above comment. I just don’t see this happening. Yes it’s true that there are lots of unqualified people calling themselves ‘engineers’. And it does cause some confusion about the work you do. But anyone who can tell their you-know what from a hole in the ground knows better. Real engineers are pretty much the architects of all the features and conveniences of modern life that surround us. Like I said, I for one have tremendous respect for that, bordering on awe. I think anyone else who understands that must harbor similar opinions. But the others, the ones who think a garbage collector is a sanitation engineer, I don’t think it matters too much what they think. But I think most of the people whose opinion really matters know the difference. Brief aside: Within the civil engineering field isn’t there actually a subspecialty practiced by genuine ‘Sanitation engineers’–designing waste treatment systems, sewage systems, etc. I truly feel their pain! End of aside: So yeah, we do have a lot of ignorant yahoos running around…but a concerted effort to denigrate engineers? I don’t think so. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/engineering-license/31746.md?page=3)