Engineers
I've noticed that people with engineering degrees seem to perform well in a number of professions unrelated to engineering and in general are pretty employable. I've wondered for a while why this is. Does it have something to do with what people learn in engineering school or is it the type of people who enter engineering school?
Some might say that the reason is that engineers learn "useful things" in school, whereas people in other areas deal mostly with abstract concepts (I believe Tom was of this opinion). However, looking back on undergrad I really didn't learn much that was useful (ie stuff that I can see myself needing that I couldn't have picked up on my own if need be at work). During my summer with Lockheed I only directly used stuff I learned in engin 101 (Matlab programming) and physics 240 (intro E&M (technically I probably used stuff I learned in 405, but I think I only needed a 240 understanding to do what I did)). Plus, these allegedly useful skills are useless if say an electrical engineer decides to go to med school to become a surgeon (I know people doing that).
Another thought is that engineers are somehow smarter than other people. My hunch is that this is not generally true, although engineering is arguably harder than many other majors so it might attract people who are willing to work harder. If it was the hard working aspect, then I would expect people to be using archetecture programs as pre-med or pre-law majors as some people do with engineering (I generally consider archetecture students to be the hardest working, simply due to the incredible amount of work they have to do).
My guess is that engineers typically assume that there is an attainable solution to every problem and therefore aren't intimidated by complex problems and issues. A complex problem is usually nothing more than a series of simple problems, you just need to have faith that the solutions to the simple problems lead to the overall solution. Engineers do problem set after problem set where every problem has an answer. Most programs end with a senior design where you design a soluiton for a problem. I think this outlook leaks into everyday life. At least personally, I know that when someone comes to me with a personal problem, my first instinct is to give them advice on how to fix it. Many times they're just looking for someone to vent to, but I automatically jump into solution mode asking them why they haven't tried various things. Although it might not work well in a personal setting I think this mindset is beneficial in many careers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and here is where my train of thought dies. I actually have this problem alot. I toy around with an idea while I'm taking a shower (I do alot of my best thinking while showering) but by the time I get done and start writing things don't fall into place like I expect them to. I don't know if the problem is that as I'm writing the stuff at the begininng the stuff towards the end of the train of thoughts gets lost or if while floating around unstructured in my mind the ideas seem to work better than they do in a (slightly) organized written form. I think I need to start writing the conclusion first while it is fresh in my mind and then I can write up all the boilerplate intro stuff afterwards.
This post was supposed to be entirely about engineering an seeing solutions but I got too caught up in the reasons I believe are false for explaining the flexibility of an engineering degree. By the time I got to the part I wanted to write about in the first place I felt like I had run out of steam.
Sidenote: Notice how I proposed a solution (starting with the conclusion first) to my problem just after (poorly and inexactly) defining it.
Some might say that the reason is that engineers learn "useful things" in school, whereas people in other areas deal mostly with abstract concepts (I believe Tom was of this opinion). However, looking back on undergrad I really didn't learn much that was useful (ie stuff that I can see myself needing that I couldn't have picked up on my own if need be at work). During my summer with Lockheed I only directly used stuff I learned in engin 101 (Matlab programming) and physics 240 (intro E&M (technically I probably used stuff I learned in 405, but I think I only needed a 240 understanding to do what I did)). Plus, these allegedly useful skills are useless if say an electrical engineer decides to go to med school to become a surgeon (I know people doing that).
Another thought is that engineers are somehow smarter than other people. My hunch is that this is not generally true, although engineering is arguably harder than many other majors so it might attract people who are willing to work harder. If it was the hard working aspect, then I would expect people to be using archetecture programs as pre-med or pre-law majors as some people do with engineering (I generally consider archetecture students to be the hardest working, simply due to the incredible amount of work they have to do).
My guess is that engineers typically assume that there is an attainable solution to every problem and therefore aren't intimidated by complex problems and issues. A complex problem is usually nothing more than a series of simple problems, you just need to have faith that the solutions to the simple problems lead to the overall solution. Engineers do problem set after problem set where every problem has an answer. Most programs end with a senior design where you design a soluiton for a problem. I think this outlook leaks into everyday life. At least personally, I know that when someone comes to me with a personal problem, my first instinct is to give them advice on how to fix it. Many times they're just looking for someone to vent to, but I automatically jump into solution mode asking them why they haven't tried various things. Although it might not work well in a personal setting I think this mindset is beneficial in many careers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and here is where my train of thought dies. I actually have this problem alot. I toy around with an idea while I'm taking a shower (I do alot of my best thinking while showering) but by the time I get done and start writing things don't fall into place like I expect them to. I don't know if the problem is that as I'm writing the stuff at the begininng the stuff towards the end of the train of thoughts gets lost or if while floating around unstructured in my mind the ideas seem to work better than they do in a (slightly) organized written form. I think I need to start writing the conclusion first while it is fresh in my mind and then I can write up all the boilerplate intro stuff afterwards.
This post was supposed to be entirely about engineering an seeing solutions but I got too caught up in the reasons I believe are false for explaining the flexibility of an engineering degree. By the time I got to the part I wanted to write about in the first place I felt like I had run out of steam.
Sidenote: Notice how I proposed a solution (starting with the conclusion first) to my problem just after (poorly and inexactly) defining it.