7
0

STEM is not culturally prestigious


 invite response                
2015 Aug 12, 5:18pm   22,622 views  56 comments

by Rin   ➕follow (8)   💰tip   ignore  

Why is it, that ppl try to make STEM education and its careers look prestigious to the naive of the world?

What the popular press seems to fail at, is delineating the fact that Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Steve Jobs are owners of intellectual properties and corporations. In other words, those who log their hours at those places, a.k.a the STEM employees, don't own the rights to any of their work.

So what happens is that then, the media confuses the likes of a Steve Jobs with that of a neurosurgeon, prop trader, or investment banker and thus, STEM is depicted as both, lucrative and prestigious. In reality, it's quite the opposite.

The prestige of STEM is mainly limited to the academy where you get the *oo, aah* of those who're impressed that someone could take Complex Variables, Thermodynamics, Transport Phenomena, and Circuit Analysis, all in one semester. Once the days of the academy are over, it's actually the reverse.

At my hedge fund, we have one so-called *intellectual*, he's a senior partner with both, an MBA from Columbia and a post-graduate Masters of Law from London.

Sure, there's this former engineering person who calls himself a *quantitative analyst* but in reality, no one sees him as an intellectual at gatherings, but more as an overeducated geek. At these functions, no one gives a rat's ass about what he does for a living. He's a nerd.

The MBA/LLM senior partner, however, is able to schmooze around with his knowledge of intellectual property issues, differences between the EU and US, and all that legal/political science jazz, making himself look worldly, cool, and an intellectual, all at once. Yes, he's "the professor" of the firm and as always made an impression as such. If he were an engineer, however, would his discourse on Statistical Thermodynamics rouse the attention of the crowd? No, ppl would grow bored an put a "nerd" label on him. You see, the world doesn't give a rat's about STEM education.

Comments 1 - 40 of 56       Last »     Search these comments

1   Strategist   2015 Aug 12, 5:40pm  

Rin says

Why is it, that ppl try to make STEM education and its careers look prestigious to the naive of the world?

More money. More job prospects.

2   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 6:02pm  

Strategist says

Rin says

Why is it, that ppl try to make STEM education and its careers look prestigious to the naive of the world?

More money. More job prospects.

Yes, in Asia-Pacific.

3   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 6:04pm  

Rin says

The MBA/LLM senior partner, however, is able to schmooze around with his knowledge of intellectual property issues, differences between the EU and US, and all that legal/political science jazz, making himself look worldly, cool, and an intellectual, all at once. Yes, he's "the professor" of the firm and as always made an impression as such. If he were an engineer, however, would his discourse on Statistical Thermodynamics rouse the attention of the crowd? No, ppl would grow bored an put a "nerd" label on him. You see, the world doesn't give a rat's about STEM education.

This guy is blowing smoke at ppl's faces for two reasons ... one, he's making a mint as a founding partner of a hedge fund, and two, that he's got some hoity-toity education which makes him look cultured and intelligent.

You see, engineers can't create the above in our society. Engineers, in contrast, are losers.

4   MisdemeanorRebel   2015 Aug 12, 6:28pm  

Steve Jobs was a Dee-sigh-ner. "Deesighners, let me see your new beveled cases. Oh, don't you think this is a little too much for Fashion Week? This one is too fierce. Marci, this one is wayyyy too dated, this isn't 1980 anymore, sunshine. Now, about the MacBook Pro. I think brushed Aluminium is the shade of silver we should shoot for..."

Compare how teachers are worshiped in Asia, with how they are treated here. And because Teaching is a low prestige job, the best and brightest don't go for it, so a vicious cycle begins. Nothing brings out the morons than a proposed raise for educators.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/170822/believe-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx?ref=image

5   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 6:33pm  

thunderlips11 says

Steve Jobs was a Dee-sigh-ner.

I believe he was a calligrapher, the founder of the so-called *fonts* in graphical user interfaces.

If I recall, that was the essence of his farewell address to Stanford

https://www.youtube.com/embed/D1R-jKKp3NA

6   Shaman   2015 Aug 12, 7:14pm  

It may be the techies who make our modern life possible, but it's the grace that comes with an artistic sensibility that makes life elegant and pleasant. This is why people go for classic cars, antique furniture, and even vintage appliances. Something made pleasing to the eye and mind brings pleasure to the user, regardless of the tech level. That is the contribution Jobs made with Apple. He insisted that it be both user friendly and artistic, so the products would appeal to people at a natural level.
That's why strict nerds and geeks aren't ever going to be popular or respected. They're rejecting their natural side in favor of a technological sophistication that feels wrong to other people because it lacks any semblance of grace.

7   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 7:35pm  

Quigley says

it's the grace that comes with an artistic sensibility that makes life elegant and pleasant. This is why people go for classic cars, antique furniture, and even vintage appliances. Something made pleasing to the eye and mind brings pleasure to the user, regardless of the tech level.

Quigley says

That's why strict nerds and geeks aren't ever going to be popular or respected.

All right, I get all of the above, however, why is it that a rich guy in finance, with a Masters of Law (LLM) from the Univ of London, considered a *cultural intellectual*, whereas some former engineer, who's now a quantitative analyst, considered a dweeb/nerd by mainstreamers?

The rich partner, with his Columbia and London degrees, is simply a schmoozer, a big time pretender, but that international largesse in legal studies makes him a true scholar (plus rich dude), you know ... the classic Anglo-American gentleman, whereas the former engineer is seen as a loser, without all the expensive cars to make up for his nerdy background.

8   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 7:39pm  

Rin says

whereas the former engineer is seen as a loser, without all the expensive cars to make up for his nerdy background.

Sure, he can buy the cars and wear the suits, but he's still trying to compensate for something lacking culturally.

And no, this has nothing to do with his penis size, but the fact that ppl don't see his educational value outside of the academy.

9   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 7:43pm  

FYI, for the record, no one with a successful career is considered a loser in America. That's partly why America is a greater nation than its counterparts in Europe. Anyone who starts with little but makes a good life for himself, has some respect in America.

I'm more talking about ppl's behavior within the up and coming social circles, not the basics of the American dream.

10   mell   2015 Aug 12, 7:46pm  

Rin says

So what happens is that then, the media confuses the likes of a Steve Jobs with that of a neurosurgeon, prop trader, or investment banker and thus, STEM is depicted as both, lucrative and prestigious. In reality, it's quite the opposite.

In reality and on average SW/HW engineering jobs are fairly lucrative (compared to the boom and bust of a prop trader). Most won't become super-wealthy, but they have a stable job and life. Of course those who make it in the field of finance will be mostly wealthier. But there are plenty of engineers who make a lot of money with options and shares during their companies ascent and those who don't like the fact that they don't own their work will run side projects and eventually start their own business.. I wouldn't paint it as the greatest job as no job were you sit a lot is particularly healthy (need a lot of workout to balance), but it's really a good way to earn more than a living. I don't know about prestigious, you have to be a really good coder for that, but most nerds don't care about that anyways, well because they are nerds - don't have to love em or hate em.

11   mell   2015 Aug 12, 7:54pm  

Rin says

All right, I get all of the above, however, why is it that a rich guy in finance, with a Masters of Law (LLM) from the Univ of London, considered a *cultural intellectual*, whereas some former engineer, who's now a quantitative analyst, considered a dweeb/nerd by mainstreamers?

Most male nerds don't exude an aura of power or masculinity, or they ride bicycles and wear shoddy clothes though they could afford better, and they often don't workout that much so they lack the workout body and grace. Men strive for power, masculinity and money and women strive for these men. Also women love professions such as doctors/EMTs or cops because they feel protected and taken care of, nerds certainly don't have that edge. However if you are in the coding field it is relatively easy to stand out if you work on your body and mind and know a lot (culture etc.) outside of the engineering realm. It will give you a real edge if you are the coder that's "different" and masculine. Don't talk about work and you'll do fine.

12   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 8:33pm  

mell says

Rin says

All right, I get all of the above, however, why is it that a rich guy in finance, with a Masters of Law (LLM) from the Univ of London, considered a *cultural intellectual*, whereas some former engineer, who's now a quantitative analyst, considered a dweeb/nerd by mainstreamers?

However if you are in the coding field it is relatively easy to stand out if you work on your body and mind and know a lot (culture etc.) outside of the engineering realm. It will give you a real edge if you are the coder that's "different" and masculine. Don't talk about work and you'll do fine.

I think you're missing the point. Sure, a guy can be a bodybuilder/triathlete, public speaker, international cuisine chef, stage magician, classical pianist, and perform all kinds of attention gathering activities, to be seen as *happening*, but that's not the issue here. The issue is that the aforementioned guy is basically hiding the fact that when he's not being a cultural circus act, he's spending 50+ hrs/wk, working as a loser/dweeb/nerd in some back office.

In contrast, the Columbia MBA/London Law hedge fund partner doesn't have to be some circus freak, to get respect. Sure, he's on the phone and spends a lot of time in meetings during the week, but let's get real, is that really something amazing? And yet, even during those meetings, his knowledge of legal precedence and all that stuff, has ppl listening to him. It's not just about getting women to pay attention, men also pay him some homage for his educational background. In contrast, that engineer with a circus show portfolio, is some nerd with a culturally compensatory circus show, to make up for the fact that as an engineer, he's society's bitch and not some winner.

13   mell   2015 Aug 12, 8:47pm  

Rin says

The issue is that the aforementioned guy is basically, hiding the fact that when he's not being a cultural circus act, he's spending 50+ hrs/wk, working as a loser/dweeb/nerd in some back office.

Most people I know who make more also work longer hours than the dweeb. A lot of dweebs don't want to travel and they like being listened to by fellow nerds when they give talks at conferences. I agree in the sense that although they make significant money, they usually don't know how to market themselves and most could make much much more if they are good. But if you give them their favorite OS they are usually happy.

Rin says

And yet, even during those meetings, his knowledge of legal prescience and all that stuff, has ppl listening to him. It's not just about getting women to pay attention, men also pay him some homage for his educational background. In contrast, that engineer with a circus show portfolio, is some nerd with a culturally compensatory circus show, to make up for the fact that as an engineer, he's society's bitch and not some winner.

They have to go the entrepreneurial route if they want to stop being regarded as working for the man. I'm not sure if the homage paid by men is really higher, if you read patnet forums you will get the impression that most are not impressed with lawyers or financial people. I do think that a neurosurgeon probably has the highest status, if your focus isn't purely on the money. Not everybody can go into finance or law and many modern day MBAs work their ass off at marketing giants for $30/hr just to get some accolades. You may have found a good entry in your case and that's all good and well, but those seats are limited. It's not all skill, you have to be at the right the place the right time and have enough social intelligence and instinct to seize the opportunity. Plus many techies are borderline autistic or may have other ailments that may not make them fit for preforming in front of others or hour long meetings with lots of interpersonal communication.

14   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 9:08pm  

mell says

I'm not sure if the homage paid by men is really higher, if you read patnet forums you will get the impression that most are not impressed with lawyers or financial people. I do think that a neurosurgeon probably has the highest status,

I think you're not understanding the essence of my case here. Sure, neurosurgeons, with their highly selective process and 8 year residency programs plus $500K+/yr average salaries, are clearly regarded, whether or not they can communicate with anyone, outside of the OR. These characters can be the biggest nerds in history and they'll get some respect.

The point is that the fact that if someone is making money, let's say he's a hedge fund partner with a London law degree, a hotel manager with a similar accolade, or even John Kerry (ex-Boston Brahman married into money) appears to be more culturally relevant than an engineer. The reason why our senior partner with the LLM is *the professor* whereas the quant/engineer is the dweeb (loser/bozo/what-have-you) is that society sees a person who can talk about legal/political science stuff, provided that he's got some bank (and isn't just some student), of value whereas the engineer is just that, an engineer, a.k.a dweeb/nerd/loser/etc.

15   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 9:50pm  

Rin says

John Kerry (ex-Boston Brahman married into money) appears to be more culturally relevant

Here's a perfect example, being a descendant of the primary founder of the city of Boston, John Winthrop, John Kerry was at best, a trust fund bozo, whose families monies had more or less, paid for his education (and travels) but didn't let him live at large until he'd married into the Heinz family.

Still, the fact that despite being a lousy student at Yale undergrad, his eventual law degree, allowed him to portray himself as some intellectual even though his senatorial career was lackluster, under the tarp of Ted Kennedy's reign as MA's forever senator.

If instead, Kerry had buckled down and gotten himself let's say an engineering degree from perhaps, Worcester Polytechnic, by actually doing some real work, would anyone have cared? Would he have been touted as the technically scholastic senator? The man to carry forth ... Gore's vision of the internet?

You see, STEM work doesn't matter culturally. Even President Carter, a former Navy nuclear engineer, was never lauded for his achievements in that area, despite that program being one of the most demanding STEM programs in America in terms of responsibilities and training. Instead, Carter's considered a hick, peanut farmer, prior to becoming Governor and President. John Kerry doesn't have a snow ball's chance of hell of ever passing such a program and yet, he's a pseudo-intellectual. Admiral Rickover would have kicked Kerry out of that school during the first week.

16   Rin   2015 Aug 12, 10:28pm  

Rin says

John Kerry doesn't have a snow ball's chance of hell of ever passing such a program and yet, he's a pseudo-intellectual. Admiral Rickover would have kicked Kerry out of that school during the first week.

Actually, nevermind Kerry, all of the clowns, Gore, Bush(es), Reagan, would have flunked out of the Navy power school. Seriously, aside from perhaps Nixon and maybe Clinton, if he's good at math (not just BS-ing essays), could pass such a program.

And yet, aside from Carter, you don't see engineering students going into politics. They're mainly law graduates or law flunkies, as in the case of Al Gore, who's too stupid or lazy to pass even that program.

17   Heraclitusstudent   2015 Aug 12, 10:37pm  

So what you care about is: money, how people at social gathering will see you (even if you don't like them), and whether your job is "culturally prestigious".
Your references are all wrong. These are exactly the things you shouldn't care about. These are the things that are culturally wrong in the US.

I recommend to study Buddhism, give up all worldly possessions and to go live in a forest wearing nothing but a yellow gown.

18   Tenpoundbass   2015 Aug 13, 7:18am  

Now they want to add Arts so it would be STEAM.

I told you all that programming was not much different than scrap booking.

19   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 7:33am  

Heraclitusstudent says

These are the things that are culturally wrong in the US.

What's culturally wrong is that Admiral Rickover's philosophy (the father of the US Navy Nuclear fleet) is only admired by those in STEM-academia and Annapolis but not by mainstreamers. Yes, Rickover expected nothing less than the best efforts from his Navy engineers.

Thus, after Jimmy Carter had performed a rescue/cleanup operation of the Chalk River meltdown during his career with the navy, was he remembered for his Rickover-like heroics up in Ontario? No, he was remembered as a peanut farmer.

http://nuclear-energy.net/nuclear-accidents/chalk-river.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/jimmy-neutron-ex-president-carter-recalls-role-in-chalk-river-meltdown/article614379/

So yes, when mainstreamers care about bozos like John Kerry, (I mean seriously, how many ppl can say that their ancestors were the founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony), when his main accomplishment was not flunking out of Yale and BC law, then there's something not right.

Heraclitusstudent says

I recommend to study Buddhism, give up all worldly possessions and to go live in a forest wearing nothing but a yellow gown.

You mean like how the Dalai Lama raised $2M, hosting his 80th birthday over a three day weekend? Yeah right, him and Richard Gere have really convinced me of their detachments and humble ways of living. If anything, the global spokespersons for Buddhism are the biggest status seekers of them all. At least John Kerry admits that he was born fortunate.

And don't tell me that you too live in the woods like a Grizzly Adams. I suspect that you also live in a dwelling, not too distinct from an apartment or a house, just like everyone else in society.

20   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 7:46am  

Rin says

Yeah right, him and Richard Gere have really convinced me of their detachments and humble ways of living

BTW, I'd also heard that when Gere was feeling lonely, the Dalai Lama had hooked him up with Padma Lakshmi. Hmm ... wasn't the karmic/spiritual/educational purpose of a breakup, an exercise in learning detachment?

Seriously, if this is modern Buddhism in action, I'd prefer the worldly & materialistic candor of the Kardashians over these hypocrites any day.

21   MisdemeanorRebel   2015 Aug 13, 9:20am  

Damn, there was a great thread on here Rin, with footage of Buddhist Monks fighting each other across Asia, usually about future leaders, electricity, benefits, etc. YouTube is full of drunken, looting, fighting, burning, fornicating Orange Robes.

22   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 9:43am  

thunderlips11 says

Buddhist Monks fighting each other across Asia, usually about future leaders, electricity, benefits, etc. YouTube is full of drunken, looting, fighting, burning, fornicating Orange Robes.

Yeah, in essence, I believe that many of these so-called spiritual seekers, are really those who don't want to work or contribute anything of meaning. And thus, the monastery system is just a way of codifying their existence as being apart from the world, when they're very much a part of it, but w/o needing to earn a regular paycheck.

At least before I become an independent scientist, I plan on banking my retirement, instead of expecting a handout from some parishioners.

23   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 9:46am  

Rin says

At least before I become an independent scientist, I plan on banking my retirement, instead of expecting a handout from some parishioners.

And yes, along with my Medical Doctorate (MD), I may have to get myself a Masters of Law (LLM), so that I get invited to John Kerry's parties on Beacon Hill.

24   HydroCabron   2015 Aug 13, 10:43am  

Rin says

I believe that many of these so-called spiritual seekers, are really those who don't want to work or contribute anything of meaning.

I have no idea whether there are actually any enlightened people in the world - I tend to doubt it. There may be a few actual Buddhists here and there, but by the very definition of that concept, you'll never see or hear from them. Richard Gere and Dalai Lama aren't among them.

Mendicant monks are living off society, but so are you and I: we both work for system-gaming rent seekers. The main difference between us and the monks is that the monks are less of a burden on society. A very few of the monks give something back. Ajahn Sumedho has changed a lot of people's lives for the better (including mine, which is interesting because I'm not remotely Buddhist) through his writings on the constant daydreaming and yearning for transformation the human mind is prone to, and which western religion and schooling does so little to confront.

Considering the extreme unlikelihood of unusual talent in the arts or sciences - and the unusually talented are those who do virtually all of the meaningful research - your retirement to your mountaintop/island laboratory will almost certainly result in nothing positive for society. Essentially you will be a Buddhist monk who cost society quite a bit more.

I don't see anything wrong with that, but it's puzzling, given your profession and intended retirement, that you find Buddhist monks to be so contemptible, since what the rest of us are doing also has nothing to do with reality.

25   1knifecatcher   2015 Aug 13, 11:19am  

Rin - You may be right about finance law types, but that was before. I think they're more or less looked at as being predatorial by a lot of people these days. I believe folks in rent seeking professions will have a major credibility problem going forward as it becomes more apparent that doing the right thing in their profession is not only against their interest, but also their business model, which BTW is why I don't like Cloud.

With regard to intellectual type, my observation has been that in order to be regarded as an intellectual, you need supporters who will blow your horn. While these intellectuals may say a few interesting facts, you will see that the people who are most impressed are often from a similar pedigree, and that is what matters most. And it is the same everywhere. They work as a cabal, much like realtors. An engineer, bozo, designer needs space and time to produce something, but an intellectual bozo will only produce in the company of others, and that is a big difference.

26   Heraclitusstudent   2015 Aug 13, 12:57pm  

Rin says

You mean like how the Dalai Lama raised $2M, hosting his 80th birthday over a three day weekend?

So the only way you understand yourself is by comparing you to other people?

27   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 12:57pm  

HydroCabron says

Considering the extreme unlikelihood of unusual talent in the arts or sciences - and the unusually talented are those who do virtually all of the meaningful research - your retirement to your mountaintop/island laboratory will almost certainly result in nothing positive for society. Essentially you will be a Buddhist monk who cost society quite a bit more.

Tesla died poor. In the past, only those who're independently wealthy, like Lavoisier (father of modern chemistry) or Maxwell (electromagnetism), were able to do their own work w/o the corporate machinery.

At the same time, I didn't pursue the officer track of the Navy Nuclear program, where a senior officer could retire in his early 40s, if he got a few promotions along the road.

HydroCabron says

I don't see anything wrong with that, but it's puzzling, given your profession and intended retirement, that you find Buddhist monks to be so contemptible, since what the rest of us are doing also has nothing to do with reality.

My career ends circa 2016 and thus, my footprint in the world of BS is short-lived.

Monks and spiritual types tend to go on forever with their malarkey, Some of those monks are like a form of Heraclitusstudent, spouting contradictions about not seeking prestige or power but then seeking it through manipulating others, talking about detachment but thinking about romantic relationships. And then, playing the victim card (simultaneously blaming those who don't adhere to their BS) whenever convenient. In essence, I see Buddhist monks as the alm seeking version of the modern armchair liberal feminist.

If I want to meditate, that's what my bedroom is for. And it's paid for.

28   Heraclitusstudent   2015 Aug 13, 1:03pm  

Rin says

And don't tell me that you too live in the woods like a Grizzly Adams.

No but I'm not defining myself by money, social gathering or what is "culturally prestigious" like you are.
In your case, I recommend the yellow robe and the woods.

29   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 1:05pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

Rin says

You mean like how the Dalai Lama raised $2M, hosting his 80th birthday over a three day weekend?

So the only way you understand yourself is by comparing you to other people?

No, I'd never been able to raise $2M for myself over a weekend by hosting my own birthday party. The Lama and Gere have beaten me by a mile.

Plus, I don't advocate for a faux govt in exile, which had feudalism for 80+% of the population till the 1950s. Thunderlips can tell you all about it, as I'm already done talking you. Feudalism had ended in the 19th century for much of the world. Tibet's one of the few countries which kept it going indefinitely.

No, in fact, I understand myself a lot better than the Lama and Gere. I want to be financially independent, do my own research, enjoy fine foods/escorts, and sure, periodically attend parties and brag about my LLM studies with John Kerry's friends.

30   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 1:06pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

I recommend the yellow robe and the woods.

What for, Richard Gere's already got that BS job.

31   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 1:07pm  

BTW, I'm deleting the rest of Heraclitusstudent posts from here forth. He's proven himself to be a worthless troll and isn't wanted.

32   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 1:12pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

It's more like your curse.

That's right, you've transcended romantic relationships and have found jobs for postdocs/PhDs in the sciences.

33   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 1:16pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

so overwhelm by illusions

Nice try, the illusions are the ideas that you're detached from the world affecting you. Otherwise, you would have had zero emotional reaction to the threads on romantic relationships, STEM work in America, and a lot of other stuff.

No, you're attached. just like the monk who told the other monk about why he carried the woman across the river.

The other monk responds ... "I put her down on the other bank. You didn't carry her at all, but she is still on your back."

34   marcus   2015 Aug 13, 3:39pm  

I think I sort of understood where Heraclitusstudent was coming from, although he was blunt about it. But also, it wasn't really contradicting you.

I think his point was why Prestige ? There are many people who value knowledge and wisdom more than anything in life, not to mention technical skills, and yet have no interest in being seen as intellectually superior to others.

MY reaction was similar. The Prestige, that is what other people think of you, is not a good reason doing anything in life. Or at least many of us think it shouldn't be nearly ones highest priority. But money and material success certainly can be liberating, and that kind of liberation certainly has some prestige attached to it.

I do see some of the drawbacks of STEM. It's hard to count on career growth in middle age and beyond. But I could see that easily changing as many technologies mature, and as the tech world in general grows and matures.

Also, I take issue with the notion that tech nerds don't have good taste or appreciate beauty. I think the opposite is true and that there is a lot of diversity among engineers, such as say software developers.. Sure, Steve Jobs brought an aesthetic and design sense to personal computing and other tech gadgets. But that isn't that amazing. IT's really just a certain specific kind common sense he had, and was driven by. I'm not saying there was no genius to what he did, but in my view he was very much in the engineering realm. To talk about it as if he brought an aesthetic aspect into an engineering world that would normally have been deeply opposed to such considerations is just wrong.

In fact, in my opinion it was actually something that needed to happen, and that's why it was so well rewarded. If it weren't for Jobs, someone else would have pushed the aesthetic side of things (maybe not at the exact same time or the exact same ways).

35   Rin   2015 Aug 13, 4:12pm  

marcus says

The Prestige, that is what other people think of you, is not a good reason doing anything in life. Or at least many of us think it shouldn't be nearly ones highest priority. But money and material success certainly can be liberating, and that kind of liberation certainly has some prestige attached to it.

In my procession, the notion of cultural prestige, is after the money is accumulated, not before it. Sure, it's sometimes easy to mix and match but that's not the thing here. The prestige which Boston Brahmins like John Kerry get to enjoy, has a lot to do with his heritage/trust fund, plus the fact that he'd studied law and gets to tout himself as an intellectual despite being a completely mediocre student in every way.

marcus says

Also, I take issue with the notion that tech nerds don't have good taste or appreciate beauty. I think the opposite is true and that there is a lot of diversity among engineers, such as say software developers.. Sure, Steve Jobs brought an aesthetic and design sense to personal computing and other tech gadgets. But that isn't that amazing. IT's really just a certain specific kind common sense he had, and was driven by. I'm not saying there was no genius to what he did, but in my view he was very much in the engineering realm. To talk about it as if he brought an aesthetic aspect into an engineering world that would normally have been deeply opposed to such considerations is just wrong.

This is also another part of my gripe. Really, who cares about the aesthetics of a Jobs or really, anyone else out there. As a Navy nuclear engineer, President Carter had performed a task, far more daunting than getting the MAC to use more interesting fonts than courier.

In my Chalk River reactor meltdown example, Jimmy Carter had to put out a potential Fukushima scenario, developing a protocol to keep the workers safe from radiation sickness during the whole ordeal. Does anyone remember this? Or is it that ppl only remember that Carter couldn't stop inflation, the hostage situation in Iran, and was a peanut farmer?

You see, this is where I have a problem.

36   marcus   2015 Aug 13, 10:22pm  

HydroCabron says

I have no idea whether there are actually any enlightened people in the world - I tend to doubt it.

It's a relative term anyway, right ? If people practice techniques that improve their mindfulness or habits of mind, they are probably just seeking improvement or growth. Or perhaps they experience (or believe they experience) very brief momentary flashes of something that feels transcendent.

Disclosure: I am not one currently devoting much time with such practices, but I am familiar enough with them to understand how they work, and that most people involved with such practices don't expect to achieve enlightenment in the way that you define it.

37   zhaohuang   2015 Aug 13, 11:48pm  

Law and medicine are noted professions that have been around for 2000-3000 years. Large numbers of engineers in the modern computer geek sense have only been around for ~40-50 years max, and only really proliferated in the last 20 years. Hence, most of the population don't recognize their value or their economic prowess.

There about ~1 million lawyers in the U.S., ~1 million doctors -- ~500k programmers, 100k electrical engineers. How many nuclear engineers are there in the USA? ~10,000? NICHE. Even if you include other engineering types like civil/mechanical engineering (eg., bridges, railroads)), which have been around for ~100-200 years, engineers of all stripes added up have only attained the size of the law and medicine population recently. And this is only because of the recent growth of programmers in particular.

If you want respect for STEM, give it another 100 years -- it'll take that long for the general population to realize the economic prowess of engineers as a class.

Of course, this may not happen as we keep offshoring our engineer jobs to other countries so for the average American, studying Law or Medicine, the two service professions which is less offshoring, is a much better bet than studying STEM. Which is why, in grad school most STEM students are foreigners.

38   zhaohuang   2015 Aug 13, 11:57pm  

And BTW Rin, are you sure in your firm, the prestige of the 'quantitative analyst' and the 'law/finance' guy isn't just because one is a senior partner and the other more junior? As i said earlier, techies and tech companies are a relatively new thing. It's hard to imagine at a tech company created by a tech-orientated founder, Gates, Zuckerberg,...etc. STEM isn't valued. But plop up the yellowpages and how many tech companies do you actually find?

39   zhaohuang   2015 Aug 14, 12:01am  

Lastly, go to Asia or even Europe, where a good mind and STEM career is highly prestigious. It's only in cowboy America that its not. And once again, we're not too distant enough from our frontier origins to appreciate STEM. Give it some time. In the meantime, if you really want to challenge yourself, don't study medicine which is all alchemy and BS. Try physics or math.

40   Rin   2015 Aug 14, 6:26am  

zhaohuang says

Lastly, go to Asia or even Europe, where a good mind and STEM career is highly prestigious.

Yes, I concur with this, as Asia-Pacific is becoming the world capital for STEM work as time goes by. Soon, US institutes will have campuses there. I believe that the Univ of Chicago has already opened a satellite campus in Singapore. Others will follow in the decades ahead.

zhaohuang says

Of course, this may not happen as we keep offshoring our engineer jobs to other countries so for the average American, studying Law or Medicine, the two service professions which is less offshoring, is a much better bet than studying STEM. Which is why, in grad school most STEM students are foreigners.

In addendum to my theme here, the fact that STEM work is being continually offshored and the fact that now, over half the graduate students in USA STEM studies are international students, makes this area appear to be less prestigious to the American observer.

zhaohuang says

In the meantime, if you really want to challenge yourself, don't study medicine which is all alchemy and BS. Try physics or math.

The idea is to get the M.D., because one, it's considered a final degree (with a doctor title), which allows one to publish and present at conferences. And it's guaranteed to complete within 4 years whereas a PhD in chemistry, math, or some engineering area could last anywhere from 5 to 10 years. One can study those other areas on the side, once free time is available and one's not under the thumb of a principal advisor for an RA-ship.

zhaohuang says

the prestige of the 'quantitative analyst' and the 'law/finance' guy isn't just because one is a senior partner and the other more junior

Not really, because I'm also at a level, not too distinct from the so-called quant. I don't, however, ever talk about my work/educational titles. I simply reference my clients/customers and play on the social angle. The professor and I are seen as tight and thus, I'm his mini-me so while he's seen as the philosopher/professor, I'm seen as the guy who gets *it done*. If I decided to get an LLM on the side, as in a part-time program, and the prof and I bantered on about political and legal issues, we'd both be the firm's intellectuals. So it's a cultural thing, not an economic ladder ordering.

Comments 1 - 40 of 56       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions