-
4
- #1
Please, read this and send him e-mail.
Thanks.
Mike
Thanks.
Mike
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Tell him that he is wrong about Engineers. Send e-mail. 13
- Thread starter whymrg
- Start date
-
1
- #21
OK, my Engineer-Brothers, let's don't beat this dead horse anymore.
I, too, wrote Hall a rather caustic note and received his boiler-plate answer (no offense intended to any mechanicals out there).
He goofed and now realizes it, but will probably never be able to apologize to the extent that most Engineers (engineers) would like him to. Just let him go.
I studied physics and biology, but I am not a physicist and certainly not a biologist. Education does not an engineer make. I hate to tell you this, but Yasser Arafat is also a civil engineer. Does that take anything away from me? Of course not. He chose another direction to pursue --- as have many other civil engineers. In fact, everyone of our presidents who graduated from the Citadel or any of the military academies has studied engineering.
We cannot associate a person's educational background with his or her actions or pursuits in life anymore than we can assume that all persons of the Muslim faith are terrorists. The Koran does not permit or condone terrorism. Hence, those people of Middle Eastern descent who commit such acts are not true Muslims anymore than people who bomb abortion clinics are true Christians. It's like a member of the British Parliament once remarked, "You have both Protestants and Catholics fully involved with all the religious strife in Ireland, but unfortunately, there's not a Christian amongst them."
Let's just move on.
If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
I, too, wrote Hall a rather caustic note and received his boiler-plate answer (no offense intended to any mechanicals out there).
He goofed and now realizes it, but will probably never be able to apologize to the extent that most Engineers (engineers) would like him to. Just let him go.
I studied physics and biology, but I am not a physicist and certainly not a biologist. Education does not an engineer make. I hate to tell you this, but Yasser Arafat is also a civil engineer. Does that take anything away from me? Of course not. He chose another direction to pursue --- as have many other civil engineers. In fact, everyone of our presidents who graduated from the Citadel or any of the military academies has studied engineering.
We cannot associate a person's educational background with his or her actions or pursuits in life anymore than we can assume that all persons of the Muslim faith are terrorists. The Koran does not permit or condone terrorism. Hence, those people of Middle Eastern descent who commit such acts are not true Muslims anymore than people who bomb abortion clinics are true Christians. It's like a member of the British Parliament once remarked, "You have both Protestants and Catholics fully involved with all the religious strife in Ireland, but unfortunately, there's not a Christian amongst them."
Let's just move on.
If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
Polecat! thanks for your opinion. i am sick of these issue -religion, race, colour etc. we condemn terrorist but at the same time we unknowingly act like one of them. engineers exist to make our life better each day. just stick to doing good for mankind. stop instilling hatred among us mankind knowingly or unknowingly.
this forum is to discuss how to do our job best. we do help billions of people worldwide. are we saint? perhap!. let us be saint throughout.
this forum is to discuss how to do our job best. we do help billions of people worldwide. are we saint? perhap!. let us be saint throughout.
JAE...I finally received a reply...the same as yours and others.
You and Polecat expressed my thoughts about taking engineering courses and being an engineer....obviously different.
To All...please continue to rally the profession. Our professional stature is constantly being eroded by those who do not understand the place of The Engineer in society and we are the only protectors of our profession.
To those who subscribe to the tenets of engineering but pursue other endeavors, we as a profession ask you to do so in honor, as there is no better educational basis for life than that of an Engineer.
Soapbox dismantled.
You and Polecat expressed my thoughts about taking engineering courses and being an engineer....obviously different.
To All...please continue to rally the profession. Our professional stature is constantly being eroded by those who do not understand the place of The Engineer in society and we are the only protectors of our profession.
To those who subscribe to the tenets of engineering but pursue other endeavors, we as a profession ask you to do so in honor, as there is no better educational basis for life than that of an Engineer.
Soapbox dismantled.
In reference to the statements of Bin Laden having an engineering education: Bin Laden is quoted in the following text, ``Bin Laden, Al-Jazeera - and I'' by Jamal Abdul Latif Ismail as "getting a degree in economics at university in Jiddah." Since this is by his own admission I, for one, would like to believe that he is not on of us.
The news story I found this statement is on Yahoo! news.
The news story I found this statement is on Yahoo! news.
Hey, Fellow Engineers:
In the Cosmic scheme of things, does it really matter who studied what or why or what they did with it?
It's human nature to feel a certain kinship towards those of like interests, and to proudly say, "He's one of us!"
But what happens when "he" turns out to be one of those undesireables?" Then, suddenly, we seem to adopt some kind of fear of "guilt by association."
Amongst all professions you will have those that lie, cheat, steal and even commit murder. So, what does that have to do with those who don't? It's a personal choice, not a professional one. We all like to think that lawyers and politicians are the worst of the lot, and maybe they are; but, you know what, there are a lot of good ones out there as well.
Herbert Hoover was a civil engineer, and so is Yassir Arafat. So what? They each pursued different paths, although it is interesting to note that both chose politics instead of engineering.
My point is: it's the person that is revelant, not the profession. We, as engineers, sometimes like to get all puffed up and announce to the world that we are the builders of great things and the protectors of public safety. We design and build towers that reach to the heavens, and then along comes a group of zealots who level them to the ground. And what if one of those zealots also happens to be "one of us?" Are we supposed to suddenly hide our heads in shame? Or do we go to great ends trying to prove that "he" was not really one of us after all? The whole idea is a waste of time. Who really cares?
Why should we be so surprised or shocked if an evil-doer happens to have studied the same subjects that we did? Does that somehow detract something from us? Only if you want it to, and frankly it matters not to me.
We, as engineers, will go on doing our thing, designing our structures and trying to build a better world. You must understand that no one ---- not even a terrorist zealot ----can take that away from us. They may destroy what we build, but they will never destroy our will to build it.
Enough of this. I will now exit, stage right. If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
In the Cosmic scheme of things, does it really matter who studied what or why or what they did with it?
It's human nature to feel a certain kinship towards those of like interests, and to proudly say, "He's one of us!"
But what happens when "he" turns out to be one of those undesireables?" Then, suddenly, we seem to adopt some kind of fear of "guilt by association."
Amongst all professions you will have those that lie, cheat, steal and even commit murder. So, what does that have to do with those who don't? It's a personal choice, not a professional one. We all like to think that lawyers and politicians are the worst of the lot, and maybe they are; but, you know what, there are a lot of good ones out there as well.
Herbert Hoover was a civil engineer, and so is Yassir Arafat. So what? They each pursued different paths, although it is interesting to note that both chose politics instead of engineering.
My point is: it's the person that is revelant, not the profession. We, as engineers, sometimes like to get all puffed up and announce to the world that we are the builders of great things and the protectors of public safety. We design and build towers that reach to the heavens, and then along comes a group of zealots who level them to the ground. And what if one of those zealots also happens to be "one of us?" Are we supposed to suddenly hide our heads in shame? Or do we go to great ends trying to prove that "he" was not really one of us after all? The whole idea is a waste of time. Who really cares?
Why should we be so surprised or shocked if an evil-doer happens to have studied the same subjects that we did? Does that somehow detract something from us? Only if you want it to, and frankly it matters not to me.
We, as engineers, will go on doing our thing, designing our structures and trying to build a better world. You must understand that no one ---- not even a terrorist zealot ----can take that away from us. They may destroy what we build, but they will never destroy our will to build it.
Enough of this. I will now exit, stage right. If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
In a purely cosmic sense, my note (and perhaps a correction to an earlier post) and your ranting are trite as are our lives and whatever engineered works we may produced or destroy. To put all this into your cosmic persepective, Polecat: The universe is estimated to be about 15 billion years old and the earth has been around for 4.6 billion years. In contrast, humans have existed only for 100,000 years. You and I, dear sir, may only expect to live to the ripe old age of 70. As such, if the universe were a full length film, your life and mine would be about 600 nanoseconds. Now, in conclusion, you can waste your nanoseconds how you wish (afterall, if the discussion is a waste of time, then it reasons that a response is really nothing more) and I will use mine how I damn well want.
Qshake,
Total agreement; in this spirit I'll waste my insignificant time with another retort to spiraleng.
If the author had instead chosen to give his article the title 'The Holy Muslims who Kill' and focus on this aspect, there would be a justifiable anger on the part of all peaceful followers of Islam worldwide. Although I believe that the author did not intend to defame engineers, his words certainly stung us, just as my suggested reference would hurt most Muslims.
Of course there are people trained in engineering who are evil (and people who purport to follow any number of religions and professional tenets who are also evil). And these evil people are almost certainly a small minority of whatever cross-section they represent. For this reason, one should be careful in using generic (but still focused) terms when referring to these evil-doers('Muslims', 'engineers', 'inner-city kids', et al.)
When somebody insensitively uses these terms, he should be made to understand the effect of this. It is clear that we as a group have made this writer understand as much. As such, I believe this 'waste' of our time isn't.
Brad
Total agreement; in this spirit I'll waste my insignificant time with another retort to spiraleng.
If the author had instead chosen to give his article the title 'The Holy Muslims who Kill' and focus on this aspect, there would be a justifiable anger on the part of all peaceful followers of Islam worldwide. Although I believe that the author did not intend to defame engineers, his words certainly stung us, just as my suggested reference would hurt most Muslims.
Of course there are people trained in engineering who are evil (and people who purport to follow any number of religions and professional tenets who are also evil). And these evil people are almost certainly a small minority of whatever cross-section they represent. For this reason, one should be careful in using generic (but still focused) terms when referring to these evil-doers('Muslims', 'engineers', 'inner-city kids', et al.)
When somebody insensitively uses these terms, he should be made to understand the effect of this. It is clear that we as a group have made this writer understand as much. As such, I believe this 'waste' of our time isn't.
Brad
To QShake and Bradh:
Dear Sirs, there's really no need to throw darts here.
If you'll read my "rantings" again (and I'll admit to the idea that they probably were), I never implied that this whole discussion was a "waste of time," but only to the extent that we get bent out of shape and go out of our way to prove that certain undesireables are not "part of our fraternity." My point was that this effort was probably insignificant in the overall scheme of things (cosmic, if you will).
Obviously, we have all been deeply hurt by the events of this past month. We have lost friends and loved ones in the process, and have thus earned the right to rant and rave about it for a while, which we have done. Let's just don't personally direct it at each other.
For your information, Qshake, I am already at the threshold of that "ripe old age of 70," and I have no interest whatsoever in counting how many of those 600 nanoseconds that I have left, even tho they may be far fewer that what is available to you. I still work fulltime in my profession and have no intention of doing otherwise unless the Almighty has different plans for me.
If I believed that this discussion overall was a waste of time, then why would I have participated in it at all? Furthermore, I don't believe that I ever suggested that you use your remaining nanoseconds in any way other than "how you damn well want."
At least we can be thankful that we have all had more opportunity than many others to prepare for our own personal "D-Day." Consider those that were passengers on those fatal flights or workers in the WTC. They all got up in the morning as usual, departed for the airport or their work, and never came back. But here we are, still able to discuss and even argue over those events. Does that not pale in comparison to the wives, husbands and families that will not be seeing their loved ones ever again?
So, forgive me now for Rant #2, but I just wanted to get all of this in perspective.
Respectfully yours,
Polecat If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
Dear Sirs, there's really no need to throw darts here.
If you'll read my "rantings" again (and I'll admit to the idea that they probably were), I never implied that this whole discussion was a "waste of time," but only to the extent that we get bent out of shape and go out of our way to prove that certain undesireables are not "part of our fraternity." My point was that this effort was probably insignificant in the overall scheme of things (cosmic, if you will).
Obviously, we have all been deeply hurt by the events of this past month. We have lost friends and loved ones in the process, and have thus earned the right to rant and rave about it for a while, which we have done. Let's just don't personally direct it at each other.
For your information, Qshake, I am already at the threshold of that "ripe old age of 70," and I have no interest whatsoever in counting how many of those 600 nanoseconds that I have left, even tho they may be far fewer that what is available to you. I still work fulltime in my profession and have no intention of doing otherwise unless the Almighty has different plans for me.
If I believed that this discussion overall was a waste of time, then why would I have participated in it at all? Furthermore, I don't believe that I ever suggested that you use your remaining nanoseconds in any way other than "how you damn well want."
At least we can be thankful that we have all had more opportunity than many others to prepare for our own personal "D-Day." Consider those that were passengers on those fatal flights or workers in the WTC. They all got up in the morning as usual, departed for the airport or their work, and never came back. But here we are, still able to discuss and even argue over those events. Does that not pale in comparison to the wives, husbands and families that will not be seeing their loved ones ever again?
So, forgive me now for Rant #2, but I just wanted to get all of this in perspective.
Respectfully yours,
Polecat If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
Thanks for your note, Brad.
No apology needed here --- no offense taken. What you have shown is that you are a real gentleman. See you around the threads.
If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
No apology needed here --- no offense taken. What you have shown is that you are a real gentleman. See you around the threads.
If you wish to visit my website, we can discuss these or other issues further.
DaveVikingPE
Structural
1. I'm back at work. My office is five blocks from the WTC...
2. "Mad Engineers" is applicable to a lot of people throughout history, just as "mad scientists" is. I'm sure we are all aware of the military careers of the names we've read in textbooks (Rankine, Coulomb, et al.). Add to that the fictional engineers/scientists comprising heroes and villains we've probably read about. (Anyone here an L. Sprague DeCamp fan? Robert A. Heinlein? How about E.E. "Doc" Smith"?) Hall's essay uses "the Engineer" (a nickname of one of the first WTC bombing masterminds, btw) to make the reader understand what kind of thinking process is behind such an attack. I guarentee a humanities scholar with a law degree or management degree wouldn't even know where to start...
That's not to make light of the situation, it's just that chiding Hall for using "The Engineer" as he did is a knee-jerk reaction that doesn't address the point of his essay at all. He didn't say "typical engineers" he said "The Engineer." His essay is not against engineers at all and a response indicating that that's what his essay was saying is not an informed response.
2. "Mad Engineers" is applicable to a lot of people throughout history, just as "mad scientists" is. I'm sure we are all aware of the military careers of the names we've read in textbooks (Rankine, Coulomb, et al.). Add to that the fictional engineers/scientists comprising heroes and villains we've probably read about. (Anyone here an L. Sprague DeCamp fan? Robert A. Heinlein? How about E.E. "Doc" Smith"?) Hall's essay uses "the Engineer" (a nickname of one of the first WTC bombing masterminds, btw) to make the reader understand what kind of thinking process is behind such an attack. I guarentee a humanities scholar with a law degree or management degree wouldn't even know where to start...
That's not to make light of the situation, it's just that chiding Hall for using "The Engineer" as he did is a knee-jerk reaction that doesn't address the point of his essay at all. He didn't say "typical engineers" he said "The Engineer." His essay is not against engineers at all and a response indicating that that's what his essay was saying is not an informed response.
DaveViking.
No no no....I don't think any of us was implying that Hall was writing purposely against engineers. He just grabbed a "metaphor" to describe bin Laden. And the metaphor he used is a term used to describe a group of good looking, intelligent, kind, caring, CONSTRUCTIVE people.
Now we know he wasn't trying to pick on engineers. And he wasn't trying to improve the image of bin Laden either. And I usually cringe at people who cry about how they are somehow insulted when a football team uses their race or moniker as a team name. But here he used our "name" to describe an individual who behaved exactly opposite from the nature of an Engineer and one who is a very bad man.
To engineer something is one thing. To call someone the Engineer is another. We're simply complaining to him that his metaphor sucked.
No no no....I don't think any of us was implying that Hall was writing purposely against engineers. He just grabbed a "metaphor" to describe bin Laden. And the metaphor he used is a term used to describe a group of good looking, intelligent, kind, caring, CONSTRUCTIVE people.
Now we know he wasn't trying to pick on engineers. And he wasn't trying to improve the image of bin Laden either. And I usually cringe at people who cry about how they are somehow insulted when a football team uses their race or moniker as a team name. But here he used our "name" to describe an individual who behaved exactly opposite from the nature of an Engineer and one who is a very bad man.
To engineer something is one thing. To call someone the Engineer is another. We're simply complaining to him that his metaphor sucked.
Gentlemen---
In the beginning of this thread, I was oh so rightously indignant. Now, with the benifit of hindsight and several days of reflection, it seems all too silly this metaphor "Engineer". It is so sad that the terrorists made so many mistakes that several people were alarmed by what they requested and we still didn't catch on. We were asleep at the wheel and it bit us. We are awake now, and if John Hall's article helped to accomplish this, so be it. We are big boys, alive and well, we can handle the metaphor, poor taste and all, I think.
Rod
PS---Qshake, sometimes it's not too bad to go unnoticed.
In the beginning of this thread, I was oh so rightously indignant. Now, with the benifit of hindsight and several days of reflection, it seems all too silly this metaphor "Engineer". It is so sad that the terrorists made so many mistakes that several people were alarmed by what they requested and we still didn't catch on. We were asleep at the wheel and it bit us. We are awake now, and if John Hall's article helped to accomplish this, so be it. We are big boys, alive and well, we can handle the metaphor, poor taste and all, I think.
Rod
PS---Qshake, sometimes it's not too bad to go unnoticed.
Curmudgeon
Mechanical
To add a couple more pennies to this pile...
I agree with Polecat and DaveViking in several respects.
In many ways, much as we may find it distasteful, even repugnant, it IS correct to describe Osama as 'the engineer of this deed'. We have used this terminology for years. Did HE specifically plan out all the details and operations involved? Probably not. But he almost certainly gave the 'go-ahead' and monetary, technical, and spiritual support to the assault teams. He was involved in the planning and execution of several such 'projects'.
And calling him 'The Engineer' is, again, distasteful as it seems to us, quite likely correct in some sense. Much as certain Mafia hitmen were known as 'The Mechanic' or 'The Choirboy' or such-like. We haven't gone into a paroxysm of sputtering rage for how those names malign automobile mechanics or Catholics.
Further, many of us should recall our college years when we 'joked' about Mechanical Engineers making bombs, Civil Engineers making targets. At the time, it was sort of 'gallows humor'. Now, we swallow hard at how awful and how serious those jokes can really be.
Am I pleased to have Osama's name tied to our profession - in even the slightest way? Of course not! I worked too hard, too many times, often against the fool-hardy penny-pinching of bean-counters buried in cozy offices, or the unrealistic fantasies of managers with no engineering back-ground, continually striving to make sure that *first*, above all things, my designs didn't kill or injure people, and *second*, that they worked. I found myself crying when a single worker was killed operating some equipment - - even though it turned out he had managed to bypass several safety devices, and at least a dozen rules of common sense. And then this type of event occurs, with thousands killed, and aspects of structural and aviation engineering both come under scrutiny.
No, Osama is NOT a 'fellow engineer', in any sense whatsoever. But we are picking at straws to say the author was wrong to call Bin Laden 'The Engineer'.
Well, I guess 2 cents goes further than I expected.
Curmudgeon
I agree with Polecat and DaveViking in several respects.
In many ways, much as we may find it distasteful, even repugnant, it IS correct to describe Osama as 'the engineer of this deed'. We have used this terminology for years. Did HE specifically plan out all the details and operations involved? Probably not. But he almost certainly gave the 'go-ahead' and monetary, technical, and spiritual support to the assault teams. He was involved in the planning and execution of several such 'projects'.
And calling him 'The Engineer' is, again, distasteful as it seems to us, quite likely correct in some sense. Much as certain Mafia hitmen were known as 'The Mechanic' or 'The Choirboy' or such-like. We haven't gone into a paroxysm of sputtering rage for how those names malign automobile mechanics or Catholics.
Further, many of us should recall our college years when we 'joked' about Mechanical Engineers making bombs, Civil Engineers making targets. At the time, it was sort of 'gallows humor'. Now, we swallow hard at how awful and how serious those jokes can really be.
Am I pleased to have Osama's name tied to our profession - in even the slightest way? Of course not! I worked too hard, too many times, often against the fool-hardy penny-pinching of bean-counters buried in cozy offices, or the unrealistic fantasies of managers with no engineering back-ground, continually striving to make sure that *first*, above all things, my designs didn't kill or injure people, and *second*, that they worked. I found myself crying when a single worker was killed operating some equipment - - even though it turned out he had managed to bypass several safety devices, and at least a dozen rules of common sense. And then this type of event occurs, with thousands killed, and aspects of structural and aviation engineering both come under scrutiny.
No, Osama is NOT a 'fellow engineer', in any sense whatsoever. But we are picking at straws to say the author was wrong to call Bin Laden 'The Engineer'.
Well, I guess 2 cents goes further than I expected.
Curmudgeon
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question