Article View: alt.engineering.electrical
Article #37Re: who is the real "engineer"? ( was Re: who can be called "Dr."/"physician")
From: Kevin Zelhart
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 00:00
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 00:00
35 lines
2858 bytes
2858 bytes
Brian wrote: > EricJNK wrote: > > > Yes, I sure can't understand how a salesman becomes "sales > engineer". > > > > Why do we, real engineer, allow our title, "engineer", to become so > > > cheap and degenerated to a BS joke? I guess that explain why the > > typical engineers are said to be a bunch of entroverts and nerds. > > Look, if you do not have PE after your title, you are not a "real" > engineer. A BS alone in an engineering field does not qualify you to > be > an engineer. In most cases, all the PE proves is that you can pass a test, NOTHING more. I trained with many that I considered to be my superiors in talent, however they did not pass the preliminary exams, and I did. Does that make them any less of an engineer? not in the least! Some of the best engineers I have worked with have not had their PE, and a good number have not had the BS! But if I wanted something designed correctly, I knew they were up to the task. If you go only by title and certification, then you are going to get burned. In the US, the only real need for the PE is if you are going to be a consultant. Then it is mainly for the lawyers, not a guarantee that the person is top-notch engineer. Outside of the US I cannot comment. I suspect that other countries take the PE designation a bit more serious than here. Also, if the licensing system is corrupt, as it was in Chicago in the 50's and 60's, it still becomes a moot point. Judge the engineer by the projects he has done, not by the paper on the wall.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<33F0BE9B.95F49DF@edge.ercnet.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<5sdept$7js$1@nnrp1.snfc21.pbi.net> <33EF3AC5.F4C38288@umr.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 116392,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gid116392,public X-Google-Thread: 10d137,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gid10d137,public X-Google-Thread: f8959,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gidf8959,public X-Google-Thread: f8a7b,23ef9ba89231145f X-Google-Attributes: gidf8a7b,public X-Google-Thread: fbe36,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gidfbe36,public X-Google-Thread: f4ca5,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gidf4ca5,public X-Google-Thread: 14b878,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gid14b878,public X-Google-Thread: 10112a,bbd0ea5f4744528e X-Google-Attributes: gid10112a,public From: Kevin Zelhart <kzelhart@edge.ercnet.com> Subject: Re: who is the real "engineer"? ( was Re: who can be called "Dr."/"physician") Date: 1997/08/12 Message-ID: <33F0BE9B.95F49DF@edge.ercnet.com> X-Deja-AN: 264441263 References: <5sdept$7js$1@nnrp1.snfc21.pbi.net> <33EF3AC5.F4C38288@umr.edu> To: Brian <byeag@umr.edu> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Organization: EdgeNet Media Reply-To: kzelhart@edge.ercnet.com Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,alt.engr.dynamics,alt.engr.explosives,at.novell,comp.cad.pro-engineer,novell.compuserve.unixware,sci.engr,sci.engr.analysis,sci.engr.biomed,sci.engr.chem,sci.engr.civil