- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
maybe without white keys. Gotta be politically
correct, ya know...
A Muslim telling the truth.
Al Sharpton donating to a worthy cause.
Algore visiting East Anglia?
Maher going to church?
Whoopi hugging O'Reilly?
Rand embracing astrology?
-- j
.
Rand & Astrology? Starting my day off with a laugh.
Obama being a big fan of Rush & FOX.
we should consider piping Fox News and Rush and Levin
and Chris Plante into his suite. . he might learn somethng. -- j
.
.
The Texas Military Department headquarters that I report to does have armed guards at the gates (they work for a different division within the department), with 100% ID check and cargo check for delivery vehicles. At several of the national guard posts I have worked at, while much of the front area is open to the public. to go further, you must show ID to armed guards. The tension, though, is the proper role of the military within a constitutional republic on a foundation of democracy.
(We can debate democracy elsewhere, but I point out that at the local level, anyone who can vote can run for office, while President of the United States must be a natural (not naturalized) citizen at least 35 years of age. That hallmarks the difference between a democracy and a republic.)
Your zippy quip failed to address who actually carries a sidearm in the American military. We inherited and embraced a class-based system from the British: "an officer and a gentleman." Officers carry sidearms to shoot their own soldiers who do not obey orders, and conversely to protect themselves from that rabble. Soldiers on guard duty carry rifles, not guns. Though exceptions are all up and down the line, that is the general rule.
So, now we are arming soldiers with handguns. Maybe that is a good thing and maybe in another generation, we non-coms will call each other "sir" and "ma'am" and salute each other when we pass… and then dance a bit to decide to gets to walk on the right…
There is a lot more involved here. After 9/11, the NY City Hall pushed the people back with hard barriers that are still in place. All federal office buildings, and many state have TSA-type screening. And, riding a Greyhound from Michigan to Texas and back, I met the TSA screening people in Memphis. Think about that. That, the Patriot Act, the NSA domestic spying, and more,l happened because of reflexive responses to 9/11.
If the assaults in Chattanooga (which were only the latest in a series) are the result of an open society, then, I agree, k, that we should discuss those issues, and that analysis requires more than a zippy one-liner.
readily blind an assailant. . cheap from Tmart. . approx.
3 mile range, if the air is clear. -- j
http://www.tmart.com/301-5mW-532nm-Pr...
.
"..published five years ago .. but the gentle patter of reassuring words about the peaceful nature of Islam will have a familiar ring. Here was another bright young Muslim woman assuring a dutiful reporter that her faith, .... is a creed inspired by nothing but love, peace and lashings of good fellowship .... "
"There's this misconception that Islam is a violent religion," she continued, "Muslims are actually peaceful."
The speaker was Yasmeen Abdulazeez.
Last week her brother, Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez 24, attacked two US Navy recruiting stations, murdering four Marines and wounding a police officer before being shot dead.
http://quadrant.org.au/ essential reading
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/li...
It goes against a rationalist engineer's inclination, but having a positive and helpful attitude is hugly powerful. Attitude is what makes the bitter engineer start his own company that produces huge value instead of languishing in poorly-run institutions that Lucky mentions or worse.
I agree with most of Lucky's comment, except for the part that says we have X number of STEM jobs and a greater number of STEM people. There's an infinite number of jobs if people look hard enough for ways to use what they have to produce things others want in exchange for money.
No, I am not a writer but I observe that we go where inspiration leads us.
Jan
Since you brought up Rodenberry, let me insert a thought. We assume that Star Trek is about future adventures. Instead, what if it was a long time ago (not in a galaxy far away). We think of mankind as being around 200,000 years old, but it could just as easily be a million years or ten million, evolving to a certain point and then destroying itself. Geologically speaking, 200K years is less than an eyeblink.
Any substantial civilization on Earth would have left traces in both material goods and in genetics. We can chart the genetic migrations from tens of thousands of years ago, and the molecular clock of our genes puts limits on when we separated from our predecessors.
So there is no opportunity for our having a high tech civilization that predates our own. The closest we can get is Minoan, which may have had differential gears (certainly, the Antikythera device that dates to BC had them) and which civilization left fewer traces than we would like. We are dealing with bronze age technology, here, and not starships. It would not be possible to hide the remnants of that advanced a tech.
Pity, though - I like the thought. What we know from archeology and paleogentics can rule out a prior cycle of civilizations here on earth, and comparative genetics can show that we evolved here from earlier life forms.
I sometimes wonder where we would be now if Minoan civilization had not been destroyed. Would the Romans have had railroads? Telegraphs?
Jan
Modern Homo sapiens didn't evolve until about 200K years ago (we can trace this through the genetic clock); close predecessors (H. erectus) had stone tools and was similar to us at around 500K years ago - their average brain size was slightly smaller, but overlapped the lower range of modern humans. The first plausible evidence of human habitation dates from 2M years ago; the first wood and stone shelter with an internal hearth is from about 500K years ago. The first manufacturing site found is a ocher processing plant with several cement hearths in Sibudu, Africa, from about 60K ago.
So, there are remains of fragile archeological evidence (bits of bone, wood, and hide) from several hundred thousand years ago. If you wan to postulate a high tech civilization, you have to have a path of remains that go from stone to metal to technical. We have such a path, and it leads to the history we know. It is not plausible to assume that there was a prior high tech civilization when there would be massive traces of the evolution of that civilization - complex civilizations do not just spring out of a hole in the ground - plus a huge amount of evidence of the civilization itself. If we can find fragments of hide shelters from the last ice age, we would be unable to miss a starship building depot.
Jan
BUT who is talking about plausibility?
One of the things that steered me to objectivism was the attempt to find sanity in an insane world (universe?). To the extent that objectivism has allowed me to function and understand to a limited extent what is going on around me, I do pretty well. But I still have that small unresolved space reserved for the implausible. When I took up the attempt to understand quantum physics in order to buttress my dealing with reality, I found it to be not only implausible, but improbable. But there it is. I can't make it go away. So I hold that area open like a guest that rarely shows up, and now and then indulge in the "what-if" that is reserved for sci-fi. One of the things I find fascinating is the responses I get in the Gulch which are scientific, analytical, and surprisingly fanciful. (You are included in there somewhere).
My personal version of what you said is that I am a scientist...and a poet. My scientific side sees chloroplast based life forms responding to high and low pressure areas; my poetic side sees dryads dancing the trees.
I actually do not find a conflict in this.
Jan
I don't see a conflict either. But I rather suspect that there are more scientists who can do poetry, than poets who can do science.
have you heard of any evidence of large groups of drowned humans
back in the past? -- j
.
If you are interested, I can try to find out more precise details (had to look up Utnapishtem already!).
Jan
If you can assemble the right team of creative types and engineers, you can create some amazing things (phones that are basically small computers, cars that drive themselves, etc).
A creative engineer MAY be the best of both worlds, but may also come with other quirks (OCD, fear-of-failure are just a couple I have seen). I don't have a big enough sample to say whether this is a side effect of balancing the creative with the more logic-oriented, or is unique to the few I have been around.
On the other hand, in the old world, the Middle East in particular, social status is important. In sociology we call then "high context" societies where family connections set your rank. Thus becoming an engineer not only is supposed to elevate you, of course, but your family as well. So, they have a lot riding on this.
As for the stories you opened with, I guess we could call them "evil Dilberts." Yesterday, I bought my fourth collection of Dilbert Comics. I am working on a full set. But as you pointed out, that bitterness is contrary to a general mood. I add that like bittersweet chocolate, you need a little contrast for good enjoyment.
My anecdote: I worked with a Middle Eastern engineer who was incensed at having to drive compacts when renting at the airport. "I look like an unsuccessful salesman," he said. Status: it's so unAmerican.
I think you will find the correlation predominates among western educated muslims.
( Ahmadinejad notwithstanding)
The reason is widespread disillusionment which comes from a popular myth we are all immersed in - that is - we need more science technology engineering management graduates. This myth is a consequence of the growth of credentialism , the growth of tertiary education as colleges becomes businesses dependent of government money, the myth benefits the education industry, even non-technical people are vocal proponents. The intelligent and upwardly mobile youth study hard in STEM, borrow, then find on graduation that jobs are sparse. most of the jobs are in big corps with security clearances and stereotyped recruitment, governments are the worse. Since the jobs are in big corps, there are inevitable big layoffs, these can be hundreds or thousands, the experienced and qualified then are looking for work among a vast cohort. Yet they still hear the myth that we need ....
It may come from the big corps, it helps to have a ready supply of labor for the next gov contract they will bid on.
This hits the new migrant family the worse, youth with better contacts and sources of advice have a better chance of finding better career choices.
While so many people complain they can't find high-paying jobs, they simultaneously complain they can't find a good carpenter, roofer, plumber or electrician to work on their homes... while those markets are so poorly served that lots of incompetents exist in the market, degrading the image of 'brain AND muscle workers.'
And migrants flock to the US and permeate the construction business... go figure. Some do excellent, hard work; others sleep on the job. I've seen both at my house in the past few years.
And a few comments about 'engineers.'
Engineers are tasked with implementing or designing solutions that will solve problems or meet needs. Someone defines the problem and engineers research solutions and lay out plans for which solutions would work best, fastest, cheapest (or at least two of those three...)
Science provides the toolbox; engineers conceive of the tools to meet the needs. Worker bees put the parts in place. Customers use the solutions.
And when I entered the job market in 1968, EE's were scarce and in demand. Some years later, as usual, there was a glut of engineers churned out by colleges and we suffered. Same as all the other pendulum-swing over-reactions that always happen in a free market. The pendulum's period might be years or decades, but pretty much everyone insists on 'solutions' that will show results next month. And are constantly frustrated when the results don't show up.
After college, I was at a company with a shitload of engineers, and unlike claims above, it seemed as if a LOT of us had Jewish backgrounds or history. So much for generalizations.
And the general statistical summaries in the two papers I cited did not say that engineers become Arabs. It only pointed out a strong statistical presence (40% to 60%) of engineers among jihadi.
Need more research; that's for sure!
And hell, yes, my examples were anecdotal. Too many "proofs" are!
That being true - and that applying here, as a well - I perceive an important cultural difference. Here if an engineer is laid off, she finds some other way to make money, to capitalize on her skills, rather than just blaming the system - which she may well do with full justification. She takes responsibility for her situation, even though it was not of her making. That is a western attitude. In truth - hang on - that is a premise of Existentialism: you did not make the irrational world you were born into, but you are morally responsible for your place in it.
That is different than the Arab/Islamist worldview of the jihadi - or others of their kind, even in here in the USA - who blame others and who cannot get past that.
For every one that says 'we need to address the culture,' I'll bet there are several others who'll defend 'the culture's right to stay the same.'
Impasse.
Eliminate rational thought before it takes root.
I struggled to understand (let alone debate) how they could be so analytical and scientific about engineering and physics yet not apply that to their religious beliefs. I still haven't figured it out, but I suspect it's analytical powers turned into powers of rationalization. Given X, a driven analytical mind can figure out a way to arrive at Y in their own mind.
Engineers also love order and predictability.
Maybe Eric Hoffer and his "True Believer" book has some clues for us?
"Whether American, Canadian or Islamic, and whether due to selection or field socialisation, a disproportionate share of engineers seems to have a mindset that inclines them to entertain the quintessential right-wing features of “monism” – ‘why argue when there is one best solution’ – and of “simplism” – ‘if only people were rational, remedies would be simple’. "(Gambetta and Hertog page 50)
When I had the class, he was on sabbatical and our professor was Patrick Koehn. The class also has been taught by Prof. Mary Elizabeth Kubitskey. Dr. Kubitskey’s master’s thesis was Teaching Ethics in a High School Physics Class.
By a roundabout way, I have an anonymous citation in a book on engineering ethics. “Of Owls, Wooden Walls, and Flower Girls,” in 4Es: Ethics, Engineering, Economics and Environment by John St. J. S. Buckeridge, Sydney: The Federation Press, 2011.
In 2011, I delivered a program on academic fraud and research misconduct, especially from police crime labs. (See CSIFlint2011.blogspot.com)
So, I approve of your school's requirement that engineers learn to consider the ethical ramifications of their work.
http://www.abet.org/accreditation/acc...
Have you been back to Ypsilanti recently? I enjoyed my time there.
requires that an engineer assume the cloak of a mini-creator,
but that is also true for any kind of producer. . the study of
science to improve the lot of humanity is also common to
many pursuits. . could it be the acceptance of dull mathematical
constraints which frustrates the architect inside an engineer's
"heart" which requires some sort of release? . I have known
a bunch of engineers who love excitement, like roller coasters
and motorcycles, Jeeps and mountain climbing. . maybe this
correlation somehow connects with excitement. . and within
Islam, there seems to be plenty of room for that. -- j
.
I can accept that they have a good educational system and serious motivation for science and engineering studies. However, a society that hangs homosexuals is going to find itself lacking creative people. Even in America, you do not announce your atheism to your co-workers, but at least here, it is not a capital offense. And what if you do not want to pray six times a day? Here, we do not care if you go to church or not. Over there, the choices are not so broad. The bottom line is that a controlled society cannot stand up to an freer opponent.
Appeals to God are fairly common. Both Germany and Netherlands had "God with Us" on their coins, just as we have IGWT. The coins of Austria declared their last emperor, Franz Josef II, to be an "apostolic monarch." The faith of Muslims is no less assertive or surprising. Jews, Buddhists, and Hindus all find encouragement from celestial beings. I do not mean just the people who happen to believe, but the leaders of those nations. The Dalai Lama is pretty sure that the Great Wheel of Life will restore Lhasa as it carries China downward. Most of the people whom I know who also admire the works of Ayn Rand would ask a more basic question at that point.
In my experience engineers are not at all easy to radicalize. They are serious skeptics!
I also don't know about the number of religious engineers. Doesn't feel that way to me, and I am more open to discussions that would expose such positions than most people (uninhibited is often used to describe me, among other less positive terms).
Maybe this was a study of engineers in Arab countries?
http://www.nuff.ox.ac.uk/users/gambet...
and
http://carnegieendowment.org/files/09...
The studies began with investigations of engineers in Arab/Islamic lands, but also included statistics about engineers in the USA and Canada.
Also, your experience with engineers, valid though it may be, can also be a "confirmation bias" in that you limit your validations to what you have experienced without accepting the broader findings of statistical surveys.
It doesn't matter what field you're successful in...mass murder in the name of "Something" is possible to any crazed individual.
Problem is...it's the average citizen, who wishes he could be a "Dirty Harry" and clean up the world, who is the one the Liberals spend all their time and effort demonizing, while ignoring the true crazies (who are, actually, more like them).
http://carnegieendowment.org/files/09...
http://www.nuff.ox.ac.uk/users/gambet...
"Whether American, Canadian or Islamic, and whether due to selection or field socialisation, a disproportionate share of engineers seems to have a mindset that inclines them to entertain the quintessential right-wing features of “monism” – ‘why argue when there is one best solution’ – and of “simplism” – ‘if only people were rational, remedies would be simple’. "(Gambetta and Hertog page 50)
On the other hand, aviation culture has not been identified with the same psycho-epistemology, even though the work would seem to be like engineering. See my post here in the Gulch on "The Virtues of Aviation Culture."
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...