On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Srini Ramakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Umm... in my experience engineers are the opposite - they are left > leaning liberals with a mild distaste for government.
The argument in this paper appears to be made "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" (with this, therefore because this). To wit: "There appear to be a large number of engineers among jihadists. Something about engineering must predispose engineers to be jihandists." From there it's possible to propose an "engineering mindset", which leads engineers to islamic extremism. No attempt is made to disprove the thesis. The fact that there is frequently more than just one "correct" solution to engineering problems is conveniently ignored. Engineers routinely argue the merits of one or another approach. The argument also contains a fallacy of composition. One of the reasons that there may be a large number of engineers among jihadists is that Jihadists are training as engineers, in order to gain the skills needed to build explosives. Therefore the mindset seen is a jihadist mindset, and not intrinsic to all engineers. One should also note that among the conservative religious right of America, there is a strong disconnect with the life sciences. If you are a religious conservative with an interest in the sciences, you are likely to shy away from areas in which the preponderance of fact places your strongly held belief system in doubt. Again, it is the religious mindset driving the individual into a pursuit which does not conflict with it. One is even less likely to come into conflict in applied sciences, hence a gravitation of religious fundamentalist to engineering and technology. The reasons that this happens in two disparate groups are similar, but still distinct enough as to say that they do not share a common cause. --Brian
